What the president of Y Combinator learned from interviewing 100 Trump supporters

Doesn’t the one person remember Warren G. Harding? I mean, he was personally corrupt, not just his administration. Ulysses S. Grant, on the other hand, was just overcome with the duties, as being a U.S. General does not carry with it the same responsibilities and tasks as being POTUS does. As for Nixon, I don’t think he was as corrupt personally as he was disturbed by folks not liking him, to a degree; Harding didn’t seem to give a fuck.

Reagan…I mean Nancy was the one to be concerned with, not so much Ronald.

1 Like

So . . . you want to win next time, right?
If you write off 63 million voters, many of whom by their own admission could be convinced to vote for a different candidate, you make your objective significantly more difficult.

Decent NYT op-ed .

I want them to show me the sort of non-Trump candidate they’re willing to vote for before I expend any energy trying to get that sort of candidate into an election. If they voted for Trump, odds are pretty good they’re not going to come up with anybody I’m inclined to do anything to support.

8 Likes
4 Likes

No, by chasing a few people who try to extract emotional labour from you to support their feelings by dangling their votes in front of you you make your objective significantly more difficult.

If someone can objectively demonstrate that hours spent sympathizing with Trump voters produces more Democrat votes than, for example, hours spent convincing young people that they desperately need to vote because asshole Trump voters are ruining their country, then they can start to make an argument that it’s strategically wise to do A vs. B (and who knows what C, D and E other people are doing).

I don’t believe anyone has the data to actually show that, and I don’t believe that the person who wrote that NYT op-ed even knows that that is what it would mean to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy they are proposing.

23 Likes

The people who value diplomacy and reaching out are called moderates.

Progressives are supposed to value progress.

The technical term is concerned.

15 Likes

For a short while I liked to think and say that I would leave the country when G.W. Bush was elected. At the same time, I was living in Santa Cruz, CA, and surfing every day, sometimes twice, three times a day. As other surfers have experienced, I found that sometimes when I paddled out into the surf there were guys who would paddle up to me and say, “Hey newb, get the fuck out of here–go surf somewhere else.” Didn’t matter that I wasn’t surfing near that person or not–they felt they owned the waves.

That did not sit well with me, ever, and my loud response was usually something like, “Actually, I’m an American and we’re in America and I’ll surf wherever I GOTDAMN please. You don’t own this beach or this water or these waves, so fuck off and leave me be.” If they wanted to fight about it (and plenty did), I’d tell them I’d be happy to let them punch me once so that I could have them arrested for assault and battery–and I WOULD press charges and I WOULD show up in court to make sure those charges stuck.

So when W was trying to bully around people with stupid shit like, “you’re either with us or against us”, I heard, “you and your voice do not belong here” and that made my choice of what to do next quite easy.

Which leads to the answer I would give trumpkins who would deign to tell me to leave the country:

13 Likes

Genuine question - are the right worrying about the 66 million who voted Democrat? I can’t find any op-eds worrying about how they convince people to vote for their candidate next time around. Are they hoping on an electoral college fluke again?

McConnell et al seem to be making hay while the sun shines. e.g. “winners make policy and the losers go home.”

The GOP aren’t proposing any candidates I could vote for. Haven’t done in forever.

That op-ed isn’t any better than the more recent one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/opinion/sunday/are-liberals-helping-trump.html?_r=0

16 Likes

This has been quite a discussion! I kinda think of people’s politics as being spectrums along 4 dimensions: left-right, Dem-Rep, authoritarian-libertarian, and open-closed minded. I counted 73 posters on this thread, probably with a few duplicates and a few missed.

These days, left-right and Dem-Rep have pretty much converged, and the score is very close to 73-0 on that spectrum. There might be a few closet non-liberals who spoke cautiously.

Authoritarian-libertarian is too hard to judge by just parsing a few sentences.

On the open-closed spectrum I counted 15 opens, 42 closed, and the rest too hard to say.

This website attracts a fairly educated population, which makes those numbers seem extremely discouraging. Trump supports are not going to be swayed by folks telling them they are idiots or worse, and at least some of them were articulate enough to say that explicitly.

Still, 26% is a lot of votes. Maybe the 26% here can talk with the 26% on the other side, and put things on a better path.

Not really, unless there are a lot of Anarchists, Stalinists and Trotskyists who are active in the Democrats.

I tend to not open my mind to people who have expressed an interest in torturing or killing me. I’m kind of funny about things like that. Until Republicans get that sorted out I have about as much interest with negotiating with them as I do with ISIS (for pretty much the same reasons).

16 Likes

There are a couple viewpoints that might do with a little straightening out.

(tldr for this paragraph - Dem. candidates need to worry a lot more about other people besides Trump voters)
First there’s Democratic candidates in the generally unknowable future landscape of 2020 deciding who they’re going to be tailoring messages to. Those people have a base which is basically everyone who’s not a conservative Republican. The vast majority of people who voted for Trump were evangelicals and conservative Republicans. That Dem. base is really large - far larger than conservative Republicans, and within that base, they have many people to reach out to who will flee if they tailor their message to evangelicals and conservative Republicans. There were a few oddballs who voted Trump as well (white nationalists/hardcore racists who usually stay home, confused soccer moms, and people who were swayed by anti-Clinton propaganda), and they might want to reach out to some of them assuming you can define more specifically who those non-conservatives were. But they’d probably be better off trying to court African-Americans (who had poor turnout), Hispanic voters (who had iffy turnout, and swung to the GOP more than expected), and younger voters (who had poor turnout, and swung third party a lot). Those groups matter a whole lot more than Trump voters, since they’re part of the base, the Dems have policies that matter for them, and it’s easier to tailor a relevant message that doesn’t piss off the rest of the coalition. If we’re talking about that candidate, then those 63 million are way too risky to spend much effort on, other than trying to get them to see what a failure Trump is and how badly he’s betrayed them, only to try to get them to stay away from the polls (they’ll make terrible choices down-ballot too, so it’s much better if they stay home). But that’ll be up to whoever runs to sort out, and our idle 2017 speculations have value mostly as getting to hear ourselves yammer.

(tldr for this paragraph - random people have different situations, and maybe listening to Trump voters isn’t the best use of their time)
Then there’s the viewpoint of random citizens who have to live in the US with the minority of people who made a really terrible choice in voting for Trump. In that case, it’s up to the random citizen to sort out what their situation is and whether there’s any point in trying to reach out to some group of people. Personally, I’m stuck listening to some of them. I have heard them loud and clear. Immigrants are evil and need to be banned. Muslims are evil and need to be banned. LGBT people are sick, and ought to be banned somehow. Liberals are evil and need to be stopped by regulations on the press and education, and it’d be great is there was some way to ban them. Women are too uppity and need to be put in their place. Taxes on the rich need to be cut. Jobs need to appear by some kind of magical tax cuts and eliminating worker protections, environmental protections, and other regulations. Healthcare doesn’t matter and if you get sick and aren’t insured, you’re just irresponsible and should’t be expecting handouts. I spent hundreds and hundreds of man-hours before the election in a few forums talking to friends/people going over Trump but his supporters really were mostly authoritarians thrilled to get their strongman, and excited at seeing “liberals” and brown people get hurt since that was what most vocal Trump supporters were most focused on. IRL, my friends loathe Trump, and my conservative family members really doesn’t care about my political views since Fox is the voice of Truth, and in not supporting the GOP, I am a deceiver.

(tldr for this paragraph - for me there are definitely better ways to spend my time, esp. since some on the left are at war with the Dems)
So for me, as a rando, there’s stuff I can do, but listening to and talking to Trump supporters is pointless, and every one I’ve spoken to is so blinded by an ideology built on hostility to progress and anything Liberals like, and so misinformed and ignorant (usually willfully) that it’s not worth my time. There are leftists who were so disenchanted by the Democrats, largely thanks to a very well orchestrated Russian propaganda campaign via Wikileaks, that they refused to support Clinton. Those people were worth spending time on. There’ll be a few more leftists in 2020 who are prone to moral equivocation between the lesser evils of Dems and the greater evils of the GOP, who believe votes “send a message” rather than select a candidate, and who will be motivated to choose personal purity over choosing to prevent harm to others, and I’d be more useful chatting with them, since we share a lot in our basic outlook (and tribal characteristics).

In terms of things that would be helpful, I’ve set up monthly donations to Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and the NRDC. I’m going to protests. When 2018 comes up I’ll be volunteering with the local Dems., and again in 2020. I’m making my voice heard in whatever ways seem relevant. Those things seem like they’ll help. We really all should be focused on worrying about the shit going down now, since 2020 is a long way off.

If you’re in a different situation and can reach out to some Trump supporters who can be turned around, that’s great - go for it. There are other things you can do that will help more, but every little bit counts, and everyone’s different kinds of contributions add up and matter. Just stop telling me how to do my job, and please stop imagining we haven’t listened to Trump voters, because I hear from them literally every single day. I listen, I disagree, and I see that in my case there’s nothing I can do to turn them around. Also please stop offering shitty advice to Democrats who have a whole lot more people than Trump voters they need to win over if they want to take 2020.

23 Likes

My recollection is that there was some honest-ish soul searching after Obama rolled over Republicans. Some talk of reaching out and adjusting the platform to attract more Latino voters in particular. In reality, those elements of the party got pushed to the side, and the primary campaign finished off any hope of a big tent GOP. We all assumed that was their loss and the left’s gain.

And as you might guess, I’m mostly with the NYT on that op-ed as well.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/pastor-walks-out-on-trumps-demonic-florida-rally-my-11-year-old-daughter-was-sobbing-in-fear/

8 Likes

Cooperation? Compromise? Collaboration? It’s like they’ve never even heard of those words. Or if they have, they’re synonyms for socialism.

10 Likes

I’ve been looking for this…full video of the rally in Florida. Wow, this is creepy.

5 Likes

And they want us to engage rationally with the kind of people that guy had to flee from? You can’t do that. Period.

6 Likes

I would agree that it’s probably a more productive strategy for the Democrats to try and increase voter turnout, especially for the midterm in 2018.

But just as an off-the-cuff example, here’s an alternative reality for last fall: The left manages to field a candidate who:

  • doesn’t use the word “deplorable”
  • talks like Elizabeth Warren when it comes to financial reform
  • proposes massive environmental remediation job programs in coal / steel country
  • actually wins the Midwest
    Nobody in this scenario has to compromise their principles or even like each other.
3 Likes

Looks like a good time for some wishful thinking…

8 Likes

It took near truckloads of various substances for me to be able to watch his hastily announced “press conference” without shouting myself hoarse and/or selling it all and becoming a hermit, and even that performance was so entirely unhinged that I thought I needed a second truckload. I don’t think I have the mental or physical fortitude to sit through another such performance.

7 Likes
9 Likes