very good read on why trump won. not liberal not conservative

[Sunburn74]

Really? I could only stand half of it he sounded like a bitch. This article has nothing on me, born and raised in the city. All country, everyone around me thinks I'm a hillbilly but I'm stuck here in they city getting her done. Fuck hillary, fuck trump and all you dumb fucks.

At least Trump will try. We've already seen your candidate fail to make any changes in 30 years. So I'll take the guy at least willing to give it a go.

I think thats a little unfair. You're ignoring the role of an entire congresses, presidents, state legislatures, etc
I mean think about your job. There are certainly problems. No one is throwing you under the bus for not having solved them all. That whole argument that she hasn't gotten stuff done in 30 years is asinine. First, she HAS gotten stuff done and second, its not a dictatorship in washington where one person holds all the cards

Also robots are coming for your job. No offense. Just the other day the first automated self-driving 18 wheeler made a delivery. This is the future. Robots are coming for all our jobs. I work in healthcare and they are building PCs with algorithms to replace the judgements human being are supposed to be making and machines to do a lot of the things we are supposed to be doing.

In fact the ultimate goal of technology in to put us all out of work, that is do everything so we have nothing but leisure time.

I agree with the statement that trump can't fix this. Just look at the map. Look at the sheer amount of land and tiny communities peppered throughout that are expecting him to swoop in and save them. Its impossible.

 

[JSt0rm]

When tensions were high all it took was one bullet to start WWII. That was about 70 years ago. Really not that long ago. The world is not all cupcakes and sunshine and just the fact that people are arguing about... in the grand scheme of the world... very petty things... should tell you the cultural climate we enjoyed the last 20 or so years is not long for this world.

This would happen regardless of who was elected. Trump just makes it so we aren't fools getting ripped off in global trade. The democrats would have bled us dry. It really makes no difference. Prepare for a depression and self-sufficiency. If we buck up and are prepared it could be the best thing to happen to us really. We're a resource rich, large, industrious and educated nation. We'll be fine. Global trade is circling the drain no matter what we do. Global wages have basically equalized out as much as possible considering the standing disparity between values, education, etc. between developed and developing nations

If this is the mentality of trump voters holy shit. You want a depression? My work would have no value in some super depression apocalypse. I think the rural peoples dream is the world shutting down and their life skills being the most important thing on the planet. That to me is a very scary thing. Not only would it increase human suffering to amazing levels but all of the forward progress brought about by technologies and cities would come crashing down. Whatever is going to happen is going to happen but fuck if this mentality is wide spread.

 

[flexy]

I am one of those who fails to see where the article is "amazing" or even revealing, unless you mean it's a good read because this article points out that the underlying factor w/ Trump success is not racism but this misery of the rural people. I for myself never doubted this so I sorta seem to miss the point of of the article. It's clear that Trump did not win because of masses of white-supremacists but mainly because of blue collar workers (or ex-workers) in mainly rural America.

As for the article, let me ask you some questions:

Was rural life (even when some industries were still around) ever rewarding and so attractive as the article somehow implies as compared to today? What about 1970? What about 1950, or 1920? I am not an expert on farm-life by any means, but I have a feeling that life in a rural area, one a farm etc *never* was a paradise. People move into cities because of more opportunities not just since 20 years ago, they do that ever since. From that point of view I fear that this is an absolute pipe-dream that someone in these areas dreams that Trump or whoever may bring back a glorious time, a time which IMO never existed in the first place. An illusion.

 

[IronWing]

Here's an idea, if the jobs have left your area, move. I've moved for every job I've had. If you don't want to move when the jobs leave your area, no one owes you a job. When market for coal jobs collapsed due to the invention of the long wall miner, it was time to move away from the coalfields. That was thirty-forty years ago. Factory farming cut the number of farm jobs and buncher-fellers cut the number of timber jobs, again, move. If folks are looking to government to fix this problem, they shouldn't be surprised to find government in their shit.

On the public morality issue, nothing pisses me off like having rural politicians proclaiming the inherent moral superiority of rural communities. It's just self-serving bullshit.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

What do you guys do that's immune to this that some Indian can't do for a quarter of the salary?

 

[JSt0rm]

On the public morality issue, nothing pisses me off like having rural politicians proclaiming the inherent moral superiority of rural communities. It's just self-serving bullshit.

Its almost as if we are all guilty of it. The difference is the rural people, it seems, just want to watch the world burn.

 

[JSt0rm]

What do you guys do that's immune to this that some Indian can't do for a quarter of the salary?

maybe they can. I am a sound designer though. Your are getting into highly technical very creative work. Plus I'm almost at the top of my field. I don't think I will have issues unless we hit a mega depression type thing.

 

[IronWing]

What do you guys do that's immune to this that some Indian can't do for a quarter of the salary?

Not much other than having to be on site. India is fully capable of producing enough technically skilled professionals to swamp American needs. I support tariffs and protected labor markets. I don't expect we'll get them with Trump any more than we would have with Clinton. Electing Trump got cancelled out by returning the House and Senate.

 

[Balt]

i feel bad for them because trump can't fix this.

Indeed. I sympathize with their grievance, but Trump isn't their solution. Obama and Hillary were being honest when they said "those jobs aren't coming back". I'm sure that's tough to hear, but personally I have more respect for honest, harsh truth than someone making grandiose claims they know they can never fulfill. Someone who lies to my face clearly doesn't respect me, so I can't respect them either.

 

[IronWing]

Post misfire. Nothing to see here. Exciting stuff below, I'm sure.

 

[Jaskalas]

From that point of view I fear that this is an absolute pipe-dream that someone in these areas dreams that Trump or whoever may bring back a glorious time, a time which IMO never existed in the first place. An illusion.

Combine that with rising costs and wages that do not keep up.
With what is, essentially, income inequality. Is that an illusion? I think it's very much real, and it hurt everyone not making 7 figures.

 

[IronWing]

Combine that with rising costs and wages that do not keep up.
With what is, essentially, income inequality. Is that an illusion? I think it's very much real, and it hurt everyone not making 7 figures.

The tools with proven track records for addressing these issues are strong unions, progressive taxes, and protection from foreign competition. Trump is talking in favor of one of these (tariffs) which is one more than Clinton supported. On the tax side, it looks like Reps are gearing up for another round of irresponsible tax cuts to the benefit the wealthy and detriment of everybody else. Strengthening unions isn't on the agenda.

The enormous shift in resource expenditures toward healthcare is relatively new (past ~50 years) and none of the three tools I suggest above address the horrendous impact medical costs have on the lives of the less well to do. Political leaders seem stuck on old solutions which don't come close to addressing this issue.

Edit: Clinton did voice support for moving toward a more progressive tax code but it was a promise she knew she wouldn't be called upon to keep as the House was never expected to move out of Rep control.

 

[sxr7171]

Here's an idea, if the jobs have left your area, move. I've moved for every job I've had. If you don't want to move when the jobs leave your area, no one owes you a job. When market for coal jobs collapsed due to the invention of the long wall miner, it was time to move away from the coalfields. That was thirty-forty years ago. Factory farming cut the number of farm jobs and buncher-fellers cut the number of timber jobs, again, move. If folks are looking to government to fix this problem, they shouldn't be surprised to find government in their shit.

On the public morality issue, nothing pisses me off like having rural politicians proclaiming the inherent moral superiority of rural communities. It's just self-serving bullshit.

Me too. I've moved all over to find work.

I do feel for these people whose jobs have left and whose communities are a shell of their former selves.

You are right. Government can't solve this problem. It should be cyclical unemployment but these people are not only stuck with their skill set they are also stuck with a mentality that they could never survive elsewhere. They are not resilient people and they are not go getters.

They make excuses to move back even after they went to the city for a decent job. The excuse reads like this "I want my kids to have the same sense of community as I did". "Family is more important than career".

Some are literally afraid to set foot in the city.

So what they are asking for basically is to be fed, clothed, given a house, allowed to get fat as a cow and pass the healthcare costs over to productive more resilient members of society. They think they deserve it because it is what was promised to them when they started out.

The baby boomer generation had the best deal of any generation ever. They nicely squandered it and expected it all to keep going for life and to expect the same for their kids. Those are the people who are screaming out right now for someone to save them.

What they are asking for is beyond unreasonable but in their minds it's just what they expect. To sit around in their same town forever and never have to move for their income. I can see why maybe the older people stay but when I see families and kids being born out in those areas I really have to wonder.

These are people who strongly prefer comfort and familiarity over going out and doing whatever it takes to keep their lives going.

I can see in a certain amount of time no need for rural communities. All the activities in those areas will be done by robots. Maintenance and repair will be done by traveling groups of people.

I can only hope the kids of these places will get educated and get out. But I don't see it with a lot of these kids with the role models they have.

 

[sxr7171]

maybe they can. I am a sound designer though. Your are getting into highly technical very creative work. Plus I'm almost at the top of my field. I don't think I will have issues unless we hit a mega depression type thing.

Some jobs will never be taken by robots. Even in the Jetsons the robots needed people to press the buttons. Human creativity will always be needed.

However this really does put a lot of people out of work. So I guess those people will have to do with basic income while people still needed by the economy will get paid very well or why else would they bother? You can sit around and make babies and get paid instead of going to school.

 

[Yakk]

Very interesting article. The sicio-economic divide is not just particular to the US, it's looks more to be a global phenomena.

i feel bad for them because trump can't fix this.

But he at least he acknowledges this group.

 

[Ornery]

That is a good read, and mostly true, IMO. My opinion being a predominantly Libertarian, blue collar, suburban dweller. Folks like me have NOTHING in common with urbanites. Most rural folks work side by side with us in suburban businesses. But, it is the suburban voters who had the numbers to... not elect Trump, but reject HRC.

Last night I was preparing to write this post excoriating the idiots who nominated Trump. The only troll on the planet who could possibly lose to HRC! Well, guess I'm eating crow today, but happily.

Like I said, we have NOTHING in common with the blue region voters. We like owning our own vehicles, property with trees, shopping without paying to park, short commutes and decent public schools. We appreciate the police, adhering to existing immigration laws and law & order in general. As was mentioned in the Cracked Blog, we like being self sufficient. The less government the better. Totally opposite from HRC's Socialist world. We also do NOT want a liberal SCOTUS, so Trump may not be the best choice, but a far better option for us.

 

[flexy]

But he at least he acknowledges this group.

Did he really "acknowledge" them...or did he take advantage of the most desperate of people, telling them a blatant lie to get their votes?

 

[IronWing]

As was mentioned in the Cracked Blog, we like being self sufficient. The less government the better. Totally opposite from HRC's Socialist world. We also do NOT want a liberal SCOTUS, so Trump may not be the best choice, but a far better option for us.

Most rural communities are not self-sufficient. They are propped up by subsidies paid for by taxes paid by urbanites. From farm subsidies to rural health subsidies to rural electric subsidies to highway subsidies, school subsidies, the money flows from the urban centers to rural communities. There is reciprocity in that with the subsidies come stable food prices and a stable food supply. The rural economy in this country is fundamentally socialist.

 

[Ornery]

Do you honestly believe the words suburb and rural are interchangeable? There are not nearly enough rural voters to decide an election. It was the suburban voters who did, and we are self sufficient.

 

[soundforbjt]

Did he really "acknowledge" them...or did he take advantage of the most desperate of people, telling them a blatant lie to get their votes?

The right said Bernie was promising the sky, what about Trump? Promising the coal miners to keep the mines open, the huge military buildup, infrastructure rebuilt, factories coming back, building the wall, etc. A lot of people are gonna be disappointed.

 

[IronWing]

Do you honestly believe the words suburb and rural are interchangeable? There are not nearly enough rural voters to decide an election. It was the suburban voters who did, and we are self sufficient.

I live in the suburbs. Suburbs are also not self sufficient. The economy is far more complex than that.

 

[Sunburn74]

What do you guys do that's immune to this that some Indian can't do for a quarter of the salary?

A ton of stuff, mostly things that need a bachelor's degree or higher and involves US based companies for operations active in on US soil.

Can we also blame some of the issues with job finding on the whole anti-birth control/abortion thing in the rural south going? I happen to have some in-laws in the deep south (deeeeeeeeep south) and its insane to me how early they start having kids and how big their families are. Young men and women don't even have a chance to start thinking about making a move because they already have 2 kids and a 3rd on the way whilst living with mom and pop. Kids are real drag on finances, yet everyone seems to want to have them. I don't know why!

 

[Yakk]

Did he really "acknowledge" them...or did he take advantage of the most desperate of people, telling them a blatant lie to get their votes?

Blatant lies, or insidious lies... kinda depends on a politician's target audience. What is the alternative for this group? Voting for a party that just mostly ignores them? There is irony in this demographic voting for a billionaire instead of just millionaire career politicians, but I'm not really seeing why they would vote otherwise. I'm not endorsing either, just curious about the why and choices presented.

 

[Balt]

Blatant lies, or insidious lies... kinda depends on a politician's target audience. What is the alternative for this group? Voting for a party that just mostly ignores them? There is irony in this demographic voting for a billionaire instead of just millionaire career politicians, but I'm not really seeing why they would vote otherwise. I'm not endorsing either, just curious about the why and choices presented.

Respectfully, I disagree that they are ignored by the Democrats. Democrats support government programs, real things, that are intended to help lower income people. We can argue about how effective they are, but they exist.

I think the Democrats' message is less appealing, however, and often the message focuses more on urban poor than rural poor. The message is that government programs are what's needed to give down-and-out people a hand.

Republicans' message is much more appealing. It promises that everything will be fine once government gets out of the way. Most people like the idea of being self-sufficient, particularly if they were raised in a rural area and taught in home, church, and school that hard work always pays off.

Edit: To be fair, there are Republican presidents who have created or increased support to programs that help the poor too, but remarkably they often don't like to talk about them that much. They will beat the "government is the problem, not the solution" drum all day long, though.

 

[Torn Mind]

The rural folks in a lot of rural states and counties have been voting Republican for a while. But really, was it them that won Trump in Democratic strongholds?
Flipping Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin can't be just a rural vote coming out in those places. That is just an overly simple narrative. Florida is really densely populated as well, with a strong Hispanic presence.

The one thing about Trump was that he is "money", but a sort of "new money" and not an established elite like the Rockefellers.