Author | Thread |
AUTOADVERT |
crzymdups
Posts: 52018 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 5/1/2004 Member: #671 USA |
![]() Horrified about the results, but looking at the numbers - it wasn't more people voting for Trump. It was voters who came out for Obama staying away from Clinton. Trump got fewer votes than Romney(12) and McCain(08) - but the problem is so did Clinton.
Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL: ¿ △ ?
|
nixluva
Posts: 56258 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 10/5/2004 Member: #758 USA |
![]() crzymdups wrote:Horrified about the results, but looking at the numbers - it wasn't more people voting for Trump. It was voters who came out for Obama staying away from Clinton. Trump got fewer votes than Romney(12) and McCain(08) - but the problem is so did Clinton.Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL: WOW! As you say it seems that Hillary simply underperformed more than Trump actually excelled. I must say that I didn't see that kind of drop off coming. The Dems have to totally regroup and I would guess that the Bernie/Warren Progressive Wing will ascend after all of this. There's nowhere else to go from here except more Progressive. They can't go back to the Clinton wing again IMO. The base wouldn't stand for it. Especially after 4 years of Trump and the Republicans in full glory. |
Rookie
Posts: 27028 Alba Posts: 28 Joined: 10/15/2008 Member: #2274 |
![]() fishmike wrote:Rookie wrote:fishmike wrote:Rookie wrote:it was Romney/Ryan, or McCain/Palin, or Bush/Cheney or Bush/Quail or Regan/Bush I would 100% agree with this and say these guys deserve their shot to move things in a better direction. However the commander is chief is a con man who openly trashes women with no accountability, cheats laborers, has a detailed history of discrimination and has shown a very poor temperment. "Balancing" that is Pence, a religious zealot who believes gays can be "cured" with therapy.nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:TheGame wrote:At this point, I am fairly convinced that 90% of everything Trump said was total BS, and he is not going to do most of what he claimed. He is never going to get Mexico to pay for a wall. He is not getting term limits passed (which would require a constitutional amendment). He probably is not going to cut regulations to any significant extent and he simply is not smart enough to fix the tax code. He will lower taxes on the rich, he will pull back Obamacare, and he will increase defense spending. Beyond that, I have doubts he will do much else. The real danger is in foreign policy because we have to worry about his temperament, and if he really plans to play the role of isolationist, it may give countries like Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia the opportunity to expand their power. We will just have to wait and see. I find this article particularly interesting, so I'll just attach it here https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/09/trump-won-because-college-educated-americans-are-out-of-touch/?wpisrc=nl_most-draw7&wpmm=1 Trump won because college-educated Americans are out of touch Higher education is isolated, insular and liberal. Average voters aren't. As the reality of President-elect Donald Trump settled in very early Wednesday morning, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes summed up an explanation common to many on the left: The Republican nominee pulled ahead thanks to old-fashioned American racism. But the attempt to make Trump’s victory about racism appears to be at odds with what actually happened on Election Day. Consider the following facts. Twenty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Trump, per exit polls. Remarkably, despite the near-ubiquitous narrative that Trump would have deep problems with this demographic given his comments and position on immigration, this was a higher percentage of those who voted for GOP nominee Mitt Romney in 2012. Meanwhile, African Americans did not turn out to vote against Trump. In fact, Trump received a higher percentage of African American votes than Romney did. And while many white voters deeply disliked Trump, they disliked Democrat Hillary Clinton even more. Of those who had negative feelings about both Trump and Clinton, Trump got their votes by a margin of 2 to 1. Votes for Trump seemed to signal a rejection of the norms and values for which Clinton stood more than an outright embrace of Trump. He was viewed unfavorably, for instance, by 61 percent of Wisconsinites, but 1 in 5 in that group voted for him anyway. The most important divide in this election was not between whites and non-whites. It was between those who are often referred to as “educated” voters and those who are described as “working class” voters. The reality is that six in 10 Americans do not have a college degree, and they elected Donald Trump. College-educated people didn’t just fail to see this coming — they have struggled to display even a rudimentary understanding of the worldviews of those who voted for Trump. This is an indictment of the monolithic, insulated political culture in the vast majority our colleges and universities. As a college professor, I know that there are many ways in which college graduates simply know more about the world than those who do not have such degrees. This is especially true — with some exceptions, of course — when it comes to “hard facts” learned in science, history and sociology courses. But I also know that that those with college degrees — again, with some significant exceptions — don’t necessarily know philosophy or theology. And they have especially paltry knowledge about the foundational role that different philosophical or theological claims play in public thought compared with what is common to college campuses. In my experience, many professors and college students don’t even realize that their views on political issues rely on a particular philosophical or theological stance. As a college professor, I know that there are many ways in which college graduates simply know more about the world than those who do not have such degrees. This is especially true — with some exceptions, of course — when it comes to “hard facts” learned in science, history and sociology courses. But I also know that that those with college degrees — again, with some significant exceptions — don’t necessarily know philosophy or theology. And they have especially paltry knowledge about the foundational role that different philosophical or theological claims play in public thought compared with what is common to college campuses. In my experience, many professors and college students don’t even realize that their views on political issues rely on a particular philosophical or theological stance. Sometimes the college-educated find themselves so unable to understand a particular working-class point of view that they will respond to those perspectives with shocking condescension. Recall that President Obama, in the midst of the 2012 election cycle, suggested that job losses were the reason working-class voters were bitterly clinging “to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” The religious themselves, meanwhile, likely do not chalk their faith up to unhappy economic prospects, and they probably find it hard to connect with politicians who seem to assume such. Thus today’s college graduates are formed by a campus culture that leaves them unable to understand people with unfamiliar or heterodox views on guns, abortion, religion, marriage, gender and privilege. And that same culture leads such educated people to either label those with whom they disagree as bad people or reduce their stated views on these issues as actually being about something else, as in Obama’s case. Most college grads in this culture are simply never forced to engage with or seriously consider professors or texts which could provide a genuine, compelling alternative view. For decades now, U.S. colleges and universities have quite rightly been trying to become more diverse when it comes to race and gender. But this election highlights the fact that our institutions of higher education should use similar methods to cultivate philosophical, theological and political diversity. These institutions should consider using quotas in hiring that help faculties and administrations more accurately reflect the wide range of norms and values present in the American people. There should be systemwide attempts to have texts assigned in classes written by people from intellectually underrepresented groups. There should be concerted efforts to protect political minorities from discrimination and marginalization, even if their views are unpopular or uncomfortable to consider. The goal of such changes would not be to convince students that their political approaches are either correct or incorrect. The goal would instead be educational: to identify and understand the norms, values, first principles, intuitions and stories which have been traditionally underrepresented in higher education. This would better equip college graduates to engage with the world as it is, including with their fellow citizens. The alternative, a reduction of all disagreement to racism, bigotry and ignorance — in addition to being wrong about its primary source — will simply make the disagreement far more personal, entrenched and vitriolic. And it won’t make liberal values more persuasive to the less educated, as Trump victory demonstrates. It is time to do the hard work of forging the kind of understanding that moves beyond mere dismissal to actual argument. Today’s election results indicate that our colleges and universities are places where this hard work is particularly necessary. |