Is there anyone besides Trump who could SYMBOLICALLY appeal to WWC? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2024, 02:58:15 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  Is there anyone besides Trump who could SYMBOLICALLY appeal to WWC? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Is there anyone besides Trump who could SYMBOLICALLY appeal to WWC?  (Read 4008 times)
White Trash
Southern Gothic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,910


« on: June 09, 2017, 12:29:49 PM »

The WWC isn't a monolith.  A certain amount of the WWC is lost to the Democrats because they are primarily focused on social conservatism (guns, religious conservatism, immigration).  In this category, we can include most of the WWC in the South and Border States.

In Appalachia, there were two issues.  One was coal and energy, and the other was respect.  Trump promised them both.  The Democrats have hurt themselves with these folks by systematic insensitivity to their needs.  Trump gave them respect, and promised to protect their livelihoods. 

But the ones that were the real mind blowers were the WWC voters in WI, MI, PA, and MN.  These folks were Northerners and more likely to be unionized.  Here, what was needed was a candidate who viewed a feminist agenda to a working class agenda.  A significant number of these WWC voters have been divorced and have hefty child support payments to make.  Hillary's over-emphasis on respect for women, concern for "women and girls" endlessly, lectures on how "words matter" just let these people know that she didn't give a crap about them.  And while these guys have exes that may have been cheering for Hillary to keep 'em paying their child support, they also had a present significant other who was living lower on the hog because of the child support their husband/boyfriend had to pay. 

I'm not saying this is logical, and I'm certainly not defending child support deadbeats.  But people don't have to like sanctimony, and people can make decisions for themselves.  It IS possible to discuss the needs of women in ways that even chauvinistic males can pay attention to.  It's NOT possible for Hillary Clinton to pull that off, however.  She hates males, has a bias against them, and while I may give her some sympathy for what Bill has put her through, folks can figure out who is and isn't with them, and SHE wasn't with THEM.
I really doubt that child support payments were even a tertiary factor in Clinton doing poorly with the WWC. And the idea that a feminist agenda and working-class agenda are diametrically opposed is ridiculous.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 11 queries.