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?
June 10, 2024, 09:20:23 AM
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 4043 times)
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


« on: June 09, 2017, 10:10:03 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.

Fuzzy Bear, I know it's hard to understand how big a deal rape is. But when one in four women are either raped or rape is attempted on them in their lifetime, we cannot say it is a female problem. 95-98% of rapists are men. This is a male problem. I know it's hard to listen to a "shrill" candidate, but even women(Roll Eyes) make good points. Yes, she is part of the problem by helping to cover up rape. But you can't just ignore someone's ideas and viewpoints because you know in part of their very, very complex personality there is some bad or evil. I want to repeat to you the "conservative" idea of diversity of thought rather than diversity of identity: we cannot afford to be closed-minded to someone else's viewpoints and thoughts for any reason.
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 0.018 seconds with 13 queries.