Koch Brothers believe Trump Presidency could lead to Far Left populism

[🕴🏼Melior🕴🏼]

Well duh!

Populism was always going to be the answer, same way minimal government psuedo-intellectualism was the inevitable result no matter who won 1976.

Gerald Ford was many things, but an elitist intellectual is not one of them.

-He won the college-educated by a lot.

And Trump won the wealthy and lost the poor, is he no longer a man of the people?

According to exit polls, Trump won the $250k+ vote by 1%. Romney won it by 10% in 2012.

Also, exit polls are junk. They tend to be very inaccurate. Most national polls had Hillary ahead with the $250k+ group by a pretty solid margin.

The wealthiest communities in America (Greenwich, CT, Darien, CT, Atherton, CA, etc.) all OVERWHELMINGLY voted for Hillary (despite the fact that they voted for Romney in 2012).

To say that Trump won the wealthy is pretty false.

[🕴🏼Melior🕴🏼]

Well duh!

Populism was always going to be the answer, same way minimal government psuedo-intellectualism was the inevitable result no matter who won 1976.

Gerald Ford was many things, but an elitist intellectual is not one of them.

-He won the college-educated by a lot.

And Trump won the wealthy and lost the poor, is he no longer a man of the people?

According to exit polls, Trump won the $250k+ vote by 1%. Romney won it by 10% in 2012.

Also, exit polls are junk. They tend to be very inaccurate. Most national polls had Hillary ahead with the $250k+ group by a pretty solid margin.

The wealthiest communities in America (Greenwich, CT, Darien, CT, Atherton, CA, etc.) all OVERWHELMINGLY voted for Hillary (despite the fact that they voted for Romney in 2012).

To say that Trump won the wealthy is pretty false.

"The exit polls don't indicate what I want them to, so I am going to choose to ignore them."

That's pretty much what you just said, buddy.  Also, winning wealthy counties (read: counties where the median income - which is a trash statistic, if not adjusted for cost of living and purchasing power) does NOT mean that you won the wealthiest voters in those counties.  There are still FAR more non-rich people in rich counties than there are rich people, you know.  If we controlled for cost of living and looked at ACTUAL affluence (ya know, how affluently you can afford to live, how much stuff you can buy, spending cash, etc.), Trump likely won this group by even more.

I'm not talking wealthiest counties. I'm talking about wealthiest towns (towns with small populations where a large majority of people are wealthy).

Clinton overwhelmingly won extremely wealthy towns where 50%+ of the population make over $250k (like Atherton CA, Darien CT, etc.) Clinton overwhelmingly won towns where there are far more rich people then non-rich people (like Greenwhich, CT, etc). The wealthiest precincts in this country voted overwhelmingly for Hillary (despite voting for Romney in 2012).

And the 2012 election has proven that exit polls are junk. National polls tend be much more accurate, and every single national poll showed Clinton ahead comfortably with the $250k+ group.

Even if exit polls were to be believed, Trump only won the $250k+ group by 1 point (within the margin of error). National polls tend to be more accurate, and they all showed Trump losing the $250k+ group.

[🕴🏼Melior🕴🏼]

Actually, Trump did lose whites with college degrees that make over $250k+. Look at this graph:



Also, national polls were very accurate this year. It was the state polls (specifically in the Rust Belt) that were inaccurate. IIRC, the national polling average before the election had Trump behind 2 points, which matches the popular vote. And most national polling showed Trump behind with the $250k+ group.