Was the Trump vote more motivated by culture or economics?

[JA]

This question has been haunting - and dividing - the Democratic Party for months. The answer to it will determine what the future of American politics will be, in which direction the two parties will go, and to whom Democrats must appeal in 2018 and beyond. It is also a major division between the more left-wing/Socialist aspect of the left and the more center-left/Liberal aspect of the left which disagree over the motivation behind the Trump vote.

If the left-wing/Socialist side is correct, then Trump voters, especially Obama-Trump voters, were motivated more by economic issues. Perhaps they were also bigoted, but if the Democrats offered an economic agenda that appealed to their financial self-interest, they would have voted Democratic instead. However, Trump won their vote and Clinton lost it, either to Trump or to abstention, due to their economic messages. On that basis, the Democratic Party must adopt a left-wing economic program, downplay aspects of its "identity politics," and pursue an agenda that will appeal to disaffected White, non-college-educated voters. It would explain the allegation of Trump voters as motivated more by racism as a deflection employed by the liberal establishment to secure their elite financial interests and that the rise of the far-right stems from the Left's failure to adopt a sufficiently left-wing economic agenda.

If the center-left/Liberal side is correct, then Trump voters, especially Obama-Trump voters, were more motivated by social/cultural issues. Perhaps they were also financially distressed, but even if the Democrats offered an economic agenda that appealed to their financial self-interest, they would have voted Republican regardless. However, Trump won their vote and Clinton lost it, either to Trump or abstention, due to their social/cultural messages. On that basis, the Democratic Party must emphasize their commitment to minority rights, globalization, and pursue an agenda that will appeal to moderate White, college-educated voters.

So, which side has the most compelling argument for it? Which side has the most substantive empirical data? Which side do you believe is more accurate?

[Hydera]

95% of the Trump vote was culture considering they voted for Romney who was right-wing on most economic issues back in 2012 and the other GOP candidates the years before.

5% of the Trump vote were Obama voters or non-voters that voted for trump over economics since he was strongly anti-free trade which resonated with a lot of rust belt whites that supported Obama or stayed home before 2016.

[RINO Tom]

95% of the Trump vote was culture considering they voted for Romney who was right-wing on most economic issues back in 2012 and the other GOP candidates the years before.

5% of the Trump vote were Obama voters or non-voters that voted for trump over economics since he was strongly anti-free trade which resonated with a lot of rust belt whites that supported Obama or stayed home before 2016.

Uh, a ton of people - including my parents - voted for both Romney and Trump entirely because of economics.  Trump being to the left of Romney doesn't change the fact that he's miles to the right of Clinton, after all...

[ApatheticAustrian]

inside of the midwest or more exactly PA/MI/WI i think economics trumo culture.

[mieastwick]

Romney voters as a whole were driven mainly by social issues, and supported him on economic issues almost entirely insofar as they relate to social (recall that Utah was once a heavily Democratic state). The same applies to Romney-Trump voters.

Obama-Trump voters were mainly motivated by economics.

Clinton really offered as much anti White racism, Russophobia (and American exceptionalism!) and authoritarianism as one would wish, which is why so many Romney voters switched to Clinton, despite her weak family values stances. Everyone knows the Trump vote was less correlated with opposition to drug liberalization than the Romney vote (see the 2016 Massachusetts referendum results as evidence), precisely because a lot of authoritarian Romney voters fled to Hillary.

[Kingpoleon]

Romney voters as a whole were driven mainly by social issues, and supported him on economic issues almost entirely insofar as they relate to social (recall that Utah was once a heavily Democratic state). The same applies to Romney-Trump voters.

Obama-Trump voters were mainly motivated by economics.

Clinton really offered as much anti White racism, Russophobia (and American exceptionalism!) and authoritarianism as one would wish, which is why so many Romney voters switched to Clinton, despite her weak family values stances. Everyone knows the Trump vote was less correlated with opposition to drug liberalization than the Romney vote (see the 2016 Massachusetts referendum results as evidence), precisely because a lot of authoritarian Romney voters fled to Hillary.

This was never the case besides the post-1928 period if that can really count considering Democrats were winning most states more heavily than Utah.

[Xing]

A combination of both.

[Kingpoleon]

Economic issues. However, trying to maneuver over his strengths is idiotic. Only opposition to him on economics and social issues would turnout new voters rather than prey on his supporters.

As such, this opposition, to be most effective, must be anti-populist on economics and pro-civil liberties/socially libertarian on social issues.

[Mike Thick]

The two are way too intertwined for there to be a simple answer.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The vast majority of people don't vote on the basis of "issues", but rather based on group identities and emotional attachments to the symbols mobilized by parties and candidates. This is true of T***p voters, Hillary voters, Bernie voters, and Cruz voters. It's a mainstay of politics and it's time people who're supposed to comment on it get the memo.

[Intell]

Culture (not necessarily racism)

[Goldwater]

The vast majority of people don't vote on the basis of "issues", but rather based on group identities and emotional attachments to the symbols mobilized by parties and candidates. This is true of T***p voters, Hillary voters, Bernie voters, and Cruz voters. It's a mainstay of politics and it's time people who're supposed to comment on it get the memo.

Basically this, which I would count as "culture".

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Economics as a cultural issue; trade and loss of good manufacturing jobs as the material aspects of a broader sense of national decline and a way of life that has disappeared or is under threat.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Both campaigns were almost solely culture-driven, which is part but not all of what made this election so infuriating throughout. Cross-posted in the Hillary thread.

[Beet]

Mainly misogyny against Hillary Clinton.

[Torie]

Option 2. There are just not many reasonably paying jobs out there for the working class anymore, at least in the private sector. It's mostly just a sea of minimum wage jobs, at least in the Hudson Valley.  Trump promised a way out, that seems relatively painless (except for foreigners). Folks wanted to believe that there is a magic wand to make it all go away. They will be sorely disillusioned in time, but I digress.

[RINO Tom]

Option 2. There are just not many reasonably paying jobs out there for the working class anymore, at least in the private sector. It's mostly just a sea of minimum wage jobs, at least in the Hudson Valley.  Trump promised a way out, that seems relatively painless (except for foreigners). Folks wanted to believe that there is a magic wand to make it all go away. They will be sorely disillusioned in time, but I digress.

Torie, I know you're somewhat desperate for a political home ... but it's just factually inaccurate that Trump's voters were more "working class" than Clinton's, so I'm not sure that can explain his entire vote.  Maybe swings, though.

[mieastwick]

but it's just factually inaccurate that Trump's voters were more "working class" than Clinton's

Are you sure about that? Clinton got a lot of lumpenproletarian voters, probably more than Trump. Lumpenproletarians aren't working class. Clinton's voters were, on average, more educated than Trump's.

[RINO Tom]

but it's just factually inaccurate that Trump's voters were more "working class" than Clinton's

Are you sure about that? Clinton got a lot of lumpenproletarian voters, probably more than Trump. Lumpenproletarians aren't working class. Clinton's voters were, on average, more educated than Trump's.

I guess that gets into what "working class" means ... I think it is ridiculously dumb to use "college degree or no college degree," especially when a wealthy 60-year old might have no college degree (as one wasn't as important when he/she was 18) and a struggling 30-year old might have one (as it was more important when he/she was 18).  If we look at income (seriously, this should be universally accepted as the best definition of "class," and it's asinine that it's not), this was the exit polls breakdown:

Under $30,000 (17%): 53% Clinton, 41% Trump
$30,000 to $49,999 (19%): 51% Clinton, 42% Trump
$50,000 to $99,999 (30%): 50% Trump, 46% Clinton
$100,000 to $199,999 (24%): 48% Trump, 47% Clinton
$200,000 to 249,999 (4%): 49% Trump, 48% Clinton
$250,000 and Over (6%): 48% Trump, 46% Clinton

Doing some simple math, almost 40% of Clinton voters came from a family that was making less than $50,000 per year, and over 67% came from a family that made less than $100,000 per year.  Compare those numbers to 32% and 65%, respectively, for Trump.  It wasn't as stark as years past, but Trump voters were better off financially than Clinton voters, on average.  While a lot of the swing toward Trump probably came from more blue collar Whites and a lot of the swing toward Clinton probably came from more affluent Whites, MOST affluent Whites "stayed home" with the GOP nominee, and the results were even more staggering for downballot (House, in this case) Republicans:

Under $30,000 (17%): 56% DEM, 41% GOP
$30,000 to $49,999 (19%): 55% DEM, 44% GOP
$50,000 to $99,999 (30%): 51% GOP, 47% DEM
$100,000 to $199,999 (24%): 51% GOP, 46% DEM
$200,000 to 249,999 (4%): 50% GOP, 47% DEM
$250,000 and Over (6%): 57% GOP, 41% DEM

Given that Congressional Republicans performed about as well with the highest income bracket as Romney did, it does suggest Trump had a unique appeal to some lower income voters ... but that STILL wasn't enough to fully flip the dynamic of a wealthier Republican voting base than the Democratic one, which is not exactly the narrative of this board's realignment fantasies.

[MT Treasurer]

What an incredibly awful and hackish thread. The Trump vote was driven by a) the hatred of Hillary Clinton, b) cultural values/social issues like abortion/the Supreme Court/etc., c) economic issues and concerns, d) 2016 being an "outsider" year, and e) Trump's stance on immigration. There were other factors as well, but these are the most important ones IMO.