Economic anxiety is not why Trump was elected.

[Confused Democrat]

Most people voted for Trump because they're white and can feel their majority status in this country quickly slipping away from them. More immigrants means less whites, and more people with accents.

Sorry, but that's how I feel.

Deep down, even if they don't want to admit. Most people voted for Trump because they have an irrational distaste for immigrants.

[cvparty]

they’re not mutually exclusive. it was likely a combination of economic anxiety as well as cultural anxiety. exit polls consistently showed that poor people swung heavily to trump

[Famous Mortimer]

Title is incorrect.

Actual post is correct except for the word "irrational".

[Tender Branson]

We have debated this before ...

It's not one issue that got him elected.

Also Hillary Clinton, who referred to his supporters as "deplorables", did an outstanding job at mobilizing his supporters.

[Confused Democrat]

We have debated this before ...

It's not one issue that got him elected.

Also Hillary Clinton, who referred to his supporters as "deplorables", did an outstanding job at mobilizing his supporters.

they’re not mutually exclusive. it was likely a combination of economic anxiety as well as cultural anxiety. exit polls consistently showed that poor people swung heavily to trump

I believe it was one issue more than any other.

Cultural anxiety was the cake, and everything else was just the icing on top.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Does this explain the behaviour of the Obama-Trump voters?

[cvparty]

We have debated this before ...

It's not one issue that got him elected.

Also Hillary Clinton, who referred to his supporters as "deplorables", did an outstanding job at mobilizing his supporters.

they’re not mutually exclusive. it was likely a combination of economic anxiety as well as cultural anxiety. exit polls consistently showed that poor people swung heavily to trump

I believe it was one issue more than any other.

Cultural anxiety was the cake, and everything else was just the icing on top.

either way, the key to trump’s victory was his appeal to areas that have been/felt “left behind,” whether socially or economically. and the two are intrinsically linked to each other

[Confused Democrat]

Does this explain the behaviour of the Obama-Trump voters?

Yes, I believe it does.

[Cold War Liberal]

I'm a member of the white working class, like the rest of my family, and no one in my family has a college degree (working on it!). I'm very economically axious right now; three of the four people in my nuclear family, myself included, are having health issues (thank God we have decent health insurance), I'm going to miss a month of work (thank God my boss sees me as one of the better workers in my store and is gracious/understanding), I have tuition to pay and not nearly enough to pay for it, and I'm also having expensive car troubles (thank God I went for the warrenty).

And yet my support for Trump has not gone up; in fact, it's gone further down recently, due to the North Korea summit and the feud with Canada/the G7. My love for immigrants and my views that we should live up to the ideals my forefathers had for this country when they came from Ireland have not diminished. I not only don't fear black or Hispanic/Latinx people or blame them for my problems, but a number of my friends who have helped bear my burdens are not white.

It's almost as if economic anxiety and Trump support aren't strongly correlated! It's my personal experience, of course, but it's reinforced by the fact that almost all the the Trump supporters we have here in Harford County are either the stereotypical racist redneck types, or the rich people who want lower taxes.

(My dad, who voted for Trump somewhat reluctantly due, he says, to the Supreme Court, does not support his reelection bid, having realized that he's just as bad at governing as he hoped Trump wouldn't be)

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Does this explain the behaviour of the Obama-Trump voters?

Yes, I believe it does.

How? I'm genuinely curious.

Anyway, I'm not sure why it matters. People with problematic views make up the majority of the electorate since the beginning politics. No use being sad about it - you can't choose your own electorate?

[I’m not Stu]

Most whites with real economic anxiety voted for Clinton.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Does this explain the behaviour of the Obama-Trump voters?

Many Obama-Trump voters were drawn to Obama by his (relative) economic populism. In '08 he ran a populist campaign and in '12 he tarred Romney as being an elitist. However, a lot of these voters likely had their own forms of cultural anxiety that were outweighed by their economic needs at the beginning of the recession.

Trump ran on populist economic positions that aligned with the socially conservative, economically liberal views of these voters. In fact, the fact that he was unique in marrying these two ideologies is part of why he was so ferverently popular, and why he continues to be so popular. It will be really interesting to see what happens if a Democrat can do a good job of convincing voters that Trump hasn't fufilled any of his economic promises -- which side of the coin will the voters decide is more important, Social Security/Medicare or cultural grievance?

Also I should add that the racial-political landscape in 2016 was different than it was in 2008. I think that Black Lives Matter did a lot to polarize many white voters and make them a lot less receptive to messages of inclusivity and more receptive to messages of cultural alienation.

[Virginiá]

They aren't mutually exclusive. People whose economic mobility has been squeezed for years and/or feel like they are losing their place in society leaves them vulnerable to things like anti-immigrant sentiments. People need someone to blame, and blaming "the others" is a time-tested classic.

[YE]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Most of the people who voted for Trump in the General Election did so because he was the official Republican nominee. Ethnic politics and the culture wars play a huge rule in partisan identification in the United States. Most of these voters are also reasonably well off. Not much to discuss about them.

The interesting questions concern those voters who voted for Trump in the General Election for reasons other the party next to his name on the ballot (of particular interest: those who voted for Trump and for at least some Democrats downticket, and those who voted for Trump but had previously voted for Obama) and for the people who voted for Trump in the Republican primary.

Unless we make these distinctions then there's little hope of meaningful debate on this matter. But I wonder sometimes whether that's the point.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Most people voted for Trump because they're white and can feel their majority status in this country quickly slipping away from them. More immigrants means less whites, and more people with accents.

Sorry, but that's how I feel.

Deep down, even if they don't want to admit. Most people voted for Trump because they have an irrational distaste for immigrants.

While I have no doubt that racism was a significant part of why people voted for Trump, I don't think it's the whole story. Anti-intellectualism played a major role too.

"My ignorance is better than your knowledge" was a huge part of his appeal.

[kyc0705]

It's quite remarkable how blatant many White Americans are in their fear of the U.S.'s changing demographic shifts. I'm still reeling from a post I saw earlier today in another thread here which argued that it's not only natural for white people to be preferred as a group, but that future genetic engineering will mean that everybody will want to become white, and that an all-white America is a goal that should be looked forward to.

[Mr. Morden]

I believe it was one issue more than any other.

The main issue was that he was the Republican nominee.  The bulk of his voters were people who voted for Romney in 2012, and in fact Trump got a slightly smaller % of the vote in 2016 than Romney did in 2012.

[Indy Texas]

Matt Yglesias gives the best succinct explanation of what I've been trying to say for the past two years:

Trump won because he could harness racial resentment, but he was able to harness racial resentment effectively because he explicitly rebuked Republican orthodoxy on trade and the social safety net, taking those issues off the table and making more room for racial/cultural resentment issues.

If he hadn't done that, the campaign would have been Hillary Clinton saying "Donald Trump doesn't care about working Americans and wants to roll Grandma's wheelchair off a cliff" and Donald Trump indignantly denying that was the case, much like the Obama-Romney campaign in 2012.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation[/u] and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

A thoughtful post.

The economically anxious that were most driven to Trump were those who were/are employed in fossil fuel industries, and in other industries that were specifically targeted by Obama-Era environmental regulations.  The energy boom in PA is one reason PA swung to Trump; energy workers in fracking industries were not at all certain that more Obama environmentalism in the form of HRC would lead to a reduction in THEIR jobs.

I'm certainly not down with all of Trump's environmental policies, and he seems to get his jollies in rolling THOSE policies back, but some of them were, IMO, not defensible.  Holding up the Keystone Pipeline was not defensible; that pipeline was going to be built by someone, so why not us?  Coal was/is a dying industry, but the Obama-Era policies toward coal miners (and, to some degree, toward oil and gas workers) came off as an assault against these workers' way of life.  And the attitude of many liberals was to view these WORKERS as scum, and not just the oil execs and mine owners.  

Would you be "economically anxious" if the Presidential candidate of one of the major parties (for many, the one they had ancestral allegiance to) said, from the stump, that she looked forward to seeing lots of coal miners out of work?  That statement, more than the "Deplorables" comment, was utter poison for Hillary, but it gave hardworking Americans in the fracking industry in PA (as well as the coal miners) just exactly what was in that sewer that passes for her soul.  She cared not one whit for these hardworking folks and loathed them for what they did.  I can imagine every fracking worker listening to her statement on coal miners and wonder what she had in store for me and my coworkers.  And before anyone moralizes about Trump's diseased soul, my "hypocritical religiosity", and such other drivel, perhaps they can put themselves in the shoes of these coal miners, fracking workers, and oil field workers and imaging what their assessment of Hillary's spiritual condition might be.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation[/u] and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

A thoughtful post.

The economically anxious that were most driven to Trump were those who were/are employed in fossil fuel industries, and in other industries that were specifically targeted by Obama-Era environmental regulations.  The energy boom in PA is one reason PA swung to Trump; energy workers in fracking industries were not at all certain that more Obama environmentalism in the form of HRC would lead to a reduction in THEIR jobs.

I'm certainly not down with all of Trump's environmental policies, and he seems to get his jollies in rolling THOSE policies back, but some of them were, IMO, not defensible.  Holding up the Keystone Pipeline was not defensible; that pipeline was going to be built by someone, so why not us?  Coal was/is a dying industry, but the Obama-Era policies toward coal miners (and, to some degree, toward oil and gas workers) came off as an assault against these workers' way of life.  And the attitude of many liberals was to view these WORKERS as scum, and not just the oil execs and mine owners. 

Would you be "economically anxious" if the Presidential candidate of one of the major parties (for many, the one they had ancestral allegiance to) said, from the stump, that she looked forward to seeing lots of coal miners out of work?  That statement, more than the "Deplorables" comment, was utter poison for Hillary, but it gave hardworking Americans in the fracking industry in PA (as well as the coal miners) just exactly what was in that sewer that passes for her soul.  She cared not one whit for these hardworking folks and loathed them for what they did.  I can imagine every fracking worker listening to her statement on coal miners and wonder what she had in store for me and my coworkers.  And before anyone moralizes about Trump's diseeased soul, my "hypocritical religiosity", and such other drivel, put yourself in the shoes of these coal miners, fracking workers, and oil field workers and imaging what their assessment of Hillary's spiritual condition might be.

That is a blatant lie. You are a liar.

[Joe Biden 2024]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation[/u] and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

A thoughtful post.

The economically anxious that were most driven to Trump were those who were/are employed in fossil fuel industries, and in other industries that were specifically targeted by Obama-Era environmental regulations.  The energy boom in PA is one reason PA swung to Trump; energy workers in fracking industries were not at all certain that more Obama environmentalism in the form of HRC would lead to a reduction in THEIR jobs.

I'm certainly not down with all of Trump's environmental policies, and he seems to get his jollies in rolling THOSE policies back, but some of them were, IMO, not defensible.  Holding up the Keystone Pipeline was not defensible; that pipeline was going to be built by someone, so why not us?  Coal was/is a dying industry, but the Obama-Era policies toward coal miners (and, to some degree, toward oil and gas workers) came off as an assault against these workers' way of life.  And the attitude of many liberals was to view these WORKERS as scum, and not just the oil execs and mine owners. 

Would you be "economically anxious" if the Presidential candidate of one of the major parties (for many, the one they had ancestral allegiance to) said, from the stump, that she looked forward to seeing lots of coal miners out of work?  That statement, more than the "Deplorables" comment, was utter poison for Hillary, but it gave hardworking Americans in the fracking industry in PA (as well as the coal miners) just exactly what was in that sewer that passes for her soul.  She cared not one whit for these hardworking folks and loathed them for what they did.  I can imagine every fracking worker listening to her statement on coal miners and wonder what she had in store for me and my coworkers.  And before anyone moralizes about Trump's diseeased soul, my "hypocritical religiosity", and such other drivel, put yourself in the shoes of these coal miners, fracking workers, and oil field workers and imaging what their assessment of Hillary's spiritual condition might be.

That is a blatant lie. You are a liar.

While completely ignoring the fact that she wanted to retrain coal miners instead.

[YE]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation[/u] and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

A thoughtful post.

The economically anxious that were most driven to Trump were those who were/are employed in fossil fuel industries, and in other industries that were specifically targeted by Obama-Era environmental regulations.  The energy boom in PA is one reason PA swung to Trump; energy workers in fracking industries were not at all certain that more Obama environmentalism in the form of HRC would lead to a reduction in THEIR jobs.

I'm certainly not down with all of Trump's environmental policies, and he seems to get his jollies in rolling THOSE policies back, but some of them were, IMO, not defensible.  Holding up the Keystone Pipeline was not defensible; that pipeline was going to be built by someone, so why not us?  Coal was/is a dying industry, but the Obama-Era policies toward coal miners (and, to some degree, toward oil and gas workers) came off as an assault against these workers' way of life.  And the attitude of many liberals was to view these WORKERS as scum, and not just the oil execs and mine owners. 

Would you be "economically anxious" if the Presidential candidate of one of the major parties (for many, the one they had ancestral allegiance to) said, from the stump, that she looked forward to seeing lots of coal miners out of work?  That statement, more than the "Deplorables" comment, was utter poison for Hillary, but it gave hardworking Americans in the fracking industry in PA (as well as the coal miners) just exactly what was in that sewer that passes for her soul.  She cared not one whit for these hardworking folks and loathed them for what they did.  I can imagine every fracking worker listening to her statement on coal miners and wonder what she had in store for me and my coworkers.  And before anyone moralizes about Trump's diseeased soul, my "hypocritical religiosity", and such other drivel, put yourself in the shoes of these coal miners, fracking workers, and oil field workers and imaging what their assessment of Hillary's spiritual condition might be.

That is a blatant lie. You are a liar.

While completely ignoring the fact that she wanted to retrain coal miners instead.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/9/15/16306158/hillary-clinton-hall-of-mirrors

I mean she did to her credit want to re-train coal workers (which more or less is proper policy) but it easily came across as she literally want to add former coal workers to the unemployment rolls.

[forgotten manatee]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation[/u] and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

A thoughtful post.

The economically anxious that were most driven to Trump were those who were/are employed in fossil fuel industries, and in other industries that were specifically targeted by Obama-Era environmental regulations.  The energy boom in PA is one reason PA swung to Trump; energy workers in fracking industries were not at all certain that more Obama environmentalism in the form of HRC would lead to a reduction in THEIR jobs.

I'm certainly not down with all of Trump's environmental policies, and he seems to get his jollies in rolling THOSE policies back, but some of them were, IMO, not defensible.  Holding up the Keystone Pipeline was not defensible; that pipeline was going to be built by someone, so why not us?  Coal was/is a dying industry, but the Obama-Era policies toward coal miners (and, to some degree, toward oil and gas workers) came off as an assault against these workers' way of life.  And the attitude of many liberals was to view these WORKERS as scum, and not just the oil execs and mine owners. 

Would you be "economically anxious" if the Presidential candidate of one of the major parties (for many, the one they had ancestral allegiance to) said, from the stump, that she looked forward to seeing lots of coal miners out of work?  That statement, more than the "Deplorables" comment, was utter poison for Hillary, but it gave hardworking Americans in the fracking industry in PA (as well as the coal miners) just exactly what was in that sewer that passes for her soul.  She cared not one whit for these hardworking folks and loathed them for what they did.  I can imagine every fracking worker listening to her statement on coal miners and wonder what she had in store for me and my coworkers.  And before anyone moralizes about Trump's diseeased soul, my "hypocritical religiosity", and such other drivel, put yourself in the shoes of these coal miners, fracking workers, and oil field workers and imaging what their assessment of Hillary's spiritual condition might be.

That is a blatant lie. You are a liar.

While completely ignoring the fact that she wanted to retrain coal miners instead.

As Bill Maher once said, having to go down into a dark, toxic hole in the ground like your daddy and grandaddy isn't progress across generations. Hillary Clinton and other Democrats wanted to help retrain people so that they don't have to go back into the dark, toxic, hole in the ground. But liars like Fuzzy Bear would rather just make siht up or twist words around than actually acknowledge this.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Not every Trump voter was in a tough economic situation[/u] and even some that are are not opening to vote Democratic in 2020 but his fake brand of populism do explain swings towards him in places like the Iron Range and driftless area. So called left wingers need to stop shaming Trump voters, which only plays into the GOP's hands by keeping this country as culturally divided as it is today.

A thoughtful post.

The economically anxious that were most driven to Trump were those who were/are employed in fossil fuel industries, and in other industries that were specifically targeted by Obama-Era environmental regulations.  The energy boom in PA is one reason PA swung to Trump; energy workers in fracking industries were not at all certain that more Obama environmentalism in the form of HRC would lead to a reduction in THEIR jobs.

I'm certainly not down with all of Trump's environmental policies, and he seems to get his jollies in rolling THOSE policies back, but some of them were, IMO, not defensible.  Holding up the Keystone Pipeline was not defensible; that pipeline was going to be built by someone, so why not us?  Coal was/is a dying industry, but the Obama-Era policies toward coal miners (and, to some degree, toward oil and gas workers) came off as an assault against these workers' way of life.  And the attitude of many liberals was to view these WORKERS as scum, and not just the oil execs and mine owners.  

Would you be "economically anxious" if the Presidential candidate of one of the major parties (for many, the one they had ancestral allegiance to) said, from the stump, that she looked forward to seeing lots of coal miners out of work?  That statement, more than the "Deplorables" comment, was utter poison for Hillary, but it gave hardworking Americans in the fracking industry in PA (as well as the coal miners) just exactly what was in that sewer that passes for her soul.  She cared not one whit for these hardworking folks and loathed them for what they did.  I can imagine every fracking worker listening to her statement on coal miners and wonder what she had in store for me and my coworkers.  And before anyone moralizes about Trump's diseeased soul, my "hypocritical religiosity", and such other drivel, put yourself in the shoes of these coal miners, fracking workers, and oil field workers and imaging what their assessment of Hillary's spiritual condition might be.

That is a blatant lie. You are a liar.

While completely ignoring the fact that she wanted to retrain coal miners instead.

As Bill Maher once said, having to go down into a dark, toxic hole in the ground like your daddy and grandaddy isn't progress across generations. Hillary Clinton and other Democrats wanted to help retrain people so that they don't have to go back into the dark, toxic, hole in the ground. But liars like Fuzzy Bear would rather just make siht up or twist words around than actually acknowledge this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksIXqxpQNt0

I've replayed the tape and I'll partially back down on the "looking forward" part.  She did not explicitly say this, but her enthusiasm for eliminating coal jobs and coal mining is unrestrained.  She was bound and determined to put these folks out of their coal mining jobs.  And, again, what would the folks working in the Fracking industry say?

I'm 61 years old.  Many of the miners in question are 45 and up.  What can they be retrained for?  More importantly, where can they do this work?  Sure, they can come to Florida and be "retrained" for clean manufacturing jobs at $18/hour.  Will they be able to afford a $150,000 home (which is on the low end of the middle class)?  Will they be able to afford $1,200/month rent?  Assuming they could move out of state, sell their homes (assuming they own them and someone would pay "market value" for them), would they be able to support a family somewhere else on TWO (2) "retraining" incomes?  Perhaps in some parts of Florida, yes, but not in the places where industry is rising the fastest.  Is metro-Atlanta or the Research Triangle of NC any cheaper?

And once they do that, how much age discrimination will these folks face in the job market?  How about their pre-existing medical conditions; will they be a real turnoff to these employers?  Of course, they can be retrained for culinary; how many hours a week does a line cook at the Olive Garden or Outback get, and at what rate of pay?

Hillary Clinton told these people that she would offer them a "settled-for" life, with no guarantees of a job after the "retraining", no economic plan for how they'll get through the training period, no assurances that any of these folks could actually complete the training successfully, and no assurances that they would not have to leave communities that they were well-rooted in.  She gave them lip service, and it was as sweet as lip service gets from her, but it was a consolation prize at best, and something not all of them could have.  There's a reason Walmart is the largest employer in WV.

I haven't even begun here to address the issue of just how the "retrainees" would economically survive during the retraining period.  There is evidence, however, as to what their actual prospects are:  http://beltmag.com/appalachia-coding-bootcamps/

The WV coal miners heard what they needed to hear.

The PA fracking workers drew the right conclusion as to what that meant for them.

I would have been more charitable toward Hillary had she not made the "deplorables" comment, but that was the comment that, as far as I'm concerned, revealed her lack of empathy for these folks.  Obama was actually a bit empathic when he commented about "clinging to their guns and their religion"; Hillary wasn't empathic at all.  All she could see was herself being the Green Queen of America, and she had to promise SOMETHING to those who'd be devastated by the "greening".