U.S. Politics

[Awol]

1 hour ago, il_serpente said:

It doesn't help that Trump lied about the source of their economic problems and they believed him and his boasts about bringing coal and manufacturing jobs back.

If as seems possible he pulls out of the Paris accords, chins off NAFTA and burns down the EPA then who knows what's possible? 

Only 10% of US GPD is from exports and I think we forget in Europe that the US is simultaneously a national and damn near continental scale economy. If they go down the protectionist route where efficiency and cost effectiveness isn't necessarily the driving factor then could he do it?

I don't know enough about macro economics to call it either way, but it doesn't seem impossible he could achieve at least some of it.

It's potentially an interesting test of whether social cohesion can be placed above the profit motive - although the whole killing the planet part is obviously a downer.

[villakram]

The popular vote story is incredibly misleading, given the geographic breakdown of R & D districts. There is a huge and incredibly genuine section of society that is being left behind, if not actively under attack, by the current economic paradigm. 

For what its worth, the final tally in Michigan was only declared a couple of days ago at approx. +10k for Trump. I'd be astonished if these votes turned up/around and see this as the kind of thing that would lead us to say very unkind things about the tea party crowd were roles reversed.

A sad spectacle. 

Edited November 25, 2016 by villakram

[mjmooney]

[Chindie]

I still love the idea of a billionaire property developer pointing at someone else as the Establishment.

[Genie]

At least they'll have their country back

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

President Trump, Nigel Farage, David Cameron and failed candidate Hilary Clinton say hi! 

I'd be interested to see where you got the stat about Hilary only getting half as many poor people to vote for her as Trump managed. But I would say that if twice as many 'poor' did vote for Trump that would appear on first look like TV's point was valid?

I think you've misread my post. 

1 third of the electorate has an income less than $50,000 p/a. Clinton won this demographic, by a long way. Ergo, 'poverty' is not a reason people voted for Trump. 

[chrisp65]

5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think you've misread my post. 

1 third of the electorate has an income less than $50,000 p/a. Clinton won this demographic, by a long way. Ergo, 'poverty' is not a reason people voted for Trump. 

Yep, you're right, I misread it.

Would still be interested to see where you got that stat from though?

 

[HanoiVillan]

9 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Yep, you're right, I misread it.

Would still be interested to see where you got that stat from though?

 

How Did Low-Income People Actually Vote?

Let’s start with the data.  According to exit polls, Hillary Clinton won by 12 points among voters making less than $30,000 a year—53% to Trump’s 41% —and by 9 points among people making between $30,000 and $49,999. Trump’s support was the inverse. He won every group making $50,000 or more—albeit by smaller margins.

 

This is consistent with analysis of exit polls from the primary, which found that the median household income of Trump voters—about $72,000—was significantly higher than the median household income of the country as a whole—about $56,000. It was also higher than that of the average Clinton and Sanders voters—about $61,000 each.

 

Even among white voters—who were more likely to support Trump than other groups—Trump did better among middle income white voters than low-income ones. And a closer look reveals that the swing towards Trump was a lot bigger based on education, rather than income.

https://talkpoverty.org/2016/11/16/stop-blaming-low-income-voters-donald-trumps-victory/

Is one place I've seen it. 

Edited November 25, 2016 by HanoiVillan

[maqroll]

4 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think you're falling into a trap of assuming that British politics and American politics are more similar than they are. 

It seems like the West as a whole is shifting hard right, so there are immediate parallels.

[chrisp65]

ok cheers Hanoi, interesting article, suggests 52% of Trump supporters (32 million people) see blacks as less evolved than whites. 

But the links lead me here...

New York Times

24,000 sample size

big differences rural to city

20% of people that voted for either candidate didn't consider them trustworthy!

seriously? both candidates got 12 million votes from people that walked out of the polling station and said they didn't trust them?

7% of people exited the polling station and declared themselves affiliated to the Democrat party and voted Trump

[HanoiVillan]

To be fair, I'd have voted for Hilary and then walked out of the polling station to tell a pollster I didn't trust her. 

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

3 hours ago, mjmooney said:

I think this is just total crap. I'm not a fan of Trump but these smart arse memes are shit. 

How about: it's a billionaire appointing other billionaires who realise the system is shite and they want to help others with a step up on the ladder. I guess it's like a Euro Millions winner realising that the prize spread is unbalanced, and so having to win a jackpot in order to become a millionaire is bullshit, so they try to change it so the pot is more evenly distributed.

Now I'm not saying this wealth spread going to happen under the Trump administration, but memes like that are as equally as bollocks. 

 

Edited November 26, 2016 by Morley_crosses_to_Withe

[StefanAVFC]

1 minute ago, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said:

How about: it's a billionaire appointing other billionaires who realise the system is shite and they want to help others with a step up on the ladder.

haha

[Keyblade]

5 hours ago, Morley_crosses_to_Withe said:

I think this is just total crap. I'm not a fan of Trump but these smart arse memes are shit. 

How about: it's a billionaire appointing other billionaires who realise the system is shite and they want to help others with a step up on the ladder. I guess it's like a Euro Millions winner realising that the prize spread is unbalanced, and so having to win a jackpot in order to become a millionaire is bullshit, so they try to change it so the pot is more evenly distributed.

Now I'm not saying this wealth spread going to happen under the Trump administration, but memes like that are as equally as bollocks. 

 

In your heart of hearts, do you really believe this?

[il_serpente]

10 hours ago, Awol said:

If as seems possible he pulls out of the Paris accords, chins off NAFTA and burns down the EPA then who knows what's possible? 

Only 10% of US GPD is from exports and I think we forget in Europe that the US is simultaneously a national and damn near continental scale economy. If they go down the protectionist route where efficiency and cost effectiveness isn't necessarily the driving factor then could he do it?

I don't know enough about macro economics to call it either way, but it doesn't seem impossible he could achieve at least some of it.

It's potentially an interesting test of whether social cohesion can be placed above the profit motive - although the whole killing the planet part is obviously a downer.

What happens with Paris accords and trade agreements won't make much difference, though.  The point is that the once (reasonably) comfortable and secure manufacturing and mining jobs didn't go away primarily because they were exported to other countries.  They went away because of automation and the move to strip mining and mountain topping.  There aren't enough jobs to be brought back to make their America great again.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

10 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

haha

That seemed to make sense after eight pints  The meme winds me up but I was talking total nonsense. Ignore

 

[Brumerican]

[NoelVilla]

To be fair Trump's longer statement is quite good. Much better than the crap Trudeau and Juncker came out with.

[Brumerican]

4 minutes ago, NoelVilla said:

To be fair Trump's longer statement is quite good. Much better than the crap Trudeau and Juncker came out with.

The statement about oppressing his own people for decades ? From the guy who wants to put Americans on a register if they are proponents  a particular religion ?

[NoelVilla]

Yes. Did you intentionally forget to pick out other parts of it? I think it's good to condemn Castro's firing squads and hoping for freedom for the Cuban people.