I will be truly shocked if Trump wins, and not exactly excited by any means, but I will absolutely love watching the hand wringing over it by my mid to far left affluent friends. It won’t be the end of the world, folks. Three branches of government there. Guantanamo is still open and health care is far from free.
The interesting thing though is that the middle class is forcing its way back into the conversation. Hopefully the Democratic Party will learn that “white working class” isn’t an epithet or the demon they keep making it out to be. I do think the bigger issue at play here is one of class, and as a life-long laissez faire proponent the rise of class has not been an easy thing for me to come to terms with.
Ultimately, the history of the world is greatly defined by conflict between the haves vs the have-nots. Perhaps not as much as Marx stated, but it’s the truth.
I believe the Democrats made a great mistake by thinking that the ethnic and social minorities are the only have-nots worth paying attention to when that’s not the case.
And if there is a conflict between your various have-nots, then you better work to deal with those conflicts in a meaningful fashion instead of demonizing some of them.
The Democrats really are reaping what they sowed here. I hope they learn from it, regardless of the ultimate result of this election.
I hate both of them so I still have somebody to enjoy watching suffer in the aftermath. The hand wringing will be fantastic to watch. But I totally agree with that and Fox–it’s an up/down, people/establishment, rural/urban divide that is coming much more to the forefront.
The rural person in me is happy because they’ve been kicked around for a long time by both people. The sensible person in me is pissed because it’s Trump and HRC and we still have 3 branches of gov’t.
Yes. Very much NOT a Marxist, but I agree. The ethnic minorities are not and never have been the only people that needed help. Also yes–you have got to avoid demonizing them. If you ignore them eventually they’ll come back to haunt you when they’re sick of taking abuse.
Depending how awesome Trump’s landslide will be, the question is rather:
Will Obama pardon the Snake or will he let her rot?
If the Trumptrain crashes hard, he must distance the party from her corrupt odour.
What concerns me most is the race baiting game because I don’t think enough people are recognizing it. When affluent white politicians are using race to get elected by demonizing working class whites then someone really ought to be catching on to the game. Divide the working class and control them. As an example, you know businesses that aren’t integrated? Elite law firms, investment companies, and money center banks. Institutions that are? Pretty much any institution employing the working class, including the police and military.
I’ll give you that without a doubt. I just hope that they take the right lesson from it, but judging by their behavior for decades…they probably won’t, either party.
I fully anticipate a bunch of chest-thumping and “hurr-durr-stats-nerds-don’t-get-real-life” from you if Trump wins, so I would like to repost this here from a couple days ago when asked about 538:
This is literally the direct opposite of what you said earlier, by the way, that statisticians see the world in black and white and can’t interpret gray area.
The final model from 538 going into Election Day had given Clinton about a 70% chance to win and Trump a 30% chance to win. If he does indeed go on to win, as it appears he might in this moment, that still doesn’t mean Nate Silver’s model was wrong (although your brain thinks in such binary yes/no terms that I doubt you can understand why this is true). His model gave Trump a 30% chance to win, something roughly in the same ballpark as flipping a coin and getting heads twice in a row. In other words, not that uncommon. Did it give Clinton better odds? Yes. If you had placed a gun to Nate Silver’s head and asked him to guess the next President, would he have guessed Clinton? Yes. But he, as any good statistician would, has explained several times that the models had a lot of uncertainty and that a 30% probability of a Trump win is not a zero probability.