Privileged people calling less privileged people "stupid" doesn't seem to be working...

[bimble]

Where's the question about despair there? what do you mean by despair?

immiseration.
the exit poll says that the lowest income people voted Clinton, I think that is worth a moments pause before the narrative gets fixed.

 

[Pickman's model]

immiseration.

other forms of despair are available

 

[rubbershoes]

Is "privileged" a code word for educated?

 

[billy_bob]

Brexit provided a nice mechanism for a bunch of people of various flavours of politics to give another a bunch of people, loosely describable as liberals, a kicking, because the outcome was the masses rejecting their patronising conservatism in favour of revolt. You might argue that revolt was, say, racist, but there are some sound reasons why Brexit might be a good idea, so it's not a given.

The trouble with trying to reuse this theme with Trump is he explicitly is a racist. And all the rest. So this time if you laud it as a revolt against the elites, any kind of victory, you have to explicitly legitimise some kind of racism, and all the rest. And to boot, if you want to argue that it wasn't stupid, you need to show some way in which a Trump presidency isn't a universally terrible idea.

The only way out of the contortion that I can see is to patronise these people and say, well, it's not their fault they're racist, they were fed this stuff and it was the only option they had. Which brings us back to elites calling people stupid, only this time benevolently.

I think the racism (which yes, is undeniably far more explicit and hard to dismiss in the Trump trajectory than in Brexit) is largely a key theme because it's such an excellent short cut to that revolt against 'liberals'. That's not the same as saying 'it's not their fault they're racist', though I don't think it's patronising to say that any group of people, elites included, can be induced to racism quite readily in the 'right' circumstances. It's so much easier than explaining what neoliberalism's really done with your job prospects to instead simply identify the person they've given your job to, and let human nature take its course.

I think both Leave and the Trump campaign could still have been successful without a hint of racism about them, because the anger at the way things are isn't really about race. (If that's equivalent to saying 'they can't help being racist', so be it). But race has proven a great vehicle for this kind of anger so many times before, so it's pretty hard to resist.

 

[Gromit]

"Privileged people calling less privileged people "stupid" doesn't seem to be working..."

It's working a treat for the privileged.

The stupid people are voting in the people who are going to make the privileged even more privileged and the less privileged even less privileged.

The stupid are earning their label.

 

[Mr Moose]

other forms of despair are available

On form today.

 

[mauvais]

Who is lauding it, or describing it as a victory? People are explaining that it's a rejection of liberal elites, not arguing that Trump and/or (at least some of) his supporters are explicitly racist .

Who's lauding it? The OP isn't cheering this result it's pointing out that the strategy that centre-left parties have pursued over the few decades is only leading to losses.

I didn't intend to suggest that the OP himself is celebrating the outcome. However I do think more broadly that it will be used as a positive by many - it's the loop we've been around with Brexit, albeit in different circumstances as described.

Obviously the strategy isn't working. But what's the answer? Because from here it looks like the natural route from this kind of argument is less opposing elitism and more trying to appease or tolerate stupidity and racism. It's deeply uncomfortable whichever way you tackle it.

 

[kenny g]

"Isn't democracy terrible that it allows all these people to vote?"

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Just before everyone makes their mind up that this is all about less priviledged people voting Trump out of despair, exit polls suggest otherwise.
View attachment 95229

Thanks for this. Can you provide the link to the source please?

 

[seventh bullet]

Privileged people unconvincingly redefining themselves as less privileged than less privileged people definitely doesn't work either.

 

[billy_bob]

"Isn't democracy terrible that it allows all these people to vote?"

"We give you the right to vote, and this is how you repay us? By voting for someone other than us? You scum!"

 

[redsquirrel]

Just before everyone makes their mind up that this is all about less priviledged people voting Trump out of despair, exit polls suggest otherwise.

You mean the exit polls that predicted the wrong result? But even if those figures are accurate, without previous years data to compare against they don't tell us how if there has been movement. Clinton may win among those with <$50,000 but win with a much lower % than previous democrats. Trump doesn't have to win a majority of poorer voters for there to have been enough movement among such voters to give him a win.

The fact that Clinton could not win democratic strongholds like Michigan and Wisconsin suggests that there's been movement to Trump among traditional democrat working class voters in these states (though without having a further breakdown and knowledge of the turnout it's hard to be sure exactly what happened).

 

[bimble]

Thanks for this. Can you provide the link to the source please?

2016 election results: National Exit polls

(quite a few interesting graphs in there but as people above have said, none of the samples is huge and information on turnout will help a lot when it comes.)

 

[pogofish]

I'm puzzled at why this is in UK Politics

 

[chilango]

Brexit provided a nice mechanism for a bunch of people of various flavours of politics to give another a bunch of people, loosely describable as liberals, a kicking, because the outcome was the masses rejecting their patronising conservatism in favour of revolt. You might argue that revolt was, say, racist, but there are some sound reasons why Brexit might be a good idea, so it's not a given.

The trouble with trying to reuse this theme with Trump is he explicitly is a racist. And all the rest. So this time if you laud it as a revolt against the elites, any kind of victory, you have to explicitly legitimise some kind of racism, and all the rest. And to boot, if you want to argue that it wasn't stupid, you need to show some way in which a Trump presidency isn't a universally terrible idea.

The only way out of the contortion that I can see is to patronise these people and say, well, it's not their fault they're racist, they were fed this stuff and it was the only option they had. Which brings us back to elites calling people stupid, only this time benevolently.

Who is lauding it as a victory?

Its a defeat.

But its not the defeat for Clinton we should be worried about.

Its the defeat (or failure) of "the left" to provide the vehicle for an utterly predictable revolt that we should be concerned about.

 

[chilango]

Did they win last night?

No.

Why not?

 

[chilango]

I'm puzzled at why this is in UK Politics

"cause I want to talk about how we might apply any lessons learnt to what we do.

 

[chilango]

immiseration.
the exit poll says that the lowest income people voted Clinton, I think that is worth a moments pause before the narrative gets fixed.

If so, it might also be worth thinking about why those perhaps not on the lowest income might feel so hard done by.

 

[redsquirrel]

Obviously the strategy isn't working. But what's the answer? Because from here it looks like the natural route from this kind of argument is less opposing elitism and more trying to appease or tolerate stupidity and racism. It's deeply uncomfortable whichever way you tackle it.

I see it as perfectly possible to not tolerate racism while at the same time not writing off millions and millions of people as thick/racists. I mean last night we had a someone on here calling (not for the first time) anyone who was critical of Clinton apologists for racism, you don't think that attitude might not be part of the reason why people didn't vote for Clinton?

 

[Pickman's model]

On form today.

never better

 

[Idaho]

Anti establishment left leaning politicians won't have any money backing or political party support and will be attacked in the media. Right wing mavericks can dress up in anti establishment colours , can garner media and corporate support . Our candidates will be pre-selected by the media and corporate interests.

 

[Sea Star]

In what way is Trump, and the white straight cis guys who voted for him, less privileged?

Actually I get called stupid and a lot worse on a daily basis by people who support Trump.

 

[bimble]

If so, it might also be worth thinking about why those perhaps not on the lowest income might feel so hard done by.

I hope that time will also be found to think about reasons why an overtly racist mysogenistic campaign won it.

 

[Mr Moose]

Who is lauding it as a victory?

Its a defeat.

But its not the defeat for Clinton we should be worried about.

Its the defeat (or failure) of "the left" to provide the vehicle for an utterly predictable revolt that we should be concerned about.

Agreed. But you won't attract many people who went for Brexit or Trump by endlessly trashing the soft left. Many people already hate the left as it is. Need to give them a reason why progressive politics is for them. Means we can't have snobbery, but we still can't tolerate racism or misogyny.

We are in a bind. Some people seem to like Brexit/Trump threatening the status quo. Probably because it's a fake threat deep down. They don't like Corbyn doing so to the same degree.

 

[Sea Star]

Also - the areas in the UK that have gone the furthest right in elections all seem to be pretty affluent as far as I can see.

 

[LDC]

In what way is Trump, and the white straight cis poor working class guys who voted for him, less privileged?

Hmmm, I have no idea...

 

[Sea Star]

Hmmm, I have no idea...

I'm responding to the title and it wasn't at you

 

[Sea Star]

Is "privileged" a code word for educated?

No. Unless you think women, people of colour and LGBT people don't get educated

 

[chilango]

I hope that time will also be found to think about reasons why an overtly racist mysogenistic campaign won it.

Yes.

Would very much be worth seeing why.

...and then learning from that.

 

[butchersapron]

Also - the areas in the UK that have gone the furthest right in elections all seem to be pretty affluent as far as I can see.

This is wrong, but just so we can be clear, you 're saying that there is or there isn't a connection between material conditions and politics?