chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
this would be the lib dem run tower hamlets run by labour i suppose.
Y'see how hard it is to differentiate between the choices of the status quo?
this would be the lib dem run tower hamlets run by labour i suppose.
not sure he needs toWill he turn NATO into a protection racket?
yeh. they don't know what they're doing. i wouldn't trust the cabinet to successfully organise revelry in a brewery.And I tend to be suspicious that an awful lot of competence to navigate a something as complex as a Brexit is simply lacking in London. They really don't know what they are doing. They evidently really didn't understand how trade deals work in any detail.
In the US, not for 4 years. Anyway how does his obscene personal wealth prevent him from prejudice-based rabble-rousing?
Oh yeah, it's patently obvious that this was a campaign railing against the effects of processes that have enriched and empowered the protagonist; capital's political wing continuing its ideological 'transvestism'.There's action all the time it's an ongoing not a 4 year cycle.
He is quite clearly not a son of the soil neither he nor anyone around him has lived any part of the life of a poor white first hand. In the past 30 years of pain for the American worker he became richer and richer.
Clearly it worked to an extent he secured Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Michigan. His speeches did promise: 'We're going to get the mines back to work'. His son could post "After visiting the rust belt the last week I have seen the terrible side effects of NAFTA. We must renegotiate our failed trade deals! #MAGA" But I believe there was something jarring about his performance which in part explains feelings of overwhelming revulsion about the election campaign.
Wow. You think its impossible and not worth trying even? Look at the stats for what Trump supporters said was important to them - it was not inequality or the economy, it was immigration and terrorists. Why?Based on the false premise that it's possible to disentangle anti-immigration sentiment from precarious economic conditions. They don't go hand in hand 100% but it isn't far off.
View attachment 95235 View attachment 95236
The racism and misogyny of Trump is not incidental, not a sideshow / unfortunate byproduct of the underlying forces, that at least I hope everyone can agree on.
Wow. You think its impossible and not worth trying even? Look at the stats for what Trump supporters said was important to them - it was not inequality or the economy, it was immigration and terrorists. Why?
No it's not. It deals with that by also looking at income correlations. The study claims to have found a factor that diverges markedly from economic conditions, and so cannot be attributed to them.Based on the false premise that it's possible to disentangle anti-immigration sentiment from precarious economic conditions. They don't go hand in hand 100% but it isn't far off.
I think it's disgusting and wholly to be condemned but I believe it is in part a byproduct. I also don't fully see how the Democrat Clinton-Kaine programme was 'less racist' than Trump. Take Hilary's 30 year record of racism - if this was Trump's record it would be regarded as outrageous racism, as it is 'liberal' it is merely a foible or two.
Hispanic turnout was up a lot - though white turnout was also apparently up in many of the states where a bigger Latino turnout could have made a difference.
No they are usually bundled up together, of course.Do you really think that immigration concerns are usually held, or even presented, in isolation from economic anxiety or hardship?
No they are usually bundled up together, of course.
Would you also say that economic anxiety explains why 87% of Trump voters said they were 'not at all bothered' by his treatment of women?
the ideas are old fashioned and don't work
I'd suggest you have to re-think your explanation for the racism / focus on immigrants and terrorists too in that case, that it is not as inevitable and economic as you suppose.I can't. That boggles my mind.
I'd suggest you have to re-think your explanation for the racism / focus on immigrants and terrorists too in that case, that it is not as inevitable and economic as you suppose.
Was it? I've read that it was lower percentage wise than 2008 and 2012.
Wow. You think its impossible and not worth trying even? Look at the stats for what Trump supporters said was important to them - it was not inequality or the economy, it was immigration and terrorists. Why?
Dunno about 'usually', but I can give you an anecdotal example. My mum and dad, to my surprise, both voted brexit. They named concern over immigration levels as part of the reason. They live in a bit of the country where there are very few immigrants. They're retired and on a fixed income. Their pension is decent - dad had an old-fashioned final-salary one. They are not rich, but have neither anxiety nor hardship economically.Do you really think that immigration concerns are usually held, or even presented, in isolation from economic anxiety or hardship?
Oh yeah, it's patently obvious that this was a campaign railing against the effects of processes that have enriched and empowered the protagonist; capital's political wing continuing its ideological 'transvestism'.
Dunno about 'usually', but I can give you an anecdotal example. My mum and dad, to my surprise, both voted brexit. They named concern over immigration levels as part of the reason. They live in a bit of the country where there are very few immigrants. They're retired and on a fixed income. Their pension is decent - dad had an old-fashioned final-salary one. They are not rich, but have neither anxiety nor hardship economically.