(I should probably post this in an established thread, but I’m too lazy today to figure out which one.)
Yesterday morning I was rushing to get out the door to go work my GOTV shift, so I could only glance at the morning Tribune. A front page article (under the fold – in Chicago the big news continues to be Cubs-related) had this as its opening paragraph:
I found myself thinking about this while driving to the Dem office. The (implied) front-runner’s major backing is from minorities and women, while the stated outsider is looking to white, (implied) men. *The racist, misogynistic candidate is the outsider. *
I voted for the first time in 1972. If someone had told me then I’d be volunteering for the establishment candidate, that this candidate would be a woman who would be following a black President, and that the outsider would be a white male largely reviled for his racist, sexist comments – well, I don’t know what my reaction would have been. Some combination of disbelief and gratification, maybe.
I will be very worried if Don the Con wins, but at least I’ll have the consolation that we have evolved to a country where it’s no longer a given that the POTUS will be a white male.
And you’ve apparently forgotten that a black guy has been President for the last eight years, handily beating two white guys to achieve that.
Yeah, this is an epochal demographic shift, and Trump indeed is losing as a direct result of it, which does indeed have huge implications for our country. I hope the incoming Presidential Administration, Senate, and, ultimately, Supreme Court hit gerrymandering hard, so we can have a more representative House of Representatives, which will speed this process to its inevitable conclusion.