That single idea may or may not be a racist one. What we need is context. Here I have a piece of a puzzle: Wall along Mexican border. Here I have another piece of the same puzzle: Total and complete ban on all Muslims yadda yadda yadda. What sort of a puzzle are we building?
I agree. When a guy with a long, easily verified history of scamming people and lying to them makes a bunch of empty promises, but only white people vote for it, you can’t just say ‘it was economics and they trusted him’. Why didn’t anyone except white people trust him?
White men without a college degree turned out for Trump at around 71%. Black women without a college degree were closer to 4% for Trump.
Both white men and black women w/o a college degree have economic problems. But why did one vote 71% for Trump and the other vote 4% for Trump?
It isn’t economics. People can say its economics, but that argument is pretty weak.
Don’t forget Trump being filled with rage about black people protesting police brutality.
Thats three parts to the puzzle.
Also his treatment of women as nothing more than sex objects for his gratification.
Also the fact that he ignores crimes committed by conservative white men, but if muslims, blacks or immigrants commit those exact same crimes he tweets about it endlessly.
It is obviously why Trump is popular among people who support the concept that America is a white, christian post-european male patriarchy. He supports the values that those people support, and he disdains the right people.
No, it’s entirely possible to be against the wall without supporting de facto open borders. But as far as I could tell, the message from the DNC was ‘while we could oppose the wall without supporting de facto open borders, we oppose the wall and support de facto open borders.’ They didn’t just argue that Trump had the wrong solution when it came to illegals; they spent a heck of a lot of time talking about letting illegals stay once they get here – and put an illegal right up there on stage, just in case the message wasn’t otherwise clear enough.
So if you wanted to crack down on illegals, you had a choice between the party that had one idea and the party that [del]had a better idea[/del] said “what are bor-ders?”
Well at least you recognize this argument is a joke. 1% of the estimated illegal immigrant total is Canadian by your own numbers.
The Wall is stupid as it won’t even work and is just a waste of effort and money.
Trump though played this dumb ass card expertly to all those who feel like their jobs were being taking by illegals. I don’t mean the farm jobs, I mean the low end construction jobs, landscaping, sheet-rocking, assembly and kitchen jobs that use to keep citizens afloat at least.
There is a real disconnect for the poorly educated where they felt left behind by both parties. Romney and his 47% comes to mind why they didn’t like more establishment Republicans and I detailed above the perception that the Dems didn’t care for the white males low educated.
Trump for all his sliminess is an expert snake oil salesman.
You should feel anger and sadness. But look at those photos at post #149 - maybe read some of the comments beneath - and try to appreciate how desperate, how utterly disenfranchised some communities are now.
Personally, I cannot imagine being a parent and bringing children into that apocalyptic world.
They don’t care about red or blue; Trump offered a kind of apolitical, somewhat patriotic salvation, exploiting their hope in extremis.
This being the SDMB, you have cites to these peer-reviewed, scientific studies, correct?
You might be right about those people, but there are not enough communities like that to explain the election of Trump, or the support he still gets from establishment Republicans (I’m looking at you Paul Ryan). If Trump just got the votes of these disenfranchised voters, he would have lost by a landslide. He got these, and also got a whole lot more who are not living on the fringe of society.
To add, they make a point to mention in the paper that research shows that brain structure is not static and can change for various reasons:
“Our findings show that high-level concepts of political attitudes are reflected in the structure of focal regions of the human brain. Brain structure can exhibit systematic relationships with an individual’s experiences and skills [19, 20], can change after extensive training [21, 22], and is related to different aspects of conscious perception [23, 24] (see [25] for a review)…”
I don’t want you to think I’m stating that one’s political persuasion is set at birth and can not be changed.
tbf, the ones truly living on the fringes are in tents in and around all Californian cities. Those people are not just politically disenfranchised.
I can offer comments but, as mentioned, I’m more interested in the working class, working and non-working poor.
Sure, Trump also got the core Republican vote. We know each party has a core who vote regardless. I presume many of those believed the national party would rein him in.
What Trump also kind of got was HRC abstentions; because the turnout was almost the same as 2012, there was a double effect this time - everyone who re/reg for Trump was matched by someone who didn’t vote at all this time, and many of those would have been Obama voters.
Wait, there’s a puzzle? While campaigning Trump was openly racist. Consistently. Overtly. Enough so that the KKK endorsed him!
Anybody who denies that Trump campaigned on open racism is, to put it mildly, completely devoid of credibility in my eyes. You can make noises regarding how border control isn’t inherently racist - but we’re not talking about border control. We’re talking about Trump and his campaign. And Trump’s campaign had overt racism as one of its primary pillars. Undeniably.
Don’t forget those who say they voted for him because he was going to break the system, which boggles my mind. Who votes for a candidate who is going to fuck up every institution within the government? Yes, Trump is doing one heckuva job there.
To answer the OP, I find that I can rationalize the actions of large groups of Trump supporters in voting for him, such as Rust Belt voters, or evangelicals, or fiscal conservatives. I do think he gives license to people to bring out their worst selves, however, and I find that troubling. The longer someone supports him, in the face of his continued incompetence and moral turpitude, the less respect I have for that person.
Yes it only takes 5 minutes of thought, and if need be, a map, or tiny bit of research to know that it’s just a huge waste of money. Of course they don’t care about environmental impact, and certainly don’t know about the Rio Grande River.
I suspect geography is not their strong point. Or common sense for that matter.
Ooops.
Sure, is that because, as the democrat looking to win an election said, they are deplorable?
Lack of intellectual curiosity, and being deplorable are different things. But I’ll say it. Some of them have the corner on the market for both.
That doesn’t appear to be a very good study.
“Suggest a link”
“We speculate”
“The casual nature of such a relationship can not be determined”
And more quotes like that.
Also, where is the peer-review?
You would be hard pressed to find any peer-reviewed research that didn’t include phrases like that. I don’t really know what you are looking for, but I doubt you’d want to read a paper that included phrases like “there is a definite link” or “we absolutely know” or “this causal relationship can definitely be determined…”. I mean, what respected journal would publish something like that? Just read the paper and maybe you can point out flaws in the method, but don’t judge because they are being careful with their language.
I agree the wall is ridiculous and it’s not Trump’s only ridiculous idea. However, when states and cities work against federal law to incentivize illegal immigration what motivation should be assumed?
I don’t know. Religion isn’t a race. Neither is Mexican. But let’s say Trump, for whatever reason, hated non Christians. Why isn’t there a ban proposed for Sikh, Hindu, Jewish, Satanists, Wiccans, Pastafarians, etc?
I don’t have a problem with Syrian refugees or other refugees for that matter. However, I also don’t have a problem with a nation deciding how it wants to handle its own borders. I do have a problem with the idea that the discussion of how to handle the borders is taboo.