When the Democrats win the middle class we can talk about that.
2016 Trump won voters between $50K-200K. Clinton won poor voters and the richest voters: Exit Polls 2016
2014 GOP won at all income levels $50K and above. They trailed by only four points among those making $30-50K. Democrats won only the poorest voters: U.S. House results -- 2014 Election Center -- Elections and Politics from CNN.com
2012 GOP won all voters above $50K: Presidential Race - 2012 Election Center - Elections & Politics from CNN.com
ALthough I’d expect 2018 and 2020 to look bad for the GOP due to Trump’s awful performance, the trend will not be arrested without major course changes by the Democratic Party. The GOP will win middle class voters by even more in 2022 and 2024 once they get a taste of a Sanders/Warren-led party.
Which GOP will bask in this triumph? The GOP that thinks about capital gains, or the GOP that thinks about Confederate flags? The GOP that likes deregulation and a robust climate for business, or the one that likes tiki torches and tough guys?
The Establishment craves stability, its the Brawndo of business. Trump is as stable as a sack of rabid weasels. The social reactionaries demand recognition that all of this change was a bad idea, and we’ll just put it all back, starting with Roe, immigration, and so forth. Thus pissing off women, gays, blacks, latinos, and white men with good sense.
Yessir! Nothing but blue skies and sunshine ahead!
I didn’t say all that. But either faction of the party is likely to win the middle class over what the Democrats are selling right now. I just hope it’s a saner party than exists now.
What I didn’t expect was that there was a version of insanity that could actually save the Republicans from demographic disaster. Win 60% of the white vote+50% of 3rd generation Latinos+10% of black voters+40-50% of Asian voters=victory. They might win 65% of the white vote in 2022.
Wild guesses and random numbers are fun! 70%! 20%! 82.7%! Wheeeeeee!
Here’s a number from the sports world: 110%
Thanks for the links.
Interesting … the premise of this thread is the analysis that Clinton had done more poorly in middle class communities than Obama had (and in particular in must win states for any Democrat like PA, WI, and MI) but there is an interesting directionality in those exit polls. Obama in 2012 lost the $50 to 100K demographic by 6 points. Clinton actually did better than Obama did in '12, still losing it but by only 3.
Makes one do a bit of a double take on the op’s premise don’t it? There are ways to square the GOP actually giving up ground with the middle class overall while doing better in defined “middle class communities”. Both can be true. But overall 2016 had Clinton doing better in the middle class than Obama did. (Maybe just a result of demographic shifts into the middle class?)
Anyway there is no question that a slight bit more than half of the middle class has, in the past, bought the spin that the GOP has been selling. I completely agree that Clinton could have and should have done a better job messaging in particular to the lower middle class white voters who have been been feeling economically insecure even as the economy overall recovered (and continues to do so) that they and their worries also matter.
Or we can, as we are, talk about how the Democrats win the middle class, other than relying on the abject awfulness of the other side.
Now Trump wants to override what states charge for property taxes. Heard that on AP Radio News the other day.
I’m sure there’s some way to change a “would” to a “wouldn’t” and have it all make sense somehow.
Ah. I wasn’t quite recalling the SALT thing correctly.
Funny the timing - today in the NYT an opinion piece: “Why Real Wages Still Aren’t Rising”
Okay, an opinion piece. I think the author is wrong to use a broad brush, we are seeing more raises and bonus now, thanks to a good economy.
But suppose you are a middle-class person who has not seen a real wage increase. Wouldn’t you say this is why the middle class needed Trump’s tax cuts?
Why did wealthy people, who have seen wage increases, need a tax cut?
The Job Creators needed more motivation to create jobs.
Or was that another administration’s explanation?
I think it is more like, if someone doesn’t have enough money, they need a tax cut; if they have too much money, they need a tax cut; and if they have the right amount of money, they need a tax cut.
It’s called the “Tea Party Goldilocks” test. When faced with three bowls of porridge of varying temperatures, the proper thing to do is cut taxes. Three beds of varying firmness, cut taxes. Three levels of deficits, cut taxes.
Pop quiz: if faced with three immigrants of varying levels of distress, what should be done?
Depends, what countries are they from and how good looking are they?
I am solidly middle-class, although a few years ago my kids were on Medicaid. Although I’ve received some raises recently, over the past ten years a Republican legislature has frozen my wages/rejiggered my pay scale in a way that’s cost me about $50,000, and that’s not even going into losses due to insurance increases.
And hell no I don’t conclude we need a tax cut. Because I know that’s not free money.
You can compensate for a tax cut in exactly three ways:
-
Raise taxes on someone else.
-
Cut programs.
-
Run a deficit.
-
If the middle class got a tax cut at the expense of the very wealthy, I could see my way to supporting it, depending on the details. But we know that’s not the option Republicans will go for.
-
The programs that are likely to be cut are things like environmental protections, education, help for the poor. I’ve got kids, and there’s no freakin’ way I want to cut environmental protections or education. I teach poor kids, and there’s no freakin’ way I want to cut their access to medical care or good nutrition or similar programs. So this doesn’t fly. Anyway, this isn’t the option Republicans go for.
-
This is, of course, the option Republicans are going for: a cheap sugar high now, to be paid for later. Paid for by my kids. And no, actually, I’m not thrilled by this idea.
The opinion was the on the why of real wages being flat. The lack of growth in real wages is a simple observation: overall, no we are not seeing more raises and bonuses now, not that exceed the increases in costs, other than to those at the very top. They are getting them, yes we are seeing that.
No, a major permanent tax cut for corporations, very significant tax cuts for the very wealthiest, and temporary tiny tax cuts for the middle class, all borrowing from the future and possibly resulting in the cutting of essential services, is not what the middle class needs.
Berke Breathed needs to bring back Major Bloom and his habit of hunting Nazis & Communists. MAGAbots would be the perfect target for the Major!
“Fake News! Alternative Facts!”