If only it cost money . . .
Trump voters are angry because they keep voting for candidates who lie to them. But this time, this time will be different.
Because . . .
Because . . .
Because the difference between a used-car salesman and a software salesman is that a used-car salesman knows he’s lying.
Donald Trump is, in those terms, a software salesman.
That’s the scary party. Trump actually is not of the establishment yet he’s dishonest. Where do people turn when they can’t even find someone outside the establishment to trust?
As for why poor whites are angry, it’s no secret. Republicans only care about rich and upper middle class professionals, Democrats only care about minorities and rich liberals. Democrats like to say they represent the interests of poor whites, but where were Democrats on Keystone? Where are Democrats on immigration and the importation of cheap labor and the abuse of H-1B visas? Where are Democrats on trade? Where are Democrats on racial preferences? Poor whites do not benefit from white privilege other than in the justice system. They aren’t getting into the boardrooms any more than minorities are. And getting to the middle management levels is complicated by companies’ preference for meeting diversity goals at that level(but not at the top levels, of course).
And I know everyone will be playing whack-a-mole about this until the world ends, but adaher has summed up very well what it feels like to a white working-class person.
A big part of this phenomenon is that ever since the early to mid-20th century, white working-class Americans have been cut off from a genuine political left wing.
Being openly aware that the interests of rich & important people are not always aligned with those of the working class didn’t used to be perceived as such a shameful and suspect thing as it currently is. Back in the day, working-class people were generally staunchly pro-union and sometimes even militantly anti-capitalist. That’s not thinkable for most non-liberal working-class whites today, except in the vestigial form of a vague suspicion of the “big” and cosmopolitan.
I don’t know exactly what it was, but I presume some combination of the Depression and the Cold War, and perhaps also the Sixties, that solidified the conservative middle class’s grip on the political ideology of the white working class. Anything “socialistic”, “bureaucratic”, “redistributive”, “welfare”-oriented, “solidarity”-promoting was a spectre of Communist horror.
Wealthy conservatives were able for a long time to persuade working-class conservatives that they were on the same side, that their “values” or “hard work” or “patriotism” were just on the brink of allowing them to “take their country back”. Trump is just the latest updose of that same drug for the addicted and desperate who were no longer getting sufficient pain relief from Romneys and Bushes.
White working-class conservatives are growing more and more frantic because they have no real majority solidarity to fall back on as their illusory solidarity with white upper-class conservatives grows ever less convincing. They can’t join forces with the large demographic who are in the same boat with them economically, because those are the dreaded commies and hippies and “urban” people and foreigners.
And they can’t form a genuine populist movement of their own because they’re still on some level buying into the anti-populist, pro-elite ideology that they’ve been schooled in by their conservative leaders. They’re taking refuge in fantasies of themselves as patriots, revolutionaries, a small struggling band in the vanguard of reclaiming the nation, by force if necessary (or for preference).
Middle-class conservatives have groomed them to despise their natural allies in populist politics, but they no longer really believe in the artificial alliance with middle-class conservatives. They’re grasping with one last convulsive clutch at the fading vision of the promised ideal: a powerful rich Boss who will really be on their side and will open up the pathway to their success at last.
I expect that varied depending on personality. I went to high school in Kenya for half my sophomore year. My family lived in a modest dwelling, but my classmates at the international school (which was about half American) lived lives of opulence. Mansions filled with servants, chauffeurs, the whole nine yards. And I don’t think they were rich enough to have lived that way in the U.S.: it was doable because most Kenyans were so poor. And they seemed to enjoy themselves. (They locked heavy steel gates at night across their stairways to seal themselves off in the upstairs areas where their bedrooms were, so they wouldn’t be murdered in their sleep by their servants, but hey.)
Little d democratic politicians can’t gain office without over-promising. This is part of the old saw about democracy being the worst system except for all the others.
The serious answer to your question is friends, family, and God. Or less seriously, I like Jean Shepherd’s book title:
In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash
If most of the people in your country can’t accept something in this ballpark, or fool themselves into thinking that the politicians are perfectly honest, the nation pretty much goes down the tubes. America is hardly there yet. But no government, of the people or otherwise, will last forever.
Yipes! Need to correct last paragraph of prior post:
If most of the people in your country can neither accept something in this ballpark, nor fool themselves into thinking that that honored politicians are perfectly honest, the nation pretty much goes down the tubes. America is hardly there yet. But no government, of the people or otherwise, lasts forever.
Worse, they don’t just perceive it as their job disappearing, but rather that it’s been actively taken from them (and other hard working Americans like them) and given to some foreigner, enriching the foreigner and impoverishing themselves.
It’s not that simple of course, but that’s what it looks like.
Also of course (adding to your point, not disagreeing) US unemployment is low by international standards and well within the long term standard deviation.
It’s not realistic to imagine every job being secure and there was no time where that wasn’t true.
It’s true that one difference is that many more jobs require training and education now… So it’s possible to get frozen out of the job market. But the government can’t roll back the clock…the solution is better training availability and fairer hiring practices.
It’s more logical to believe that politicians are perfect liars, with the highly rare exception.
To overuse sports analogies yet again, voters accept overpromising in terms of “we’re going to win the pennant!” and it just not working out. No one blames Barack Obama for failure to pass climate change legislation. The votes were never there even when Democrats had huge majorities. What they are less accepting of is, “I’m going to oppose this policy and support this policy” and then once in office the candidate does exactly the opposite. Which describes Obama’s opposition to NAFTA and other trade deals, as well as the individual mandate.
The trade issue is very important to working class white voters, and practically every candidate promises to get tough with China and oppose trade deals when campaigning, but by now we all know it’s a lie. The reason they are behind Trump is because Trump might be the only guy who is actually serious when he says those things. As much of a charlatan as he is, at least on trade he’s been pretty consistent since long before he decided to run for office that he thought these deals weren’t benefitting the US.
I think he’s wrong, but if there’s one thing I dislike more than dumb policies, it’s lying to appease the rubes and then implementing good policy as if that’s some kind of virtue. What is our democracy worth if we accept this kind of behavior? I’d rather have a dumb policy sold honestly than a good policy sold through lies. And that sums up our trade policy post-NAFTA. Bill Clinton supported NAFTA as a candidate, as did Bush 41, and ever since Democratic candidates and to some extent Republican candidates have pretended to be against globalization. Bullshit. The lies need to stop.
Why? Honest question. I feel just the opposite.
Because then Donald Trump happens. We either believe in the people ruling or we don’t. If the people rule, then there are only three ways to get good policy that are legitimate: 1) implement the good policy the people already favor, 2) Convince the public to favor a policy they currently don’t, 3) Say you’ll implement the policy anyway because leadership and you’ll see that it will work out.
Most politicians take the illegitimate route of 4) say you support what the people want and then do the opposite. That harms our democracy and Trump is a symptom of that.
Gee wouldn’t it be nice if voters could spot when they are being lied to? Or maybe they can, and would rather live in a fool’s paradise. They keep voting for liars, and you think offering candidates that tell the truth is going to make any difference? Who are you to deny them what they want? The people have spoken, and you aren’t listening. They can’t handle the truth.
Do you think the average American is educated enough to understand what “good economic policy” entails?
I think Hillary Clinton’s statement that she will be putting many miners out of work sums up why many working class whites do not vote democrat. Thousands of economically viable private sector jobs will be replaced by hugely subsidized ones.
The proposed legislation should make some effort to find jobs for the people who lose theirs.
This is why I stated the new jobs would be hugely subidized, and no guarantee of sustainable jobs being produced. This example of miners is why an element of working class whites are pissed off at Democrats.