# "Is it that the Dems don't understand white, working-class America?" No, that's not it **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 28, 2016, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291 "2016-11-28T16:35:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/461 "2016-12-14T03:06:27Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > She’s a cheater. How is it that you can see one video of a cop killing a black man and planting a gun on him and assume that it happens all the time, but when factual evidence of foul [play is presented, you just sweep it under the rug. > > If wikileaks revealed next week that Trump had gotten debate questions before his debates with Hillary, you’d be screaming bloody fucking murder regardless of whether the Russians helped unveil that duplicity. > > Hillary is corrupt, the emails prove it Her corruption may not rise to a level that bothers you but it bothers a lot of people who put ethics ahead of partisan politics. 1. The emails didn’t prove a fucking thing. 2. Don’t **EVER** presume to know anything about what I think or how I might react to anything except your absurd ideas, and this is my last comment to you. 3. Get a hobby. Preferably not involving the internet. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/462 "2016-12-14T05:40:37Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > How do you know what happened outside of the email chain? I mean we already know Hillary cheats. > > How do you know that they weren’t tweaking the debate schedule to minimize anyone’s ability to effectively challenge Hillary? Its not like Hillary didn’t give Debbie Wasserman Schultz a spot on her campaign as soon as she got booted from the DNC. > > How do you know they weren’t letting Hillary tell them how to run the DNC before she was the nominee? How do you know that the personal non-state department related emails that Hillary deleted weren’t emails between her and debbie wasserman schultz scheming about how to clear the field so that Hillary would run virtually unopposed? > > Conspiracy theory you say? Sure! Of Course! But now that we know she is a cheater and that she has deleted a bunch of her emails and that she says one thing in public and another thing to plutocrats in her private speeches, why is any of that so incredible? > > If there is doubt in your mind about whether the question was shared with the Hillary campaign, then I think you may want to check your objectivity in this matter. She is a cheater plain and simple. You can try to minimize the cheating but its still cheating and it says something about her. > > So then why the fuck does it matter who helped uncover Hilary’s corruption? > > Really? We have actual proof of Hillary’s corruption and you wave it away but you think that Russia kept something in reserve to blackmail Trump with? Are you fucking serious? Russia also thought Trump was going to lose. > > Pffft. I’ve seen how he treats his creditors. Owing money to someone does not make him their bitch it makes them HIS bitch. > > I think he will probably be a horrible leader but I am willing to wait for evidence before I start setting my hair on fire. > > I think they will do what Republicans always do. Or do you think Trump will be the first Republican administration to give out contracts to companies like Halliburton? I bet Exxon Mobil gets to drill for oil in the ANWR before the midterm elections. > > I don’t think Trump gives a shit about proof. He wants a head on a pike to show the masses. > > How long would it be before you fed this stuff to YOUR children. I am not bringing baby formula to some guy that works in a factory, these are educated people with means and they don’t trust their food. > > And they are not the only country that makes the shit that they make. > > You are looking at it bass ackwards. They need our markets, we don’t need theirs. > > The part that describes the teeny tiny fucking sliver of China trade is accounted for by the described trade violation. “Certain cold rolled steel products” which accounts for less than half a billion dollars worth of Chinese and Japanese imports COMBINED. > > IIRC the claim was that China ate our lunch on steel. I pointed out that China did not eat our lunch on steel in any meaningful sense. The steel industry moved from the US to Japan a looong time ago. Then from there to Korea and then from there to Indonesia. > > And we are going to impose tariffs on them over it. > > You are assuming that they perceive a crazy man in the white house as weakness. > > And how much of their production does that represent? The majority of products coming from China are coming from China because of price, not quality. > > Japan and Korea have about 200 million people engaged in a modern industrialized economy. > > China has about 7 times as many people but there are only about 100 million factory workers. Much of China is still living in the 19th century with a few modern accents like cell phones and indoor plumbing. That is the trade threat. Modern economic trade theory assumes something close to full employment, not an economy that has 20% of its population participating in the global economy and 80% scratching dirt waiting for more factories to open up so they can enjoy the economic growth. > > I realize that you are just guessing about a lot of these prices but if everything doubled and I doubt it would, you are talking about a 3 or 4% increase coupled with higher domestic employment and perhaps higher wage levels. I mean seriously 3 or 4%? > > And your computer is iphone is not likely to go to 1200 when you can buy a much better samsung or nokia for 700. It is much more likely that we would outsource some components from places like Germany, Korea and Taiwan and make the rest here and increase the price by about $100 assuming apple insisted on making the same profit margin. > > [How much extra would a US-made iPhone cost? MIT has done the sums ... - 9to5Mac](https://9to5mac.com/2016/06/13/iphone-made-in-usa-cost/) > > China. But the laws of physics does not require this to be so. > > Are you under the impression that iphones are just too hard for the Japanese to make? > > Korea would LOVE to make flat screen TVs and electronics again. Those were good factory jobs that propelled economic growth and higher wages. With robotics going the way its going, you could afford to pay a factory worker quite a bit without disrupting the economics too much. Japan might be comfortable with their decades long economic stagnation but I think they would welcome the economic activity as well. > > We make up something like a quarter of the world’s consumption. We can buy from elsewhere and see a 1 or 2% increase in our cost of living. China would see a near 25% reduction in its exports (directly or indirectly through Hong Kong). And even though exports are a only a quarter of its economy, it drives much of the growth in every other sector in China. They need us a lot more than we need them. > > Why do you assume he would have lost? Bernie’s socialist message is no less appealing to rust belt swing voters than Trump’s blatant bigotry and all the other shit that we hate him for. > > Bernie is pro-gun because he isn’t a pandering idiot. And while I can’t prove that Bernie would have won, I can prove that Hillary lost. When you engage in corruption and cheat to win a primary because you think that the primary is what counts, then you better fucking win. You can’t cheat your way to the nomination, lose and then say “well the other guys would have lost too” Not against Donald bobblehead Trump. > > You may have had more than your share of propaganda kool aid as well. Not every politician is as corrupt and unethical as Hillary. But lets just take one example. How is Bernie as corrupt and unethical as Hillary? > > What secret dirt? You’re just speculating. We have pussy grabbing, Trump U., bankruptcies, and a slew of other shit and none of it mattered because Hillary was so corrupt that people preferred the devil they didn’t know to the devil they did. > > cheating on a debate is cheating. I don’t know how acceptable that is where you’re from but where I’m from cheating is bad and in and of itself is a reason for you to lose. After that rant, I think we can assume that your “Trump is much worse” line is only cover-your-ass bullshit. Your blind hatred of, and constant rants about, Clinton and your never-ending apologies for Trump and his Russian friends lead me to believe that you voted for him. You don’t damn her with faint praise-you just damn her, period. BTW, how you can use the word “corruption” when talking about Clinton and not when talking about Trump just shows how fucking twisted you are. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/463 "2016-12-14T13:40:34Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > 1. The emails didn’t prove a fucking thing. :dubious: So emails from Donna Brazile with debate questions don’t prove anything to you? I don’t think you are being objective. > [@](#): > > 1. Don’t **EVER** presume to know anything about what I think or how I might react to anything except your absurd ideas, and this is my last comment to you. You are such a caricature of a hyperventilating “ready for Hillary” liberal that I don’t have to presume anything. You are entirely predictable. If the wikileaks about Donna Brazile had instead been about Trump getting debate questions from the media, you would plaster the Pit, Elections and Great Debates with a dozen new threads about how horrible Trump is. > [@](#): > > 1. Get a hobby. Preferably not involving the internet. Says the person who has posted dozens of whiny new thread on the same goddam topic since the election. Trump is going to be our president. Get over it and move on. There are plenty of really smart people on your side of the argument. You are not one of them. It is becoming increasingly clear to everyone on this board that the reason you keep posting new threads is because you cannot meaningfully respond to the threads you have already started. I hope I am wrong and you are just in the throes of anger, outrage and grief and it is clouding your ability to reason but right now you seem like a tool. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/464 "2016-12-14T13:52:53Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > After that rant, I think we can assume that your “Trump is much worse” line is only cover-your-ass bullshit. Your blind hatred of, and constant rants about, Clinton and your never-ending apologies for Trump and his Russian friends lead me to believe that you voted for him. You don’t damn her with faint praise-you just damn her, period. I voted for her in the general election. I hated doing it but the alternative was Trump. If you twist and distort the Democratic process to make yourself the nominee and you can’t even beat Donald bobblehead Trump, they you deserve all the blame for your loss. If your point is that I dislike Hillary. I am guilty as charged. Is there some reason why I should stop disliking her now that she has handed over the presidency to Donald bobblehead Trump because she insisted it was her turn and twisted the primaries to make sure she became the nominee? Trump won. Its her fault. Continuing to minimize all the bullshit that she did to bring about the Trump victory is only going to lead to more bobblehead victories in the future. > [@](#): > > BTW, how you can use the word “corruption” when talking about Clinton and not when talking about Trump just shows how fucking twisted you are. I call Hillary corrupt because she is. I have called Trump a lot of nasty things but no one ever pushes back when I do, so there is no argument, debate or conversation to be had. IIRC someone asked me why I don’t like Trump, I responded and no one took issue with anything I said on the matter. Do I have to append a criticism of Trump to all of my posts that criticize Hillary. Is that the lapel pin of SDMB? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/465 "2016-12-14T14:31:31Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I voted for her in the general election. I hated doing it but the alternative was Trump. If you twist and distort the Democratic process to make yourself the nominee and you can’t even beat Donald bobblehead Trump, they you deserve all the blame for your loss. > > If your point is that I dislike Hillary. I am guilty as charged. Is there some reason why I should stop disliking her now that she has handed over the presidency to Donald bobblehead Trump because she insisted it was her turn and twisted the primaries to make sure she became the nominee? > > Trump won. Its her fault. Continuing to minimize all the bullshit that she did to bring about the Trump victory is only going to lead to more bobblehead victories in the future. > > I call Hillary corrupt because she is. > > I have called Trump a lot of nasty things but no one ever pushes back when I do, so there is no argument, debate or conversation to be had. IIRC someone asked me why I don’t like Trump, I responded and no one took issue with anything I said on the matter. Do I have to append a criticism of Trump to all of my posts that criticize Hillary. Is that the lapel pin of SDMB? The problem is that you’re complaining how high a molehill is while standing at the foot of Kilimanjaro. That’s why you’re getting called out on this bullshit. I’m going to say this again: the people to blame for Trump’s victory are the people who voted for Trump. You claim he was beatable, yet he beat everyone else. You talk about how Clinton and DWS rigged the system to hand her the win; the RNC system was rigged **against** Trump, _and he still beat all 16 other candidates_. The ugly truth is that millions of Americans voted for Trump because that’s who they wanted to vote for. Maybe a different Democratic candidate might have tipped the balance and won, but that candidate was not Bernie Sanders. I like Bernie but he wouldn’t have beaten Clinton in an “unrigged” primary and he certainly wouldn’t have beaten Trump who rode in on a tsunami of lies and corruption and nastiness separate from whatever comparably tiny ripples of lies and corruption and nastiness Clinton was guilty of. Trump won because Trump won, not because Clinton lost. And until you stop focusing on the small picture and start paying attention to the big one, the rest of us are going to keep calling you on it. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/466 "2016-12-15T02:49:05Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > The problem is that you’re complaining how high a molehill is while standing at the foot of Kilimanjaro. That’s why you’re getting called out on this bullshit. I point out how horrible Trump is and I get no push back. Should I just repeat how horrible he is every time I point out what a shitty candidate Hillary was? > [@](#): > > I’m going to say this again: the people to blame for Trump’s victory are the people who voted for Trump. You claim he was beatable, yet he beat everyone else. You talk about how Clinton and DWS rigged the system to hand her the win; the RNC system was rigged **against** Trump, _and he still beat all 16 other candidates_. The ugly truth is that millions of Americans voted for Trump because that’s who they wanted to vote for. So you think he really is some sort of political genius. :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > Maybe a different Democratic candidate might have tipped the balance and won, but that candidate was not Bernie Sanders. I like Bernie but he wouldn’t have beaten Clinton in an “unrigged” primary and he certainly wouldn’t have beaten Trump who rode in on a tsunami of lies and corruption and nastiness separate from whatever comparably tiny ripples of lies and corruption and nastiness Clinton was guilty of. Prove it. I can prove hillary would have lost because she fucking did. Trump didn’t win because he got more votes than Hillary. He won because he got a combined 100,000 vote advantage across three or four states that swung the election his way. Those voters were just as likely to vote on Bernie populism as they were to vote on Trump populism. Probably moreso because Bernie wasn’t going around gabbing people by the pussy. What’s Bernie’s big skeleton? he’s a socialist? > [@](#): > > Trump won because Trump won, not because Clinton lost. And until you stop focusing on the small picture and start paying attention to the big one, the rest of us are going to keep calling you on it. Trump won because Hillary lost. And until you stop focusing on how to shift blame away from Hillary where is belongs, I’m going to keep reminding you how myopic you are STILL being even in the face of this mind-shattering loss to a bobblehead. Face it, you were wrong about everything in this election, more wrong than Adaher is in a bad year and yet you are confident that you couldn’t possibly be wrong about this election being Hillary’s fault. After assuring us that ditching Bernie for Hillary was for the best and to grow up and stop whining because she was going to win the general against Trump (and that is the important thing right?); and now that she lost pitifully (Bernie couldn’t have been much worse), now Trump is a political genius? PFFFT!!! I will say it again, you can’t lose an election to a bobblehead like Trump and blame anyone but yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/467 "2016-12-15T11:37:47Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So you think he really is some sort of political genius. :rolleyes: No, any more than I think Nigel Farage is. But like Farage he tapped into an extremely nasty undercurrent in the zeitgeist and, noting that this was successful, ramped it up and rode it to victory. He did literally hundreds of things that should have disqualified him and nothing did, not because of Clinton but because the people who voted for him _didn’t care_. They didn’t care about the offensive and nonsensical comments, they didn’t care about the truth, they didn’t care that by every single metric he was the last person you should elect president; they loved him not in spite of his being a narcissistic asshole but because of it. He was the right man at the right time for the worst possible reasons. > [@](#): > > Prove it. I can prove hillary would have lost because she fucking did. > > Trump didn’t win because he got more votes than Hillary. He won because he got a combined 100,000 vote advantage across three or four states that swung the election his way. Those voters were just as likely to vote on Bernie populism as they were to vote on Trump populism. Probably moreso because Bernie wasn’t going around gabbing people by the pussy. Now who needs to provide proof? You think there were Trump voters who would have voted for Sanders if only they’d had the chance? Sanders’ populism and Trump’s populism were very different things appealing to very different audiences, and the people who voted for Trump _didn’t care about the pussy-grabbing comments._ > [@](#): > > What’s Bernie’s big skeleton? he’s a socialist? In America that’s a Godzilla-sized skeleton. Americans react to the word “socialism” the way the actors in Blackadder 3 reacted to the word “MacBeth” - it provokes a spasm of irrational revulsion. Consider how often the right-wing tagged Obama with the label with exactly zero justification. How do you think they’d react to some who actually embraced the label? We’d have had the S-word on heavy rotation for months, and it would have sunk him. Sanders supporters, like Ron Paul supporters, are an energetic and enthusiastic bunch. And like Paul supporters, they’re a minority convinced that the level of noise they generate means there are a lot more of them than there really are. > [@](#): > > Trump won because Hillary lost. And until you stop focusing on how to shift blame away from Hillary where is belongs, I’m going to keep reminding you how myopic you are STILL being even in the face of this mind-shattering loss to a bobblehead. Trump also won because all the other GOP candidates lost, even with the RNC against him. Why was that again? Was it because he was a political genius? > [@](#): > > Face it, you were wrong about everything in this election, more wrong than Adaher is in a bad year and yet you are confident that you couldn’t possibly be wrong about this election being Hillary’s fault. Really? Me personally? Don’t think so. But please keep stamping your widdle feet about Hillary. > [@](#): > > After assuring us that ditching Bernie for Hillary was for the best and to grow up and stop whining because she was going to win the general against Trump (and that is the important thing right?); and now that she lost pitifully (Bernie couldn’t have been much worse), now Trump is a political genius? PFFFT!!! I never said Trump was a political genius, so perhaps you could stop pretending you’re refuting an argument I didn’t make. As indeed applies to most of the rest of this. > [@](#): > > I will say it again, you can’t lose an election to a bobblehead like Trump and blame anyone but yourself. And I will say it again - Trump may be a “bobblehead” but he was a bobblehead a lot of people wanted to vote for. That _isn’t_ Clinton’s fault. ---
**Author:** ![Covert\_Harris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f6c823/32.png) [@Covert\_Harris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Covert_Harris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/468 "2016-12-15T12:48:59Z")
I don’t remember Hillary’s exact post-election speech words, but she said something to the effect of devoting her public life to empowering people and helping young people advance their careers. I ran a manufacturing company, and like many neophyte business managers, I read about job enrichment and such. I will never forget attempting to accomplish that and having a worker start crying and beg me just to let her do her job. I came to understand that most workers simply want a decent wage and respect. Hillary’s comments helped me understand how out of touch with working people she is. And Obama’s speech was very similar. He gave examples of his constituency, and all were professionals. I can’t speak for Dems in general, but Hillary and Obama are ivory tower elitists and out of touch with the working class. How Trump knew how to resonate is an interesting question. I suspect it had to do with his rubbing elbows with construction workers while he learned the real estate business. I was likewise raised in the privileged class but it didn’t take me long to understand what laborers want once I worked with them. I didn’t have a clue before that. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/469 "2016-12-15T13:53:08Z")
> [@Covert\_Harris](#): > > I don’t remember Hillary’s exact post-election speech words, but she said something to the effect of devoting her public life to empowering people and helping young people advance their careers. > > I ran a manufacturing company, and like many neophyte business managers, I read about job enrichment and such. I will never forget attempting to accomplish that and having a worker start crying and beg me just to let her do her job. I came to understand that most workers simply want a decent wage and respect. Just out of curiosity, what did you “read about job enrichment and such.”? What exactly did you try to do to enrich this worker’s job that upset her so? I have seen neophyte managers try to “enrich” their employees jobs by simply giving them more work to do. Why is it that you feel that every worker would react the same way as this one, especially if given a different approach? Also, how old was she? Many younger people don’t want to learn anything for a bit, they think they finished their learning with school, and want to take a break. Older workers may not feel as though it is worth it to put in the effort, old dog, new tricks, all that. I don’t agree with either stance, as I feel learning is a lifelong process, but you can’t force people. > [@](#): > > Hillary’s comments helped me understand how out of touch with working people she is. And Obama’s speech was very similar. He gave examples of his constituency, and all were professionals. I can’t speak for Dems in general, but Hillary and Obama are ivory tower elitists and out of touch with the working class. How Trump knew how to resonate is an interesting question. I suspect it had to do with his rubbing elbows with construction workers while he learned the real estate business. I was likewise raised in the privileged class but it didn’t take me long to understand what laborers want once I worked with them. I didn’t have a clue before that. And now that you do “understand what laborers want”, what do you think that is? Is it really to be left alone in their job with no advancement until they are too old to work anymore? ---
**Author:** ![Covert\_Harris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f6c823/32.png) [@Covert\_Harris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Covert_Harris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/470 "2016-12-15T14:36:31Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Just out of curiosity, what did you “read about job enrichment and such.”? What exactly did you try to do to enrich this worker’s job that upset her so? I have seen neophyte managers try to “enrich” their employees jobs by simply giving them more work to do. Why is it that you feel that every worker would react the same way as this one, especially if given a different approach? Also, how old was she? Many younger people don’t want to learn anything for a bit, they think they finished their learning with school, and want to take a break. Older workers may not feel as though it is worth it to put in the effort, old dog, new tricks, all that. I don’t agree with either stance, as I feel learning is a lifelong process, but you can’t force people. > > And now that you do “understand what laborers want”, what do you think that is? Is it really to be left alone in their job with no advancement until they are too old to work anymore? I tried to include the 40-ish woman in designing the process to improve the quality control of her machine operator job, which needed improvement. She just wanted me to tell her what to do differently. I’m not going to drag out textbooks from my MBA program, but there is a lot written about job enrichment, which anybody can Google, I would imagine. I don’t think every worker is the same. But I had a lot of close experience with working people and most only wanted cost-of-living raises and to be treated with dignity and respect. The few that were interested in more interesting work, or advancement (I made sure I teased them out), I advanced. Nobody quit my factory. Once in a while I would find a worker with a superior IQ, but most of the workers had average IQs. Generally (there are always exceptions, of course), people with higher IQs are more curious and interested in enrichment than people with average IQs, and lower. I think that people with above average IQs, but without experience working with people with lower IQs, try to understand them through empathy rather than evidence. That’s the mistake people like Hillary made. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/471 "2016-12-15T14:42:40Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > She was hoping that people would be repulsed by what he was saying, that their better nature would win out. She was wrong. Dead wrong. Hillary’s team should have heeded a warning from Mark Twain : [QUOTE=The alleged Dauphin of France, as quoted in Huckleberry Finn] Hain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain’t that a big enough majority in any town? [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Covert\_Harris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f6c823/32.png) [@Covert\_Harris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Covert_Harris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/472 "2016-12-15T15:13:04Z")
The quote works, but I’m sure you know it’s not about being a fool; it’s about being common. And lots and lots of Hillary supporters were of the same cloth as Trump’s. It’s too bad a multivariate regression analysis can’t be run on all the independent variables to determine which one held the biggest sway. But I vote for “deplorables,” the ultimate outing. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/473 "2016-12-15T15:42:54Z")
> [@Covert\_Harris](#): > > I tried to include the 40-ish woman in designing the process to improve the quality control of her machine operator job, which needed improvement. She just wanted me to tell her what to do differently. > > I’m not going to drag out textbooks from my MBA program, but there is a lot written about job enrichment, which anybody can Google, I would imagine. > > I don’t think every worker is the same. But I had a lot of close experience with working people and most only wanted cost-of-living raises and to be treated with dignity and respect. The few that were interested in more interesting work, or advancement (I made sure I teased them out), I advanced. Nobody quit my factory. > > Once in a while I would find a worker with a superior IQ, but most of the workers had average IQs. Generally (there are always exceptions, of course), people with higher IQs are more curious and interested in enrichment than people with average IQs, and lower. I think that people with above average IQs, but without experience working with people with lower IQs, try to understand them through empathy rather than evidence. That’s the mistake people like Hillary made. I don’t think it’s really a matter of IQ. In my experience, stupid people have just as many ideas as smart people - \*bad \*ideas, mostly, but ideas nonetheless. No, what you’re describing is the result of decades of crappy schools and crappy bosses and crappy society in general, all focused on teaching people never to think for themselves. People like that who have reached their 40s are, with some major exceptions, pretty much beyond saving. Just give them their cost of living increase and try to break the cycle with the next generation. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/474 "2016-12-15T16:31:15Z")
> [@Covert\_Harris](#): > > I tried to include the 40-ish woman in designing the process to improve the quality control of her machine operator job, which needed improvement. She just wanted me to tell her what to do differently. It does sound like that was stuff a bit “above her pay grade”. That seems quite a bit to drop on someone all at once. When I try to teach a new skill to an employee, I don’t tell them that that is what I am doing. I just make sure that the information is presented to them. Gotta be sneaky sometimes, if you are looking to train your workforce. > [@](#): > > I’m not going to drag out textbooks from my MBA program, but there is a lot written about job enrichment, which anybody can Google, I would imagine. > > I don’t think every worker is the same. But I had a lot of close experience with working people and most only wanted cost-of-living raises and to be treated with dignity and respect. The few that were interested in more interesting work, or advancement (I made sure I teased them out), I advanced. Nobody quit my factory. My experience is that most of the time, most people just want a simple job with simple advancement. But it is very few people that never are looking for it. People get content with what they are doing, but then they get bored. There is also the fact that they get displaced. You say no one quit your factory. Did you have to lay anyone off as you increased automation and eliminated jobs? Do you think that the people that were laid off would have been better off if they had gotten some level of higher training and advancement when it was offered, even if they didn’t really want to put in the work then? > [@](#): > > Once in a while I would find a worker with a superior IQ, but most of the workers had average IQs. Generally (there are always exceptions, of course), people with higher IQs are more curious and interested in enrichment than people with average IQs, and lower. I think that people with above average IQs, but without experience working with people with lower IQs, try to understand them through empathy rather than evidence. That’s the mistake people like Hillary made. It is quite possible that Hillary did not connect with the working people. Though I think it is her ambition that blinds her to the problems of the people, rather than her empathy. She has always worked hard to get what she wanted for herself and her community. She never had anything handed to her. So, when she is interacting with people with no ambition, that just want to do their job (that is obsolete and being phased out one way or the other), that aren’t curious, that _do_ want to have things just handed to them without any “work” (I say “work”, not as in the job that they do, but in the work that is necessary to improve yourself and your life), so she doesn’t get that mindset. That people would rather just sit and complain that they aren’t being given what they want in life, rather than proactively taking a course of action that would give them the things that they want in life is an alien mindset to people of her level of ambition. > [@Alessan](#): > > I don’t think it’s really a matter of IQ. In my experience, stupid people have just as many ideas as smart people - \*bad \*ideas, mostly, but ideas nonetheless. No, what you’re describing is the result of decades of crappy schools and crappy bosses and crappy society in general, all focused on teaching people never to think for themselves. People like that who have reached their 40s are, with some major exceptions, pretty much beyond saving. Just give them their cost of living increase and try to break the cycle with the next generation. Yeah, that’s why I said old dog, new tricks. I don’t agree with that mindset at all. I am almost 40 myself, and find any day that I did not learn something new to be a bit of a waste. 2 of my employees are over 40. One is pretty well skilled, and I honestly don’t have much to offer her as far as development (she knows more about the industry than I do), but she is always reading up on new techniques and stuff on her own, so that’s cool. I have another one that pretty much just wants to come in and shave some dogs for a few hours and go home. She does a good enough job, but it does frustrate me how little she cares about learning any new skills. Guess which one gets more raises? Guess which gets the better pick of the hours? Guess which one I will keep if I am ever in an unfortunate situation where I need to downsize. And then guess which one complains more? ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/475 "2016-12-15T16:31:26Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > The problem is that you’re complaining how high a molehill is while standing at the foot of Kilimanjaro. That’s why you’re getting called out on this bullshit. > > I’m going to say this again: the people to blame for Trump’s victory are the people who voted for Trump. That’s just stupid; it’s like saying it was the storm surge that was responsible for your home’s destruction, not the hurricane. The question is WHY did these people choose Trump over Hillary? A lot of that blame can be fairly laid at Hillary’s feet, or at least at her campaign’s feet. For a whole lot of people, she was an oddly uncharismatic policy wonk who was tainted by association with her husband, as well as someone who is perceived as a dyed-in-the-wool Washington insider. Maybe not just an insider, but something more intimate than that. At any rate, if you think the current government is part of the problem regardless of party, she’s not going to look good to you. On top of that, there are the continual allegations of corruption on her part. Maybe they keep getting squashed, but a lot of people probably think that where there’s smoke, there probably is fire. Roll all of this together and you get a candidate who is uniquely ill suited to run against a charismatic person whose entire platform consists of “I’m not a politician”. She’s like every political sin rolled together into one person for many people, while Trump is kind of like the opposite of that. Personally I voted for her anyway, but I didn’t’ _like_ it- it was like choosing whether to eat a cat turd or a hairball. I imagine people with a hair more party affiliation or affection for either candidate found it an easier decision to vote one way or the other. On top of that, I have a firm conviction that it was far less people voting for Trump or for Hillary as much as it was people voting against Trump or against Hillaryl. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/476 "2016-12-15T17:19:55Z")
> [@bump](#): > > That’s just stupid; it’s like saying it was the storm surge that was responsible for your home’s destruction, not the hurricane. It’s good to know when it was the storm surge, rather than the hurricane that destroyed your home, otherwise, when you rebuild, you may rebuild thinking you are protecting yourself from the winds or the rain or the debris from the hurricane, but since you don’t seem to care that it was actually the flood from the storm surge, your house gets destroyed again. So, if you would not blame the people that voted for Trump, then who would you blame? It does seem pretty weird that you would blame the people that tried to prevent something, but not the people that actually made it happen. You can be disappointed that they failed at stopping Trump, I am, and you can help to look into the ways to move forward to prevent such things again. But seriously, the people to blame for trump are the people that put him in office. Blaming anyone else is pretty fucking stupid. > [@](#): > > The question is WHY did these people choose Trump over Hillary? A lot of that blame can be fairly laid at Hillary’s feet, or at least at her campaign’s feet. For a whole lot of people, she was an oddly uncharismatic policy wonk who was tainted by association with her husband, as well as someone who is perceived as a dyed-in-the-wool Washington insider. Maybe not just an insider, but something more intimate than that. At any rate, if you think the current government is part of the problem regardless of party, she’s not going to look good to you. On top of that, there are the continual allegations of corruption on her part. Maybe they keep getting squashed, but a lot of people probably think that where there’s smoke, there probably is fire. The blame can largely be placed at the conservatives feet for carrying on an anti-hillary campaign for the last 30 years. You blame her that she was accused of scandals? You blame her that people blame the government for not protecting them from their employers and health care industry? You blame her for being associated with Bill Clinton, who presided over the economic boom of the 90’s? You blame her for the allegations of corruption, even though they are pretty much proven to be baseless? You blame her for people being gullible enough to eat it all up? > [@](#): > > Roll all of this together and you get a candidate who is uniquely ill suited to run against a charismatic person whose entire platform consists of “I’m not a politician”. She’s like every political sin rolled together into one person for many people, while Trump is kind of like the opposite of that. So, she is every political sin, and Trump is every other sin? How exactly is Trump the opposite? You are claiming that he is not corrupt? That he is not embroiled in controversy? I get the image that you are saying that he was projecting, I just find it hard to imagine people actually falling for that. Of course, that’s my own failure of imagination, as recent event have shown that there are a large number of people that do in fact fall for such demagoguery. > [@](#): > > Personally I voted for her anyway, but I didn’t’ _like_ it- it was like choosing whether to eat a cat turd or a hairball. I imagine people with a hair more party affiliation or affection for either candidate found it an easier decision to vote one way or the other. True that. I had no problem voting for Clinton. She was not my ideal candidate. I actually was pulling for Warren to enter the race, I didn’t really like biden all that much. I voted for sanders because I liked the idea of moving the overton window a bit farther to the left, but I don’t actually think he would have made a very good president, if he managed to win the general, which I have my doubts because of his affiliation with socialism. But, in the end, I don’t vote for the people, I vote for what the people represents. Honestly, anyone of somewhat below average capability and up could _do_ the job of the presidency. You aren’t actually doing any research or anything, other people do that for you, present you with information and options, and you make decisions based on the best information that you have, that are informed by the ideology that you were elected to represent. > [@](#): > > On top of that, I have a firm conviction that it was far less people voting for Trump or for Hillary as much as it was people voting against Trump or against Hillaryl. I think you are half right. I think that most of the people that voted for Clinton voted for her because they thought she would be a good president. The conservatives that voted for her were voting against trump, but I think they were a small minority of clinton voters. There were not all that many people that voted for trump because they wanted the things that he represented. Yeah, you have your deplorable contingent, but I think (hope) that hillary was estimating high when she said it was about half of trump voters. You then have your single issue voters, that didn’t vote against hillary, so much as the voted against the democrat. Any pro-gun or pro-life voter would have voted for trump to vote against the democrat, whoever that ended up being. Those were the known trump voters. The rest of the people that voted against clinton weren’t voting against clinton, they were voting against the government. They felt as though the govt was no longer representing their interests, and their voice was not being heard, so they voted to burn it all down. Those are the white, working class americans (which I have spent my life as a part of) that put Trump in office. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/477 "2016-12-15T17:25:07Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > No, any more than I think Nigel Farage is. But like Farage he tapped into an extremely nasty undercurrent in the zeitgeist and, noting that this was successful, ramped it up and rode it to victory. He did literally hundreds of things that should have disqualified him and nothing did, not because of Clinton but because the people who voted for him _didn’t care_. They didn’t care about the offensive and nonsensical comments, they didn’t care about the truth, they didn’t care that by every single metric he was the last person you should elect president; they loved him not in spite of his being a narcissistic asshole but because of it. If you keep thinking that the reason that Hillary lost is because the country that elected Barack Hussein Obama TWICE over McCain and Romney is horrible and likes horrible leaders then you are never going to understand a goddam thing about this election and you are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. This was a big fuck you to the establishment Republican and Democrat alike. If Bernie had been running they would probably have used him as their middle finger instead of Trump but we didn’t give them that choice. The Democratic party nominated a corrupt woman who was giving secret speeches to wall street banks. The same fucking wall street banks that ruined our economy less than 10 years ago. Half those mother fuckers should be in jail but instead they just got record high pay last year while a shitload of Americans are still reeling from the effects of the recession which for many families was the straw that broke the camel’s back. And what does the Democratic party do? Put up a nominee that gets hundreds of thousands of dollars for giving secret speeches to these same banks telling them how awesome they are. We lost because we nominated Hillary. The next time someone tells me that we have to nominate someone because they are a woman, or an Asian or a Mexican, I will fucking throttle them. > [@](#): > > He was the right man at the right time for the worst possible reasons. Bernie would have been just as effective an outlet for the electoral outrage at the establishment. > [@](#): > > Now who needs to provide proof? You think there were Trump voters who would have voted for Sanders if only they’d had the chance? Sanders’ populism and Trump’s populism were very different things appealing to very different audiences, and the people who voted for Trump _didn’t care about the pussy-grabbing comments._ Do you know any trump voters who aren’t perennial Republican voters? I do, and they would have preferred Bernie to either of them. So that may not mean that Bernie would have won but I can’t think of many Hillary voters who wouldn’t have voted for Bernie and i can think of at least some Trump voters who would have voted for Bernie. I can’t prove that he would have won but I can prove that Hillary lost. And she cheated to put herself in a position to lose. > [@](#): > > In America that’s a Godzilla-sized skeleton. Americans react to the word “socialism” the way the actors in Blackadder 3 reacted to the word “MacBeth” - it provokes a spasm of irrational revulsion. Consider how often the right-wing tagged Obama with the label with exactly zero justification. How do you think they’d react to some who actually embraced the label? We’d have had the S-word on heavy rotation for months, and it would have sunk him. Really? Worse than black? > [@](#): > > Sanders supporters, like Ron Paul supporters, are an energetic and enthusiastic bunch. And like Paul supporters, they’re a minority convinced that the level of noise they generate means there are a lot more of them than there really are. I bet Ron Paul could have won this year if he got the nomination. > [@](#): > > Trump also won because all the other GOP candidates lost, even with the RNC against him. Why was that again? Was it because he was a political genius? Circular firing squad. That plus there wasn’t a single one of them that didn’t reek of establishment. > [@](#): > > Really? Me personally? Don’t think so. But please keep stamping your widdle feet about Hillary. I don’t know. Its been hard to keep track of all the Hillary apologists but generally speaking, yes, the “I’m ready for Hillary” crowd is having a meltdown and calling half the country racist and misogynistic without any self awareness that this is a large part of why they lost the election. > [@](#): > > I never said Trump was a political genius, so perhaps you could stop pretending you’re refuting an argument I didn’t make. As indeed applies to most of the rest of this. Then how did he beat Hillary unless Hillary is a fucking horrible candidate? Oh, wait, that’s right. The electorate in the swing states that voted for a black dude named Barack Hussein Obama is full of racists and other deplorables. > [@](#): > > And I will say it again - Trump may be a “bobblehead” but he was a bobblehead a lot of people wanted to vote for. That _isn’t_ Clinton’s fault. A lot of people wanted to vote for him because the alternative was Hillary. THAT is Hillary’s fault. Her insistence and that it was her turn combined with her cheating and collusion with the media and the DNC cleared the field for anyone but her. Given a choice between Trump and Bernie, Bernie would have been the choice of a lot of people who voted for Trump. You know who WOULDN’T have come out in droves to defeat Bernie? Gun owners. Just that would have made the difference. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/478 "2016-12-15T17:25:51Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > > [@RTFirefly](#): > > > > So, who were these ‘better candidates’ on the Dem side? > > > > Bernie Sand[del]inista[/del]ers? The GOP had a book on him that makes what they had on Hillary look trivial. By the time they were done with him, we’d be thinking better of Michael Dukakis. > > > > Martin O’Malley? Didn’t exactly excite anybody, did he? > > > > Joe Biden? There were reasons he didn’t move the needle much the two times he ran for President. And like it or not, due to his son’s death, he wasn’t really available. > > > > Elizabeth Warren, _maybe_ - but is there any evidence that she felt ready to run this time? > > > > Hell, who were these ‘better candidates’ on the GOP side, for that matter? Given the way Trump dismantled the lot of them, I have to believe he _was_ their best candidate. > > I love how Trump has become this invincible candidate of destiny now that he has beaten Hillary and people don’t want to admit that Hillary is a shitty candidate. I ask this in total sincerity: is there a connection between my question and your reply? ---
**Author:** ![Covert\_Harris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f6c823/32.png) [@Covert\_Harris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Covert_Harris)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/479 "2016-12-15T17:28:18Z")
Worse than a layoff, k9b. Our industry and specific hardware product line was just about the first, if not the very first, targeted by China, in the early '80s. I sold the company as fast as I could after over 100 years in business as a virtual monopoly. Everybody connected with the factory (except, thank God, the biggest shareholder)thought I was crazy, and tried to have me fired. Who would buy that cheap, un-American junk, they said? Answer: everybody. Within two years there was no more factory. The federal government told me that I was the only CEO they knew of in our industry that got out whole. And, no, most of my workers were not prepared for anything but laboring in a factory. Some undoubtedly found similar work elsewhere, but many American factory workers have had a hard time of it since, as we well know. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291/480 "2016-12-15T17:29:54Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Hillary’s team should have heeded a warning from Mark Twain : She was hoping they would be more repulsed by him than by her. She was wrong. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-that-the-dems-dont-understand-white-working-class-america-no-thats-not-it/773291.md?page=25)