It doesn’t matter. If Trump voters *perceived *him as anti-establishment, then voting for Trump, to give a middle finger to the establishment, made sense from their perspective.
You didn’t even vote for Trump. yes, anyone who voted for trump is in a bubble of some sort, whether it be a conservative bubble, a racist bubble, a general …phobia bubble, a bernie bubble, a hate for hillary bubble, or just an information bubble in which they were not exposed to the fact that trumps statements were entirely lies.
So, unless you think of yourself as being in a bubble apart from the rest of the world, and that trump voters are the right ones, then yes, even you would have to agree that they are in a bubble.
Sorry, but you are incorrect here. Recognizing other’s rights to exist with dignity does not make one more moral. There are plenty of times thourought history that the acceptably moral thing to do was not to recognize the rights and dignities of other humans. Liberals have been considered to be immoral for their push towards a equality, in that blacks or women should not be a part of society, and there was quite a bit of moralizing that this was the case, and that is was the abolistionists or the suffrageists that were on the wrong side.
So, while I personally think it is better to be a liberal, and to follow through on the philosophy of pushing for equality and egalitarianism, there are other schools of argument.
You are talking about democrats and republicans in this paragraph, two political parties that have shifted their philosophical ideologies constantly through the years. The side that was liberal and the side that was conservative has changed. Meanwhile, the ideology of what it means to be a conservative vs what it means to be a liberal has not changed nearly as much.
From the perspective of a member of the Trump voting demographic (white, middle aged straight male with no college degree), I am not sure why you think that republicans would represent my interest better than the democrats.
I contend that the only major difference between myself and a trump voter is that I take it upon myself to be informed about the going ons about the world, the country, and my community, while most of the people I know of that voted for trump, (who exist in the exact same social, economic, ethnic class, as well as sharing precisely the same geography) are fairly ignorant of anything going on outside their very small areas, either though intent, or just being too busy to keep up with all the happenings.
With that in mind, I strongly argue that it is those who do not inform themselves about what is happening in the world, the country, and their community to be the ones in the bubble, rather than the ones who do take it upon themselves to be engaged.
Wait, what?
Yes, but the people who considered them immoral were wrong. Morality is not based on what other people think.
Remind me which group was caught completely by surprise by the results of the election again?
Both.
We consider it to be wrong now, but being an abolitionist in the early 1800’s would put you on the wrong side of most of the population, and they would declare you to be immoral for your actions of freeing or helping slaves.
We can say that those who are against gay rights and trans rights and all the other forms of equality will be shown to be “wrong” when viewed through the perspective of the future looking back on now as the past, but it wasn’t all that long ago that just being gay was considered to be immoral by the majority of the population, and is still considered to be so by a significant chunk of the population.
Where do you get such troll bait nonsense?
-
you are saying half the country is isolated, right have fun pulling that off.
-
So people with masters degrees and PHD’s are less educated than what exactly?
My you have such a myopic view. Uninteresting considering you do not know anything about anyone at all, except perhaps yourself. And i dont think you even know anything about yourself or you would already realize you are a useless pot stirring troll and would be seeking professional help from some educated AND intelligent person.
Here is half a troll cookie so you don’t starve, now go seek some kind of mental help huh?
And for the record, if you called Hillary’s supporters stupid inbred morons, i would probably agree to hold you down for them while they beat the hell out of you.
And i don’t like Hillary.
Go ponder that for a bit.
Which would equally describe the Hillary camp and any other group as well, unless you are into self delusion?
Still in the bubble, huh?
Undoubtedly some Trump supporters were surprised, but given that Hillary was favored to win, it would of course be Hillary supporters who would be more caught by surprise.
(I realize that, as mentioned upthread, people would prefer that this not be a Trump supporters vs. Hillary supporters thing and more a right vs. left thing)
Every Trump voter I know can’t believe he actually won. They’re happy, but they’re just as shocked as everyone else. This includes the ones who held their noses and voted for Trump because they felt compelled to vote (R), but it’s especially true of the friends I have who are die-hard Trump supporters.
They were supporting the underdog from day one.
Here’sa map of the counties that voted for Trump vs. those that went for Hillary. Which look more isolated to you? Or do you believe the East Coast is contiguous with the West?
Who would you say is in more of a bubble - a conservative posting on the SDMB, or a liberal posting here?
Regards,
Shodan
Socially, virtually everyone is in a bubble. People prefer to associate with people like themselves and it is a well-understood phenomenon that most people have the idea that most other people world think like they do, because of their bubbles.
Post snipped.
If you want a bit of research check these out:
Link.
Note, Haidt is a liberal.
Linkto the actual book.
Link to his Morailty Quiz site where you can run through tests.
The bubble isn’t so much rural vs. urban or accepting vs. not accepting but more ‘I understand your reasoning but disagree with your conclusion’ (conservatives/moderates) v.s ‘I disagree with your conclusion based on *my *reasoning’ (liberals).
A note, I am a bit distrustful of social psychology for reasonsI won’t get into here. However, Haidt seems to be pretty good and the research has been backed up by further studies.
FTR, I am fiscally conservative, socially liberal and didn’t vote for Trump.
Slee
Trump even was surprised, so those trying to paint it as a liberal thing to have been surprised by his win are doing an exceptionally poor job of it.
Again, that doesn’t matter. They were wrong.
Let me give an example. There are times in (pre) history where going out and murdering people for not being part of my family was considered moral. That doesn’t make it moral. If I went and did that today, it would be immoral.
The idea that something isn’t moral because it was considered immoral in the past is silly.
There is this notion among some liberals that people vote based off of facts and evidence, and that if people vote for the “wrong” candidate/party, it’s because they weren’t informed enough to know better, or that they had the wrong facts, or weren’t educated enough, or that the liberal party didn’t sell/present its case well enough.
Well, superimposing that on a population map., I see that the red counties are largely lowly populated rural areas, with highly isolated populations.
If your point is that the next liberal “bubble” geographically to a city is farther for the dems than the next conservative “bubble” is geographically to a republican leaning county, you have a point. I don’t see what it has to do with anything, but at least that is a correct statement.
If you are trying to say that conservatives live closer together and encounter each other more often than liberals do, then you are simply incorrect, though if that were true, that would have some relevance to what is being talked about.
I would say that those in the bubble are those who are not posting here at all. Even the conservatives posting here have their bubbles broken, because they have made the choice to engage with others outside their immediate geographic circles.
I do not think that there are many liberals on here that I would describe as being “bubbled”, and actually very few of the conservatives either. Now, are there some, you betcha. They annoy me when they are on my side of the ideological divide, and should annoy you when they are on yours.
We are entirely talking about people who do not take the initiative to engage themselves in the process of getting information and perspective, but instead simply allow it to come to them them through whatever media is most convenient to them, whether it be through TV, radio, social contact or internet.
And you, my friend, you have a great day,
k9bfriender
That’s precisely what it means to be in a bubble-- the info you get from the people you know is not representative of the larger population.
Not so in my case: it was pointed out to me by Trump voters that he was the one drawing the big crowds. I still thought he wouldn’t win, of course.
That would be silly, but is not what I said. I did not say that things are not or could not be moral today because they were immoral in the past.
My point is simply that morality does change. What was moral in the past is not moral now. Judging people of a different time by today’s morals is silly. Judging people of today by future morals is even sillier.
Contrary to what Chronos said, morality is determined exactly by what other people think. def.“a particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society.”
By definition, morals are the values that society holds. The values that society holds change. Therefore… morals change.
We can look back, and say that people in the past who did not adhere to our morals were wrong (but then you get to define what wrong means in this context), but we cannot say that they were immoral.
Back to my original point, in which case I was accused of trying to be morally superior by holding to an ideal of equality which started this tangent, it has not always been the moral standpoint, the standpoint that reflects the values and principles of conduct of society, to be for equality, it has in fact been an immoral position to take for much of history.