4 ms·
With the risk of sounding "smug", I think most of this thread offers a poor analysis of the election. The reason Trump won is, presumably, to a large extent th
by emless 10y ago
With the risk of sounding "smug", I think most of this thread offers a poor analysis of the election.
The reason Trump won is, presumably, to a large extent that he managed to make his message more relevant. If this election would have been about schools, even in the same context, he most likely wouldn't have won and the deplorables comment wouldn't have mattered or even happened in the first place.
We've seen this in Europe repeatedly with new candidates offering easy solutions and a straight forward message, leaving the established parties on their heels trying to defend themselves. In Europe this normally results in 5-15% of the seats in parliament, while in the US (once you're in the running) this can win you the election because of the political system.
- goostavos 10y agoIt doesn't sound smug, it just sounds massively over simplified and assumed. The reasons for Trump's win probably varies wildly from region to region and person to person. Anecdotally, I know several who voted only because he was _not_ Hilary, not due to any message resonance. Hell, I mean, personally, despite being politically closest to Hilary on paper, I had no intention of voting for her, and none of those reasons had anything to do with Trump.
- emless 10y agoA large part of Trumps message was that Hillary was unsuitable as president. If Trump hadn't manage to get that message through and elevated that issue in favor of other issues much fewer people would have voted for him.