6 ms·

I think the student's observation that Trump's election was more an act of political vandalism rather than a good faith attempt at reform is accurate. But to th

I think the student's observation that Trump's election was more an act of political vandalism rather than a good faith attempt at reform is accurate. But to think that the motivation was purely economic is naive. We've had economic doldrums before and we didn't elect a dangerous buffoon in response. What has been unprecedented these past eight years is that we had a black president, and we made enormous strides forward in gay rights. That explains the white nationalist backlash better than simple economics. After all, by the time the election rolled around, unemployment had dropped to less than 5% and the markets were near all-time highs. But the president was still black, and gays were still getting married.

fred_is_fred 10y ago
Unfortunately unemployment numbers don't tell the whole story. Large parts of the country are still suffering, not from the downturn but from technological & trade based upheaval. Someone who used to work at a factory or mine may technically not be unemployed when working at WalMart, but they aren't happy either. I think Democrats will continue to lose elections so long as they care more about rights of immigrants than of a local coal mine closing down. In fact, many would celebrate that, despite the cost to the people who work there or the community. I think of it this way, I live in a small non-diverse town, and I can pick the guy/gal who says he's going to keep the plant open or the guy/gal who says he will protect gay and immigrant rights and you need to feed your family, who are you going to vote for?
jj8 10y ago
Economic interest, fear (for a threatened ideology), and anger as motives for your aptly labeled "political vandalism" don't seem mutually exclusive. Further more I don't think the author was as naive as you think, as he posits that disruption of traditional state vs federal power distributions economic inequity, and ideological claustrophobia, all contribute to a seemingly nation-wide impulse to endorse the political "wrecking ball", i.e., Donald Trump.

fred_is_fred 10y ago

Unfortunately unemployment numbers don't tell the whole story. Large parts of the country are still suffering, not from the downturn but from technological & trade based upheaval. Someone who used to work at a factory or mine may technically not be unemployed when working at WalMart, but they aren't happy either. I think Democrats will continue to lose elections so long as they care more about rights of immigrants than of a local coal mine closing down. In fact, many would celebrate that, despite the cost to the people who work there or the community. I think of it this way, I live in a small non-diverse town, and I can pick the guy/gal who says he's going to keep the plant open or the guy/gal who says he will protect gay and immigrant rights and you need to feed your family, who are you going to vote for?

jj8 10y ago

Economic interest, fear (for a threatened ideology), and anger as motives for your aptly labeled "political vandalism" don't seem mutually exclusive. Further more I don't think the author was as naive as you think, as he posits that disruption of traditional state vs federal power distributions economic inequity, and ideological claustrophobia, all contribute to a seemingly nation-wide impulse to endorse the political "wrecking ball", i.e., Donald Trump.