3 ms·

Hacker News is a welcome respite from traditional American news sources whose sole purpose today is wall-to-wall Trump coverage. Leave it to HN commenters to fi

Hacker News is a welcome respite from traditional American news sources whose sole purpose today is wall-to-wall Trump coverage. Leave it to HN commenters to find a long-term thoughtful and productive point of view when a Trump story finally does make it up through the ranks. I know when you say "brother/sister" you're talking in the abstract, but the problem is that intra-familial political divides are increasingly uncommon, I.e. Trump voters are unlikely to even be my third cousin. A recent precinct-by-precinct 2016 election map published by the NYT showed that it's likely I'd have to drive up to 30 miles to find a precinct that swung the other way, so they're not my neighbor either. Major protests, which remain one of the more productive tools of political communication because they require actual human effort, happen in large cities and end up preaching to the choir, effectively. The "Other Side" receives news of the worst elements of these protests in coverage designed to make them angry, /because that's what news coverage today is designed to do/. People read the news to get mad about something. They click on the story that's likely to have the juiciest arguments. And it's not the media's fault - yes they choose what to publish, but they have to maximize profits and therefore clicks. I think what people don't get, or keep forgetting or whatever, is that Trump won because of the Midwest. Yes, he carried a bunch of traditional red states that were going to vote for him anyway. But he won because he convinced swaths of workers in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that he would fight harder to keep their jobs around than his opponent. And he's basically stuck to that promise, whether or not what he's doing will actually help them in the long term, or if he even understands the basic tenets of global trade (as this article seems to insinuate he doesn't). These are the people who are being alienated by Democrats' efforts to unseat Trump at any cost, instead of pushing their own solution to the changing economic environment. What they'll likely say in 2020 is "so he's racist and sexist- but I still have a better chance with him than you." As much as I'm nervous about the country being run by somebody who appears to be incompetent, ego-driven and lacking long-term strategy, I'm more nervous about what the left's candidate will be in 2024. In other words, if Trump is the response to 8 years of Obama, what will the response to 8 years of Trump look like? Not sure where this is going so I'm gonna stop.

jarfil 8y ago
Just remember that you've always been at war with Eastasia, Eurasia always supported you... and Trump always promised to cut useless jobs. Saying otherwise is plusuntruth, I mean, fake news!
candiodari 8y ago
> I know when you say "brother/sister" you're talking in the abstract, but the problem is that intra-familial political divides are increasingly uncommon, I.e. Trump voters are unlikely to even be my third cousin. A recent precinct-by-precinct 2016 election map published by the NYT showed that it's likely I'd have to drive up to 30 miles to find a precinct that swung the other way, so they're not my neighbor either. In the vast majority of districts, even in California, Trump scored ~32% on average. That means, minimum he scored ~13% (ie. 1 in 8 voters), average 32%, and up to 80%. The above statement is bullshit. In your immediate environment, at the very least 13% of people voted for Trump, and very likely more. The odds that you don't know, have as a neighbor, or are family to one of them, seem very remote indeed. That anyone in California (who would like to remain there) lies about their political preference ... seems a much, MUCH more likely explanation. So, the real situation (again, with overwhelming likelihood), is 1) If you take the 8 houses around yours, one voted for Trump, absolute minimum. More likely 3 (in California, which would be the minimum). Out of your family, 1 in 8 voted for Trump, minimum (given that it will be skewed to the older ones, lets say, one of your parents, two of your grandparents seems a good guess). 2) These people clearly feel that you would react unreasonably if you found out, and that's why you don't know. Given how you describe Trump voters, I can certainly see why they feel this way. But of course, I get that it's very comforting for you to think like this, even if it's extremely unlikely to be true. By the way, wasn't the whole point of Democrat values that people can have whatever political views they want, and you should support them regardless ?

jarfil 8y ago

Just remember that you've always been at war with Eastasia, Eurasia always supported you... and Trump always promised to cut useless jobs. Saying otherwise is plusuntruth, I mean, fake news!

candiodari 8y ago

> I know when you say "brother/sister" you're talking in the abstract, but the problem is that intra-familial political divides are increasingly uncommon, I.e. Trump voters are unlikely to even be my third cousin. A recent precinct-by-precinct 2016 election map published by the NYT showed that it's likely I'd have to drive up to 30 miles to find a precinct that swung the other way, so they're not my neighbor either. In the vast majority of districts, even in California, Trump scored ~32% on average. That means, minimum he scored ~13% (ie. 1 in 8 voters), average 32%, and up to 80%. The above statement is bullshit. In your immediate environment, at the very least 13% of people voted for Trump, and very likely more. The odds that you don't know, have as a neighbor, or are family to one of them, seem very remote indeed. That anyone in California (who would like to remain there) lies about their political preference ... seems a much, MUCH more likely explanation. So, the real situation (again, with overwhelming likelihood), is 1) If you take the 8 houses around yours, one voted for Trump, absolute minimum. More likely 3 (in California, which would be the minimum). Out of your family, 1 in 8 voted for Trump, minimum (given that it will be skewed to the older ones, lets say, one of your parents, two of your grandparents seems a good guess). 2) These people clearly feel that you would react unreasonably if you found out, and that's why you don't know. Given how you describe Trump voters, I can certainly see why they feel this way. But of course, I get that it's very comforting for you to think like this, even if it's extremely unlikely to be true. By the way, wasn't the whole point of Democrat values that people can have whatever political views they want, and you should support them regardless ?