6 ms·

I would like to skip that rethoric here on HN whenever possible. You cannot possibly reduce 70M voters to that. I would like to explore the whys and hows of th

I would like to skip that rethoric here on HN whenever possible. You cannot possibly reduce 70M voters to that. I would like to explore the whys and hows of this apparent step backwards in so many things and why Trump was voted like he was and this reductionist view helps no one.

baxuz 2y ago
Ok, let's take the nuanced route. Not all are stupid. They're just more uneducated than ever, more conservative than ever, and idolizing dehumanization and evil totalitarians more than ever. The root of everything is social insecurity and bad education, caused by the USA actually not being a country for its people but for corporations and billionaires. I'm sorry but if you want a pathological liar, criminal and an overall horrible human being as a president of the (probably) most powerful and influential country in the world, you're just scum. Keep the downvotes coming.
- bogle 2y ago
  The inequality in a nation must have a huge effect on the nature of the people in that nation. That a treatise on inequality has won a Nobel prizes for economics would tend to support your thesis [1]. That another Nobel prize winner has also written on inequality should clinch it [2]. Fix inequality. [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2015/deaton/facts/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2015/dea... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stiglitz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stiglitz
- squigz 2y ago
  > I'm sorry but if you want a pathological liar, criminal and an overall horrible human being as a president of the (probably) most powerful and influential country in the world, you're just scum. Keep the downvotes coming. This is precisely what I'm talking about. You really think this comment is going to do anything but push even more people to vote for the right? Because why would they side with your camp when you just called them scum, because you don't understand their intentions for voting for him/the party? Which is extra unfortunate, because your comment up until that part was pretty good.
  - baxuz 2y ago
    I understand their intentions. I understand that these votes come out of a place of fear. They are unhappy and a lying demagogue is pointing them to a solution and fuels them with hate. [1] I also understand that they willfully choose to ignore massive red flags and are a bunch of hypocrites. These people have no shame and need to be shamed. It is the key emotion that leads to change and motivates to action. Sadly, due to electoral interference by totalitarian regimes, media outlets, Musk, and the internet in general, these people who would otherwise be ostracized by the community due to their antisocial behaviours have been normalized. Once you're set up like that, it's extremely difficult to get out of. I am afraid that the US has check-mated itself for at least an entire generation. The only thing that can drive a change is hope and basic human decency, ethics and morality. Which brings us back to people wilfully being the exact opposites of those values. We've had lying oppressive demagogues probably since the dawn of humanity. Most certainly in the last century. However, despite being afraid and frustrated, many people sided against such leaders. And this is why I consider not doing so a personal moral failing. [1] https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/11/trump-voters-like-lying-deception-feature/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/11/trump-voters-li...
    - squigz 2y ago
      > These people have no shame and need to be shamed. It is the key emotion that leads to change and motivates to action. > these people who would otherwise be ostracized by the community due to their antisocial behaviours have been normalized. The Internet (or global communication in general) does indeed mean shame won't work, because people can just ignore you and go find people who support them - whether that's Trump, Musk, or some randoms on the Internet is irrelevant. So let's double down on the shame thing, which has worked out so well lately? > The only thing that can drive a change is hope and basic human decency, ethics and morality. I think the crux of many social issues is that people have different ideas about what 'basic human decency, ethics and morality' even mean.
      - baxuz 2y ago
        > I think the crux of many social issues is that people have different ideas about what 'basic human decency, ethics and morality' even mean. Everybody knows that lying, stealing, swindling, rape, misogyny, selfishness, narcissism, taking pride in ignorance and probably a dozen more wouldn't make that list. Everybody. People vote for who they identify with as this gives legitimacy and backing to their own views and behaviours.
Tainnor 2y ago
You're right to point out that this kind of rhetoric isn't really in the spirit of HN. On the other hand, it's a fallacy to assume that there must be merit to an argument just because it's championed by a majority. I'm aware that it's politically suicidal to say that "most people are stupid", but I'm not a politician (I'm not even American) and I feel like "stupidity" should not a priori be ruled out as an explanation.
- karencarits 2y ago
  You would have to provide a better and more precise definition of "stupid" then, the word has a tendency to become circular
  - Tainnor 2y ago
    True, "stupid" is a very imprecise term. But my main point was merely that epistemically, there is no validity to something just because a majority is behind it.
  - bogle 2y ago
    Perhaps you could use the word "idiot" and refer to them as "idiots". The term has been used in a medico-legal context in the past to define a person's mental age. That there is a divide between the two parties and the average intellectual ability of their supporters is a well-known fact. I'd contest that this is less of an issue than their racism.
    - econ40432 2y ago
      Engineering students are actually more conservative than a group like communications majors. Are communications majors smarter?
      - bogle 2y ago
        I was moving the point away from a measure of smartness to one of racism. I do hope you haven't just damned all the other engineers on HN!
mort96 2y ago
[flagged]
TrackerFF 2y ago
Voters complain that the economy is bad. Trump promises to truly crater it, Musk stands behind him and promises said austerity. Voters still vote for Trump on the basis of economy. Are there any other ways to interpret it? Than that your average voter simply doesn't know the basics of econ?
- econ40432 2y ago
  What are the "basics of econ" in your view?
  - komali2 2y ago
    Tariffs increase prices, for example.
    - econ40432 2y ago
      I agree that tariffs aren't good econ policy. What are your views on grocery "price gouging"? Rent controls?
      - bagels 2y ago
        Tariffs are worse, but, all three aren't great.
      - komali2 2y ago
        Depends on implementation but in general we already don't have a free market, and if we did the American economy would collapse with the destruction of the entire farming sector and possibly the oil and gas sector, so I don't dismiss price controls on groceries or rent controls out of hand. Singapore has nationalized housing and is extraordinarily prosperous. Perhaps rent control isn't a good measure and we should simply do that instead.
- agent86 2y ago
  In interviews with people who are primarily voting on the economy a common response is that they feel things were economically better for them under Trump than they were under Biden. They want to go back to that, and they believe Trump can do it again.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
taylorius 2y ago
"this apparent step backwards" When optimising globally, sometimes a backward step is required to escape a local minima. It is possible that progressive politics has made a misstep, and that correcting that is the right thing to do.
- bogle 2y ago
  I think we can all see that correcting to oligarchy/authoritarianism/fascism never works out well for any nation. I don't see your suggestion of a correction working out here either.
unethical_ban 2y ago
Structure: We have a first pass the post voting system which only allows for two parties. We have this thing called the electoral college that further obfuscates the popular will. Both of these flawed systems disillusion millions of people every election cycle. People in non-swing states who have a minority opinion feel they have no voice, and often do not vote. People who have serious issue with the two major parties have no viable method to express their political will. --- Media: We have a highly polarized media environment where a large number of people only get their facts from highly biased sources. This can happen on "both sides" but it's particularly evident with conservative media such as Fox News. In this outlet, millions of people see an alternate reality to the one we live in. They don't see Trump's age-addled brain or his most offensive rhetoric. --- Policy: Many people seem to think that the Democratic party is responsible for the inflation of the past 4 years. Many people seem to think that Trump stands for lower taxes for the working class, in ways that won't hurt them. If we take Trump literally, he wants to deport many millions of people who live and work in this country peacefully, but do not have proper documentation. He wants to give Ukraine to Russia. I believe he is at best ambivalent to a national abortion ban. He doesn't show any support for combating climate change. I'm probably leaving some points out, it's late.
- vdqtp3 2y ago
  You mention that the EC obfuscates the popular will, but you ignore that it's a balance that gives a voice to many who would otherwise have none. Would you find a popular vote system that entirely ignores the votes of dozens of states in favor of just a few somehow carrying less obfuscation of the will of the people?
  - unethical_ban 2y ago
    Why do states matter more than people? And of all things to comment on, why the EC?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
imoverclocked 2y ago
I really wish your comment to be relevant. There is probably no single thing that you could ascribe to 70M voters except that they vote. However, there are plenty of themes that are touted amongst supporters, many (all?) of which are easily shown to be false. Also, his biggest benefactors are people with a lot of money or influence... which are definitely not most of those 70M voters. The man was convicted by a jury, impeached, and is known to have raped people. He is a known national security risk. ... the "critiques" are endless. IMHO, to say that there is a useful message to be sent by electing him is naive at best. The fact that nobody can seem to discern that message despite truly trying is also telling. Is the message, "people just want to watch the world burn?" Is it something else? As far as I can tell, nobody actually knows. Meanwhile, he has declared victory before the votes are actually finalized. Is the probability high? Yes. Does it undermine the process? Also, yes. Are there factors such as, "Kamala is a black female" at play? Almost definitely. Does Trump pander to groups that are covertly/overtly racist? Yes. Do all of his supporters understand/admit that? No.

baxuz 2y ago

Ok, let's take the nuanced route. Not all are stupid. They're just more uneducated than ever, more conservative than ever, and idolizing dehumanization and evil totalitarians more than ever. The root of everything is social insecurity and bad education, caused by the USA actually not being a country for its people but for corporations and billionaires. I'm sorry but if you want a pathological liar, criminal and an overall horrible human being as a president of the (probably) most powerful and influential country in the world, you're just scum. Keep the downvotes coming.

bogle 2y ago
The inequality in a nation must have a huge effect on the nature of the people in that nation. That a treatise on inequality has won a Nobel prizes for economics would tend to support your thesis [1]. That another Nobel prize winner has also written on inequality should clinch it [2]. Fix inequality. [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2015/deaton/facts/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2015/dea... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stiglitz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stiglitz
squigz 2y ago
> I'm sorry but if you want a pathological liar, criminal and an overall horrible human being as a president of the (probably) most powerful and influential country in the world, you're just scum. Keep the downvotes coming. This is precisely what I'm talking about. You really think this comment is going to do anything but push even more people to vote for the right? Because why would they side with your camp when you just called them scum, because you don't understand their intentions for voting for him/the party? Which is extra unfortunate, because your comment up until that part was pretty good.
- baxuz 2y ago
  I understand their intentions. I understand that these votes come out of a place of fear. They are unhappy and a lying demagogue is pointing them to a solution and fuels them with hate. [1] I also understand that they willfully choose to ignore massive red flags and are a bunch of hypocrites. These people have no shame and need to be shamed. It is the key emotion that leads to change and motivates to action. Sadly, due to electoral interference by totalitarian regimes, media outlets, Musk, and the internet in general, these people who would otherwise be ostracized by the community due to their antisocial behaviours have been normalized. Once you're set up like that, it's extremely difficult to get out of. I am afraid that the US has check-mated itself for at least an entire generation. The only thing that can drive a change is hope and basic human decency, ethics and morality. Which brings us back to people wilfully being the exact opposites of those values. We've had lying oppressive demagogues probably since the dawn of humanity. Most certainly in the last century. However, despite being afraid and frustrated, many people sided against such leaders. And this is why I consider not doing so a personal moral failing. [1] https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/11/trump-voters-like-lying-deception-feature/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/11/trump-voters-li...
  - squigz 2y ago
    > These people have no shame and need to be shamed. It is the key emotion that leads to change and motivates to action. > these people who would otherwise be ostracized by the community due to their antisocial behaviours have been normalized. The Internet (or global communication in general) does indeed mean shame won't work, because people can just ignore you and go find people who support them - whether that's Trump, Musk, or some randoms on the Internet is irrelevant. So let's double down on the shame thing, which has worked out so well lately? > The only thing that can drive a change is hope and basic human decency, ethics and morality. I think the crux of many social issues is that people have different ideas about what 'basic human decency, ethics and morality' even mean.
    - baxuz 2y ago
      > I think the crux of many social issues is that people have different ideas about what 'basic human decency, ethics and morality' even mean. Everybody knows that lying, stealing, swindling, rape, misogyny, selfishness, narcissism, taking pride in ignorance and probably a dozen more wouldn't make that list. Everybody. People vote for who they identify with as this gives legitimacy and backing to their own views and behaviours.

Tainnor 2y ago

You're right to point out that this kind of rhetoric isn't really in the spirit of HN. On the other hand, it's a fallacy to assume that there must be merit to an argument just because it's championed by a majority. I'm aware that it's politically suicidal to say that "most people are stupid", but I'm not a politician (I'm not even American) and I feel like "stupidity" should not a priori be ruled out as an explanation.

karencarits 2y ago
You would have to provide a better and more precise definition of "stupid" then, the word has a tendency to become circular
- Tainnor 2y ago
  True, "stupid" is a very imprecise term. But my main point was merely that epistemically, there is no validity to something just because a majority is behind it.
- bogle 2y ago
  Perhaps you could use the word "idiot" and refer to them as "idiots". The term has been used in a medico-legal context in the past to define a person's mental age. That there is a divide between the two parties and the average intellectual ability of their supporters is a well-known fact. I'd contest that this is less of an issue than their racism.
  - econ40432 2y ago
    Engineering students are actually more conservative than a group like communications majors. Are communications majors smarter?
    - bogle 2y ago
      I was moving the point away from a measure of smartness to one of racism. I do hope you haven't just damned all the other engineers on HN!

mort96 2y ago

[flagged]

TrackerFF 2y ago

Voters complain that the economy is bad. Trump promises to truly crater it, Musk stands behind him and promises said austerity. Voters still vote for Trump on the basis of economy. Are there any other ways to interpret it? Than that your average voter simply doesn't know the basics of econ?

econ40432 2y ago
What are the "basics of econ" in your view?
- komali2 2y ago
  Tariffs increase prices, for example.
  - econ40432 2y ago
    I agree that tariffs aren't good econ policy. What are your views on grocery "price gouging"? Rent controls?
    - bagels 2y ago
      Tariffs are worse, but, all three aren't great.
    - komali2 2y ago
      Depends on implementation but in general we already don't have a free market, and if we did the American economy would collapse with the destruction of the entire farming sector and possibly the oil and gas sector, so I don't dismiss price controls on groceries or rent controls out of hand. Singapore has nationalized housing and is extraordinarily prosperous. Perhaps rent control isn't a good measure and we should simply do that instead.
agent86 2y ago
In interviews with people who are primarily voting on the economy a common response is that they feel things were economically better for them under Trump than they were under Biden. They want to go back to that, and they believe Trump can do it again.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

taylorius 2y ago

"this apparent step backwards" When optimising globally, sometimes a backward step is required to escape a local minima. It is possible that progressive politics has made a misstep, and that correcting that is the right thing to do.

bogle 2y ago
I think we can all see that correcting to oligarchy/authoritarianism/fascism never works out well for any nation. I don't see your suggestion of a correction working out here either.

unethical_ban 2y ago

Structure: We have a first pass the post voting system which only allows for two parties. We have this thing called the electoral college that further obfuscates the popular will. Both of these flawed systems disillusion millions of people every election cycle. People in non-swing states who have a minority opinion feel they have no voice, and often do not vote. People who have serious issue with the two major parties have no viable method to express their political will. --- Media: We have a highly polarized media environment where a large number of people only get their facts from highly biased sources. This can happen on "both sides" but it's particularly evident with conservative media such as Fox News. In this outlet, millions of people see an alternate reality to the one we live in. They don't see Trump's age-addled brain or his most offensive rhetoric. --- Policy: Many people seem to think that the Democratic party is responsible for the inflation of the past 4 years. Many people seem to think that Trump stands for lower taxes for the working class, in ways that won't hurt them. If we take Trump literally, he wants to deport many millions of people who live and work in this country peacefully, but do not have proper documentation. He wants to give Ukraine to Russia. I believe he is at best ambivalent to a national abortion ban. He doesn't show any support for combating climate change. I'm probably leaving some points out, it's late.

vdqtp3 2y ago
You mention that the EC obfuscates the popular will, but you ignore that it's a balance that gives a voice to many who would otherwise have none. Would you find a popular vote system that entirely ignores the votes of dozens of states in favor of just a few somehow carrying less obfuscation of the will of the people?
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  Why do states matter more than people? And of all things to comment on, why the EC?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

imoverclocked 2y ago

I really wish your comment to be relevant. There is probably no single thing that you could ascribe to 70M voters except that they vote. However, there are plenty of themes that are touted amongst supporters, many (all?) of which are easily shown to be false. Also, his biggest benefactors are people with a lot of money or influence... which are definitely not most of those 70M voters. The man was convicted by a jury, impeached, and is known to have raped people. He is a known national security risk. ... the "critiques" are endless. IMHO, to say that there is a useful message to be sent by electing him is naive at best. The fact that nobody can seem to discern that message despite truly trying is also telling. Is the message, "people just want to watch the world burn?" Is it something else? As far as I can tell, nobody actually knows. Meanwhile, he has declared victory before the votes are actually finalized. Is the probability high? Yes. Does it undermine the process? Also, yes. Are there factors such as, "Kamala is a black female" at play? Almost definitely. Does Trump pander to groups that are covertly/overtly racist? Yes. Do all of his supporters understand/admit that? No.