Trump won because of racial resentment (studies find)

[Amerikuracana]

You can't have every group besides white, straight, males be "protected" from being harassed at and fired etc.. Do you get that?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Lol.
Better keep up the trend of bitching about whites for no reason, then; that'll fix the racial resentment.

It's interesting how a lot of people seem to be completely unable to grasp the idea of wanting to know the truth absent any kind of political agenda. One would think that the existence and weaponization of white racial resentment would be an issue that is of interest even to people who believe it is justified or that it can be mobilized to achieve unrelated policy ends. But instead, there's a movement to make the subject taboo.

 

[Gandhi]

Of course racism played a part but I don't see how you can conclude from the sort of correlations in that study that economic insecurity did not play a sig role as well.

So what if there was some greater tendency for whites to swing liberal the poorer they got, or the more unemployed they were, the fact remains that poor whites voted predominately for trump. It also remain a fact that many rust belt states swung from blue to red.

 

[DickSarp]

"I don’t think you can change the minds of many Trump supporters. Winning fact-driven discussions about the man and the issues will likely make them more defensive. Their connection with their leader is not rational but emotional. It’s based on fear that he fans and anger that he channels. The ideas in the campaign just float around in the Atmosphere of Indifference, quite ignored by his followers. That’s why Trump can contradict himself so often, and say so many outrageous things, with no effect on his followers’ support. He is likely more vulnerable to emotional backlash among his followers when he does something horrendous than to intellectual rejection when he lies or says something stupid."
--Dr. Robert Altemeyer

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

Good lord. You have no idea.

You must be a right wing sycophant. How do I know? Your points, they make no sense.

If you don't understand those two points, go back to the heavyweights.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

But instead, there's a movement to make the subject taboo.

Could you elaborate on how you drew this conclusion? It appears to be a stupid one, in the context of my half-hearted dismissal.
Specifically, could you point out how I am treating the subject as though it were taboo?

 

[Gandhi]

Is it ok to mention a resurgence of white identity politics as a motivator for natural conservatives if I am an alt righter aka breitbart aka Steve bannon? Is it only taboo when liberals bring it up?

 

[Throttlehead]

Yeah, cuckyshot (@luckyshot) has never recovered.

And you will likely never recover from the Trump moneyshot.

 

[Phelly2]

You know what would correct BLM pretty fast or stop them in their tracks? If a few cops would turn in the bad ones or at the very least tell the truth when a bad shooting or set up happens. You know 100% those cops exist, why dont you turn them in and forget your stupid little code? I think its been 40 years since Scerpico happened, so we all must think there are no bad cops.

I know bad/corrupt/racist people exist, and some of them are cops. But your post makes it sound like I know who they are. I don't. You think I want these people representing me?

If you do the proper thing once in a while, why would any race or person have an issue with police.

Really? Earlier I brought up Michael Brown. The officer who shot him did everything right (according to the evidence) but he was still chased out of his job, out of his town and essentially into hiding.

Criminals will ALWAYS hate cops, even the perfect ones. And they will always claim victim status, too. And there will always be that element who takes their side regardless of what the cop did right or wrong. (And democrats like Hillary pander to these people, which is one of the reasons Trump won)

Am I saying all cops are bad, absolutely not, but PLEASE weed out the bad ones, and the public cant do that. So, those few bad ones paint a lot of you, I can see why some people have issue with it.
They proved there was systemic race issues with police in Ferguson if Im not mistaken, maybe Im wrong but thought I read it after they had an investigation. Taking on that job is a hard job, but with certain laws and the way some LEO act, there is systemic problems in some areas, pretty sure you cant deny that.

I'm sure some areas are more racist than others, but I don't think it's as widespread a problem as people make it out to be. I'm more than happy to call for changes when there is proof of racism, but I have a problem with assuming racism with flimsy evidence because I, myself, have been called racist on numerous occasions when I know for a fact that race had nothing to do with my decisions.

"Do you know why I pulled you over?"
*doesn't even look at me, just points to his skin*

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

And you will likely never recover from the Trump moneyshot.

 

[WTF2008]

The past year of research has made it very clear: Trump won because of racial resentment

More than a year after President Donald Trump won the election, there are still some questions about what drove him to victory: Was it genuine anxiety about the state of the economy? Or was it racism and racial resentment?

Over at the Washington Post, researchers Matthew Fowler, Vladimir Medenica, and Cathy Cohen have published the results of a new survey on these questions, with a focus on the 41 percent of white millennials who voted for Trump and the sense of “white vulnerability” that motivated them. The conclusion is very clear:

Contrary to what some have suggested, white millennial Trump voters were not in more economically precarious situations than non-Trump voters. Fully 86 percent of them reported being employed, a rate similar to non-Trump voters; and they were 14 percent less likely to be low income than white voters who did not support Trump. Employment and income were not significantly related to that sense of white vulnerability.

So what was? Racial resentment.

Even when controlling for partisanship, ideology, region and a host of other factors, white millennials fit Michael Tesler’s analysis, explored here. As he put it, economic anxiety isn’t driving racial resentment; rather, racial resentment is driving economic anxiety. We found, as he has in a larger population, that racial resentment is the biggest predictor of white vulnerability among white millennials. Economic variables like education, income and employment made a negligible difference.


Read link above for full article.

Fucking ridiculous.

 

[Trotsky]

Didn't bother to read the race-bating OP. But I'm curious, does the resentment stem from all the white/male vilification over the last number of years? After that I'm confused because resentment usualy stems from losing out. And that's the opposite of privilege.

Of course: why would you read empirical studies that are contrary to what you wish to believe?

Also, it's pretty clear that the "resentment" stems from, mostly at least, political pandering to tribalist vulnerabilities and some note of last place aversion. The moment that Barack Obama was elected, there was dog whistling....hell, not even dog whistling-- direct appeals to white nationalism and white vulnerability with no substantive basis. Anyone remember Glenn Beck in 2010 saying Obama deeply resented white people....as evidenced by the fucking Affordable Care Act?

Because he raised taxes on the top 1% to provide subsidized healthcare to needy Americans.

I highly, highly doubt there are reasonable and well-informed white/male persons who would characterize their identity as "vilified," let alone to the extent that they would vote for a moron who would torpedo basically all demographic interests besides the economic interests of a very, very tiny subset of citizens.

 

[Phelly2]

Of course: why would you read empirical studies that are contrary to what you wish to believe?

Would you bother to read an "empirical" study conducted by Breitbart and being reported by Fox News making an outlandish claim that vindicates the alt right?

Because that's basically what this is.

 

[WTF2008]

"I don’t think you can change the minds of many Trump supporters. Winning fact-driven discussions about the man and the issues will likely make them more defensive. Their connection with their leader is not rational but emotional. It’s based on fear that he fans and anger that he channels. The ideas in the campaign just float around in the Atmosphere of Indifference, quite ignored by his followers. That’s why Trump can contradict himself so often, and say so many outrageous things, with no effect on his followers’ support. He is likely more vulnerable to emotional backlash among his followers when he does something horrendous than to intellectual rejection when he lies or says something stupid."
--Dr. Robert Altemeyer

'Fact driven'?
Youre delusional.

You stated no facts. How the fuck do you argue with that?

Trump has lowered unemployment, started paying off the deficit, set records in the stock market and is starting to fix health care.

Who's post had more 'facts'?

 

[WTF2008]

I don't care if people think he's stupid and tweets dumb shit.

 

[WTF2008]

It's interesting how a lot of people seem to be completely unable to grasp the idea of wanting to know the truth absent any kind of political agenda. One would think that the existence and weaponization of white racial resentment would be an issue that is of interest even to people who believe it is justified or that it can be mobilized to achieve unrelated policy ends. But instead, there's a movement to make the subject taboo.

This is just a ridiculous set of words.
Where are you seeing this 'weaponization of white racial resentment'?

Things are getting better and you want them to be worse.

 

[splendica]

"I don’t think you can change the minds of many Trump supporters. Winning fact-driven discussions about the man and the issues will likely make them more defensive. Their connection with their leader is not rational but emotional. It’s based on fear that he fans and anger that he channels. The ideas in the campaign just float around in the Atmosphere of Indifference, quite ignored by his followers. That’s why Trump can contradict himself so often, and say so many outrageous things, with no effect on his followers’ support. He is likely more vulnerable to emotional backlash among his followers when he does something horrendous than to intellectual rejection when he lies or says something stupid."
--Dr. Robert Altemeyer

How about many identifying clear morality concerns with Hillary (and Democrats generally), like:

- Hillary giving full, unadulterated support to late term abortion using the abused phrase "a woman's body" when refering to the fetus.

- Hillary doing almost nothing to attract a Christian vote (regardless of skin color), ignoring a supposed majority population. And no, having some loose association to a Lutheran background before you left home at 17 en route to a career in politics doesn't count for squat. Its like Hitler being associated with Catholicism because he was baptized as a baby into it. Ridiculous association.

- Hillary's clear support of all things related to divisive identity politics (in its many forms); populism.

- Hillary's inability to clearly address and call out Islamic extremism until pressed during debates to a make a weak-assed, unpresidential "so as not to inflame" type answer.

- Hillary pretty much declaring war on Russia during the presidential debates, attempting to conjure up Cold War emotion by publicly tearing at the still-healing scab from the Kennedy, Nixon, Carter eras and beyond.

- the rise of violent left-wing political movements in BLM and ANTIFA (under the guise of social justice) supported and afforded growth by Hillary and prior to her campaign, an openly vocal Democrat POTUS/supporter of said movements in Barack Obama; who went so far as to say that "of course all lives matter, we already know that" and then to distinguish Black Lives Matter above the rest (this, after hostile vitriolic anti-police, anti-white rioting - wrongly called civil protesting) everywhere across the US, reminding us of the crusades frequently after Islamic terrorist attacks (during a prayer breakfast speech I believe even), and even going so far as to lecture the Dallas PD during a memorial for 5 of their own slain officers.

- integrity scandals dogging Hillary, including, Bill meeting on the Tarmac with Loretta Lynch while Hillary was still under federal investigation, email server bleaching, Huma Abedin access to high level intelligence through Clinton's private email account, debate questions leaked by CNN political analyst during primary debates with Sanders, the massive growth of her net worth/the Clinton foundation, Soros support etc.

 

[Ichibanner]

The article is bullshit. Obama got a higher percentage of white votes then Jimmy Carter or Walter Mondale. The white vote counts as less of a percentage of overall electorate votes each election cycle as immigration and changes in family size effect the demographics. To think that white people said "I'm voting for the whitest candidate" or some other bullshit do to "racial resentment" is garbage. Less whites voted for Obama the second go around. One look at your paycheck could tell you why. I lost $26,000+ in income over 8 years of Obama. Whether I pin that on him or the Dem Congress that started under Bush doesn't matter to me. I took a Bush era pay stub and one from the Obama era and calculated a big loss of money over 8 years. Hmmm.....do I want more of that?

The choices were a bunch of Republicans who didn't stand a chance or the Dems opposing them. We had Bernie who owns multiple properties, seems to play down his income and status, and lectures working class people on the evil "rich" while he has been a useless politician longer than most Sherdoggers have been alive. The Democratic party spiked him on his head as a sacrifice to Hillary. Hillary lied about taking sniper fire, being named after Sir Edward Hillary, not having classified e-mails on her server, etc etc and is tied to so many dirty scandals a truckload of bleach can't get her clean. Add in footage of her laughing about defending a child rapist and footage of her having seizures or such and confidence was low.

Then there's Trump. A loud-mouthed egotist who was beloved as a rich Democrat from New York. he partied with Mike Tyson and grabbed women by the PU$$Y. He flips the script and hijacks the Conversative bus. He tells Americans the he'll bring back jobs, fight illegal immigration, take on ISIS, tackle gang crime, cure cancer, give us all unicorns, etc etc and he has never held public office. Do we have to wonder why he won? It was sh*t soup, sh*t sandwich, or sh*t bisque. Nobody had tried the bisque before so they voted for it.

 

[RIPWarrior]

Certainly, I agree the wording of some of the questions may be problematic, 1but when you ignore them and consider the better ones, the results are quite interesting.
Someone linked to the actual survey, here,
http://genforwardsurvey.com/assets/uploads/2017/10/September-2017-Final-Toplines.pdf
It demonstrates a weird cognitive dissonance in their thinking. A lot of them said they thought racism was the biggest issue of the day, but then a similar number said they spent most of their time with a mix of people and were optimistic about their own futures. 2It shows what happens when people get their news from social media. They can't reconcile their totally normal lives with all the fear-mongering they encounter online so they settle for assuming everything else is going to shit but their little pocket of existence is OK. 3What they don't realize is that everyone else around them also thinks things are going to shit everywhere but where they are so they don't realize the things they're afraid of aren't such large issues as they have been led to believe.

4That is not to minimize the fact that the number of white supremacists is on the rise, but the violent ones are still the lunatic fringe, same as antifa.

1Which questions are you talking about?

2How the fuck does it show that? Twisted progressives are actually trying to downplay or discredit what is posted on the internet. This clown is assuming these people get their news online and from racist sources. The damage CNN and the others have done is clearly visible.

Just because everything is ok in your little diversified pocket of progress doesn't mean it is everywhere else.

3This is some hardcore progressive delusion.

4Oh yeah you know for sure? There must be millions just waiting for the order to strike! We must do everything we can to turn white people into pathetic and loathsome creatures like @Rebound59 and friends.

 

[Andy Capp]

1Which questions are you talking about?

2How the fuck does it show that? Twisted progressives are actually trying to downplay or discredit what is posted on the internet. This clown is assuming these people get their news online and from racist sources. The damage CNN and the others have done is clearly visible.

Just because everything is ok in your little diversified pocket of progress doesn't mean it is everywhere else.

3This is some hardcore progressive delusion.

4Oh yeah you know for sure? There must be millions just waiting for the order to strike! We must do everything we can to turn white people into pathetic and loathsome creatures like @Rebound59 and friends.

LOL I don't know what drugs you're on but I want some. Unless they turn me into a sad afraid whiner too.