Opinion Identity Politics Won: America's Divide is Demographic, Not Ideological

[franklinstower]

Wedge issues like abortion and gun control need to be put to direct vote as they are one of the main tools republicans use to get their voters to vote against their own interests..


As a christian who votes left I know a ton who would vote left were those issues not up for grabs.

 

[58miles]

Wedge issues like abortion and gun control need to be put to direct vote as they are one of the main tools republicans use to get their voters to vote against their own interests..


As a chritian who votes left I know a ton who would vote left were those issues not up for grabs.

Wedge issues is how Republicans have been winning elections since Nixon, even if you made abortion illegal nationwide tomorrow, even if the gun control issue disappeared, the Republicans would just come up with another wedge issue. It's the same with the immigration issue, if they built the wall and not one more illegal immigrant ever came to this country again, they would just move on to legal immigrants from so called "sh*thole countries.

 

[NoDak]

First off, you are full of shit. Half of white collar jobs mostly consist of reading and writing emails, wasting time in meetings, fiddling in excel, and writing high school level content.

You have doctors, scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and other specialist careers in your mind and you are deluded into thinking that they are the vast majority of white collar workers.

Have you ever worked in an office building for a medium to large sized company? Your posts makes me think not.

The wages could definitely be better, but this isn't welfare recipient money and employers aren't feeling the Bern publicly. Are Walmart superstores and Amazon fullfilment centers the first things that come to mind for people when "blue collar" is mentioned? I tend to think of it as upskilled construction and manufacturing work, first and foremost.

 

[all caps]

Wedge issues like abortion and gun control need to be put to direct vote as they are one of the main tools republicans use to get their voters to vote against their own interests..


As a chritian who votes left I know a ton who would vote left were those issues not up for grabs.

If the left/right werent ultimately the same thing playing a game at our expense, wouldnt the left just vow to protect 1st and 2nd amendment rights and own the country outright? This is all just a game.

 

[NoDak]

Awesome post.

The funny thing too, when you really listen to the music and watch the movies, they speak of the same shit. Same struggles. Same everything, but skin color.

lol white boys love this shit. It's actually fucking fire too given the state of the genre the last half decade. Kind of surreal.

 

[NoDak]

@sniper What kind of an absolute cretin doesn't fuck with Miles Davis, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Wonder, James Brown, Gladys Knight or Prince?! I blast all of that shit inbetween and back-to-back with thrash and black metal songs. You can't hear this without the spoken intro. Imagine making this song in 1967. :'(

 

[all caps]

@sniper What kind of an absolute cretin doesn't fuck with Miles Davis, Jimi Hendrix, Stevie Wonder, James Brown, Gladys Knight or Prince?! I blast all of that shit inbetween and back-to-back with thrash and black metal songs. You can't hear this without the spoken intro. Imagine making this song in 1967. :'(

You should post some music in the what are you listening to thread! Weve got the same taste

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

National median household income: $55,322
Districts earning less: R+35
Districts earning more: D+71

That's interesting because Trump won with people that earned more.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rump-skewed-wealthier/?utm_term=.398436b4517d
That is, if Hillary won in wealthier counties with poorer people she won in the most unequal areas. Is it that surprising?
Liberal areas have really rich people and really poor people servicing them, mostly minorities. Think California, you have Hollywood and Silicon Valley and latino maids and cooks.
The way the data is presented it makes it look like Trump voters are poor and dumb while that's not exactly the case. The poorest are obviously voting for the left.

 

[NoDak]

That's interesting because Trump won with people that earned more.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rump-skewed-wealthier/?utm_term=.398436b4517d
That is, if Hillary won in wealthier counties with poorer people she won in the most unequal areas. Is it that surprising?
Liberal areas have really rich people and really poor people servicing them, mostly minorities. Think California, you have Hollywood and Silicon Valley and latino maids and cooks.
The way the data is presented it makes it look like Trump voters are poor and dumb while that's not exactly the case. The poorest are obviously voting for the left.

The establishment here isn't trying to hear that shit, man.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-corporations-white-working-class.html

WICHITA, Kansas — Is the white working class an angry, backward monolith — some 90 million white Americans without college degrees, all standing around in factories and fields thumping their dirty hands with baseball bats? You might think so after two years of media fixation on this version of the aggrieved laborer: male, caucasian, conservative, racist, sexist.

This account does white supremacy a great service in several ways: It ignores workers of color, along with humane, even progressive white workers. It allows college-educated white liberals to signal superior virtue while denying the sins of their own place and class. And it conceals well-informed, formally educated white conservatives — from middle-class suburbia to the highest ranks of influence — who voted for Donald Trump in legions.

Much has been made of the white working class’s political shift to the right. But Mr. Trump won among white college graduates, too. According to those same exit polls trotted out to blame the “uneducated,” 49 percent of whites with degrees picked Mr. Trump, while 45 percent picked Hillary Clinton (among them, support for Mr. Trump was stronger among men). Such Americans hardly “vote against their own best interest.” Media coverage suggests that economically distressed whiteness elected Mr. Trump, when in fact it was just plain whiteness.

 

[luckyshot]

The establishment here isn't trying to hear that shit, man.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/19/opinion/trump-corporations-white-working-class.html

WICHITA, Kansas — Is the white working class an angry, backward monolith — some 90 million white Americans without college degrees, all standing around in factories and fields thumping their dirty hands with baseball bats? You might think so after two years of media fixation on this version of the aggrieved laborer: male, caucasian, conservative, racist, sexist.

This account does white supremacy a great service in several ways: It ignores workers of color, along with humane, even progressive white workers. It allows college-educated white liberals to signal superior virtue while denying the sins of their own place and class. And it conceals well-informed, formally educated white conservatives — from middle-class suburbia to the highest ranks of influence — who voted for Donald Trump in legions.

Much has been made of the white working class’s political shift to the right. But Mr. Trump won among white college graduates, too. According to those same exit polls trotted out to blame the “uneducated,” 49 percent of whites with degrees picked Mr. Trump, while 45 percent picked Hillary Clinton (among them, support for Mr. Trump was stronger among men). Such Americans hardly “vote against their own best interest.” Media coverage suggests that economically distressed whiteness elected Mr. Trump, when in fact it was just plain whiteness.

That's interesting because Trump won with people that earned more.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rump-skewed-wealthier/?utm_term=.398436b4517d
That is, if Hillary won in wealthier counties with poorer people she won in the most unequal areas. Is it that surprising?
Liberal areas have really rich people and really poor people servicing them, mostly minorities. Think California, you have Hollywood and Silicon Valley and latino maids and cooks.
The way the data is presented it makes it look like Trump voters are poor and dumb while that's not exactly the case. The poorest are obviously voting for the left.

The OP is factual. It shows several variables. Clearly race and native status are stronger predictors than education or income. That’s reflected in the data.

 

[Trotsky]

Stuff you can learn on youtube, if we're being honest with ourselves. An investment banker can learn how to fix his Mustang engine from youtube, order the parts and do it himself. A mechanic can't get hired as an investment banker though, even if he puts hours of youtube research on his resume.

Wait, though. That's asymmetrical. An investment banker couldn't get hired as a mechanic based on having YouTube research on his resume. And a mechanic could handle his own investments using internet research, and if I recall correctly investment professionals are only slightly more effective than random guessing when it comes to assembling portfolios.

I think the meaningful distinction in blue collar work is the absence of a four-year degree prerequisite. It's hard to tie it to specific industry (steel, oil, coal, manufacturing, automotive) anymore.

 

[IGIT]

hi PrinceofPain,

It's called 'tacit knowledge', it comes from doing, rather than simply studying, and it is pretty damned important, especially in encouraging space for innovativeness in organisational structures.

what does this mean, though? are you talking about internships or something?

i don't know what field you're in, my friend - but (i'm thinking mostly of my own family members, uncles and nephews and stuff) my uncle works for NASA...my Dad a scientist at DOW and then Hoechst...my mom a chemist at Merck...my brother is attending medical school shortly...one my cousins, a professor at Ohio State, the other is a pediatrician. those goddamn asians, lol.

don't you think its better that they learned their trade and got their Phds before "doing?"

if so, could you explain what you are talking about? because i don't understand what you are trying to say.

While education is important, there is such a thing as overspecialisation, and it tends to stifle innovation. It's hard to think outside the box when one has never seen outside of the box. And graduates tend to be sheltered and ignorant on everything outside of their narrow fields, with an over-reliance on theory that they've never really seen put into real-world practice.

again, what does any of this mean?

are you saying that a 24 year old attending NYU Law or Harvard Business School, or Princeton, for example, has a more insular and sheltered life than the 24 year old rural fellow who lives out in Oklahoma with his HS diploma?

how did you come to that sort of conclusion, PrinceofPain?

- IGIT

 

[Trotsky]

That's interesting because Trump won with people that earned more.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rump-skewed-wealthier/?utm_term=.398436b4517d
That is, if Hillary won in wealthier counties with poorer people she won in the most unequal areas. Is it that surprising?
Liberal areas have really rich people and really poor people servicing them, mostly minorities. Think California, you have Hollywood and Silicon Valley and latino maids and cooks.
The way the data is presented it makes it look like Trump voters are poor and dumb while that's not exactly the case. The poorest are obviously voting for the left.

Sorry @luckyshot, but I have to side with the opposition on this one in saying that the cited data on median earning is spurious and only revelatory if you dig deeper into it like he started to here.

Race is a very strong predictor and exposure to other races is a strong predictor as well. Education is correlative, but I wouldn't call it a strong predictor. Income does not predict in the way that the OP suggests.

 

[franklinstower]

If the left/right werent ultimately the same thing playing a game at our expense, wouldnt the left just vow to protect 1st and 2nd amendment rights and own the country outright? This is all just a game.

I am not of the opinion that the left wants to infringe on first or second amendment rights in significant ways. I think the right frames it that way to win a political battle. I think the right's characterization of the left on these matters is an example of how they use wedge issues to lie to people and divide them.

I do not believe the left would take away anyone's guns were they to hold both houses and the presidency.

I think a direct vote on certain issues is the best way to end wedge issues and then the people would actually vote left-- progressive left even.

 

[NoDak]

Princeton, for example, has a more insular and sheltered life

Hiya IGIT,

What do you think about the Institute for Advanced Study?



Richard Feynman had some harsh words.

"When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK?

So they don't get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they're not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come. Nothing happens because there's not enough real activity and challenge: You're not in contact with the experimental guys. You don't have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!"

- NoDak Richard Feynman

 

[IGIT]

Hiya IGIT,

What do you think about the Institute for Advanced Study?



Richard Feynman had some harsh words.

"When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK?

So they don't get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they're not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come. Nothing happens because there's not enough real activity and challenge: You're not in contact with the experimental guys. You don't have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!"

- NoDak Richard Feynman

hi Nodak,

i think that the academics who've spent time there as faculty or members have amassed 33 Nobel Laureates, 42 of the 60 Fields Medalists, and 17 of the 19 Abel Prize Laureates.

so, per the poster i responding to, they seem like a highly, highly specialized lot, and therefore, are probably really dumb in anything not related to their fields.

- IGIT

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

are you saying that a 24 year old attending NYU Law or Harvard Business School, or Princeton, for example, has a more insular and sheltered life than the 24 year old rural fellow who lives out in Oklahoma with his HS diploma?

how did you come to that sort of conclusion, PrinceofPain?

- IGIT

It will depend on the person but both can be insular and sheltered. One only knows rich well educated people and the other only poor people.

Sorry @luckyshot, but I have to side with the opposition on this one in saying that the cited data on median earning is spurious and only revelatory if you dig deeper into it like he started to here.

Race is a very strong predictor and exposure to other races is a strong predictor as well. Education is correlative, but I wouldn't call it a strong predictor. Income does not predict in the way that the OP suggests.

It's almost like some people are trying to blame it on the poor. Even when the rich wins it was because of the goddamn poor. Rich people are woke and compassionate and vote for higher taxes and wealth redistribution.

 

[IGIT]

hi Cuauhtemoc,

It will depend on the person but both can be insular and sheltered. One only knows rich well educated people and the other only poor people.

i lived across the street from NYU Law School when i attended the college (i went to Tisch School of the Arts) and was friends with a few who were toiling away there. at that very moment in time, a few of the people i knew at the law school were dead broke. i'm sure they went on to riches, but at the time, they're just law school students attending a school that they leveraged their future to attend.

what they were exposed to, though, were black people. and asian people. and gay people. and lesbians. and jewish people. and rich people. some really rich people...and some incredibly poor people (they seem poorer at times, due to the contrast that's on regular display between the opulence of the ubber rich and the ordinary and the poor).

the other 24 year old guy, the rural one...working some salt-of-the-earth job moving dirt or working at the local auto body shop, in the middle of snow white Oklahoma....lol. its that guy who seems pretty sheltered to me. i mean, doesn't that sound even a little bit insular to you?

good to talk to you, my friend.

- IGIT

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

hi Cuauhtemoc,



i lived across the street from NYU Law School when i attended the college (i went to Tisch School of the Arts) and was friends with a few who were toiling away there. at that very moment in time, a few of the people i knew at the law school were dead broke. i'm sure they went on to riches, but at the time, they're just law school students attending a school that they leveraged their future to attend.

what they were exposed to, though, were black people. and asian people. and gay people. and lesbians. and jewish people. and rich people. some really rich people...and some incredibly poor people (they seem poorer at times, due to the contrast that's on regular display between the opulence of the ubber rich and the ordinary and the poor).

the other 24 year old guy, the rural one...working some salt-of-the-earth job moving dirt or working at the local auto body shop, in the middle of snow white Oklahoma....lol. its that guy who seems pretty sheltered to me. i mean, doesn't that sound even a little bit insular to you?

good to talk to you, my friend.

- IGIT

If his job was moving dirt in Oklahoma sure, but a white working class guy in NY would be exposed to everything you mentioned and in much different situations, it's one thing to met a few nice black guys at your law school, it's completely different if he is a cop and actually has to work in a black area.
Maybe the white rural guy went to Iraq too and met muslims that actually wanted to kill him and not just some foreign student that happens to wear a hijab.

 

[Higus]

Did you just agree that a stat can be over 40% off and still be within margins of error?!? What the fuck point is there in a poll if a stat can be wrong by 48%? Or perhaps the two of you are trying to prove my point without realizing it.

Polls are useless and you say a poll CAN be wrong by 48% and still be viewed as correct...in other words, every poll in the OP can actually be the opposite of what they show and 70% of the people are AGAINST those things instead of for it. Derp. Derp ditty day!

You don’t know what a margin of error is if you think it’s 40% in this case.
I’ll try to explain tomorrow.