Like
many others, I was surprised by the recent U.S. presidential election results.
I read a fair bit of news and would consider myself abreast of the going’s-on
in and around the world—from the New York Times, the Washington Post, to
Breitbart and the National Review. I’ll read liberals, socialists,
conservatives, libertarians, I don’t care. I’m an inveterate news junkie.
Something was amiss, though; all the pollsters had the election as an
overwhelming Clinton victory, and though I’d like to think I’m a fairly
sceptical reader, I can’t help but be swayed when all the ‘experts’ universally
agree. Seems logical to me, I convinced myself. The Huffington Post hilariously
had the chances of Clinton winning at 99%. I had no hard contrary data with
which to run with. Sure, I noticed that Trump rallies were attended by tens of
thousands and the atmosphere was like a playoff hockey game, and that Clinton
rallies were dreary and under-attended affairs. I chalked that up to people not
being very enthusiastic about her, but that—again!—the experts were right, and
she was comfortably ahead by every metric. All of this contributed to the shock
of election night. That dark November night where the results bled in slowly
and the extent of the wound didn’t become clear until most people were sound
asleep, dreaming of a new America.
Since the election I’ve posited this
query to liberal voters and have felt very troubled by the answers. I’ve
stretched it a little because the woman in the scenario is Canadian, but no
matter, she certainly would have voted for Trump. She’s a conservative and has
been for decades. It goes like this: my friend’s Mom, who is an immigrant of
Pakistani origin, voted for Trump. Is she a racist, sexist, xenophobe? The
answers I get vary from, “she’s misinformed,” “yes, it’s simple—she is a
racist, sexist, xenophobe,” to “she’s obviously dumb,” “she watches too much
Fox,” etc. They simply cannot logically comprehend why a woman of colour would
vote for a hate-muppet like Donald Trump. Many liberals are in dire need of
introspection, but continue to blame their failures on outside forces. It’s all
James Comey’s fault! I have a feeling that a lot of them don’t even have one
republican friend (because why be friends with a sexist, racist monster,
right?)
Maybe journalists should do what the
reporter Salena Zito did and, oh, I don’t know, actually hit the streets and
talk to hundreds of residents in swing states where they actually live. Salena
lives in Pennsylvania and consistently noted throughout the campaign that there
was little support for Hillary and that people were angry. She noted “little”
details, like the fact that there weren’t many Hillary Clinton signs on
people’s lawns compared to previous elections. She didn’t moralize and pass
judgement like many at the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times,
etc, who, apparently, don’t get out much to the suburbs. I imagine Paul Krugman
or Jonathan Chait don’t much talk to plumbers, electricians, truck drivers and
the like, yet their words are in vaunted places and reach millions. Clearly,
they don’t have their fingers on the pulse of America.
Ross
Douthat is a smarty-pants writer for the NYT. I don’t know where he went to
school but it’s probably Yale or North Western or Harvard. Some place like
that. He predicted that the Electoral College vote would be 322 for Clinton and
216 for Trump. Now, here’s a guy who studies and writes about politics for a
living at the most prestigious outlet in the world. While you’re at work filing
TPS reports, he’s pouring over the minutiae of the election 9 to 5, sussing out
patterns and breaking it all down for his readers. He’s got sources all over. And
this political expert got it so wrong that a baboon on a three-day K and booze
bender could have made a better prediction. The actual, reality-based electoral
college results were 306 for Trump and 232 for Clinton. What kind of chaffs me
is that there are no consequences. I’m not saying these reporters should
necessarily be fired. Honestly, I don’t even know what the consequences should
be (maybe no column for two months?), but as a rational man I feel like justice
has been cheated. Their attitude amounts to “oops, sorry ’bout that guys, we’ll
do better next time, heh-heh”.
Wisconsin, which has typically been a
Democrat stronghold, went to the Republicans. Hillary Clinton hadn’t campaigned
in Wisconsin since April and seemingly relied on arrogance and celebrity
endorsements to carry her to victory. It’s not terribly shocking that rich
feminists like Amy Schumer and Lena Dunham, who decry the ‘patriarchy’ and
‘white privilege’ didn’t sway union guys in Wisconsin who have seen their jobs
dry up and industries move elsewhere. Perhaps telling them they should feel
guilty about being white and how they’re sexist for sometimes crudely
commenting on women with their buddies wasn’t a great strategy for the
democrats. It was an utterly tone deaf campaign.
The narrative is now that Trump was
elected by a dying white electorate who will soon go extinct. And that if Trump
was elected every kind of minority was going to be catapulted over the wall.
Well, first of all, nearly half the electorate didn’t even vote. They were so
terrified they just didn’t give a hoot, I guess. You don’t hear in the news too
much about the millions of Latinos and Asians that voted for Trump. And lots of
women. And lots of educated people. All
this about the “poor, uneducated white guy” vote is a little misleading. Sure,
a lot of uneducated white people did vote for Trump, but that’s just one piece
of the pie. In 2012 for instance, 68% of voters who made less than $50K a year
voted for Obama, compared to 38% who voted for Romney. And Trump performed
better than Romney amongst all minorities. I see some liberals banking on the
extinction of white people and then the saintly democrats can regain power. I
hate to break it to you, but if liberals continue down the identity politics
road, they’ll alienate the working class even more. If the GOP runs a young,
fresh, slightly progressive candidate as opposed to a populist buffoon like
Trump, imagine how much they’ll win by. You can disagree with me, that’s fine,
but I’m telling you, giving righteous lectures to people telling them they’re
racist, sexist bigots for voting for Trump is not a winning strategy. It never
will be. The liberal media should focus more on how bad a Trump presidency will
be for more pressing real world issues like criminal justice reform and the
environment, or that he’s filling his cabinet with hard-right religious
maniacs, not spilling endless amounts of ink on which bathroom transgender
people use.
I know that there are legitimate concerns
in the LGBT community when Trump assumes power. The future vice president, Mike
Pence, has some alarming views on homosexuality. He’s a proponent of the
bizarre practice of ‘gay conversion therapy’. I’m guessing it’s something akin
to ‘praying the gay away’. So, that’s alarming. But, in six months when no LGBT
rights are curtailed, gay people can still get married, and trans-people aren’t
melted down in to Trump Steaks, all the concern will be for naught. It’s the
same thing if Bernie Sanders won. You think he’d turn America into some
socialist paradise with universal healthcare and free university? Hell no!
People need to discern between campaign rhetoric and actual policy. Remember
how Obama vowed to close Guantanamo Bay? Yeah, how’d that go? In regards to
building the wall along the southern border, there is nothing inherently racist
or wrong about a nation’s desire to protect their borders in the interest of
national security. My main gripe with the wall is that it’s a wholly futile endeavour.
Yes, illegal immigration is an issue that needs to be addressed, but what will
a wall do? People will go over it, under it, through it; they’ll arrive by
ocean or by hiding in the trunks of cars. Don’t underestimate Mexicans, they’re
hardy people!
The
most lopsided electoral college vote was in D.C. Even traditional Red states
like Texas still have s high 30s to 40-something % of the population voting
Blue. Same goes for Blue states like New York. Yet, something like 93% of D.C.
voted for Clinton. A tiny district, more powerful and flush with cash than any
other in the world, full of lobbyists who take kickbacks and throw in
provisions into bills that never make it into the papers, and sociopaths devoid
of any sympathy for the poor who live in rural areas with little opportunities.
No empathy for a truck driver from Nebraska with 3 kids. Did you know that the
most common job in America is a truck driver? Ah well, he’s just another sucker
for the Washington machine to grift. D.C. almost universally voted for Clinton
and D.C. is chalked full of the vilest examples of human scum on planet Earth
waiting for your fat-ass dirty dollar. The D.C. that voted for Clinton is one
not of nasty words but of nasty actions. One could make a case that if you
wanted to reject the status quo, if you wanted to make a moral vote against
racism/sexism/misogyny and every other hateful ism, you would vote against all
the fat, rich white dudes in D.C. who voted for Hillary Clinton. These people
don’t care if you’re Muslim or Mormon. No, their discrimination runs deeper
than that. They only care about money and exploitation and power. They want to
make money with a pharmaceutical company and pour more drugs down your gullet.
Oh, but Trump said he grabs women by the pussy! JFK is one of the most beloved
presidents in American history and he was a womanizing playboy. So was Bill
Clinton. Who fucking cares? Powerful men are generally boorish pigs who fuck
lots of women and brag about it. They’re not limp-wristed girlie-men. That
isn’t going to change until Clay Aiken becomes president.
I suspect a lot of liberals who act as
though they’re horrified by Trump, secretly smiled to themselves when they woke
up the day after the election knowing that a whole bunch of fat-cats on Wall
Street and K Street were having a really, really bad day. I guess it’s the punk
rocker in me, but between moments of disappointment and shock, I couldn’t help
but chuckle that the voting public gave political establishment the biggest ‘fuck
you’ in a long time, maybe ever.
If
Hillary’s campaign planted an actor posing as a truck driver at one of her
rallies with a sign that read “Truckers Will Haul Hillary to Victory!” and then
brought him up to the stage to address the people, then Tommy the Truck Driver
could have won this election for Hillary. Instead she opted for born-rich millennial
feminists finger-wagging to the public and chastising them about how bigoted
they are if they vote for Trump.
I wouldn’t have voted for DJT, but man,
I didn’t know schadenfreude levels could go this high watching famous people
have meltdowns over the Trump victory. I didn’t think it was possible to cringe
as hard as I did watching and reading celebs’ reactions to the Trump victory.
They really have to be seen to be believed. I won’t quote Sarah Silverman or
Lena Dunham’s painfully dumb bloviating for fear that I’ll OD on douche-chills,
but go search them out for yourself. You’ll never read something so maudlin and
pathetic in your entire life. You’d think their entire families fell into a
volcano.
There’s a case to be made about
abolishing the electoral college, but candidates don’t campaign for the popular
vote. Bragging about winning the popular vote is like a coach bragging about
scoring more playoff goals. Right, but you lost the game.
The Dems ran the wrong candidate, plain
and simple. They ran a deeply unlikeable, uncharismatic establishment politician
who colluded with the DNC and the press to discredit and smear Bernie Sanders (which
violates most of our natural inclinations to fairness). Then they rammed her
down voters’ throats and America barfed her up like a four day old fish taco.
Hillary and Bill with their Clinton
Foundation are like Walter White and Skyler with their car-wash: a front to
launder dirty money and favours. Have an A-1 day, America.
No comments:
Post a Comment