Yes agreed, but either way both countries have been divided into two. In the end though , no-one will be happy.
Trump and Brexit: What has happened to the world?
- Thread starter sullydnl
- Start date
Yes agreed, but either way both countries have been divided into two. In the end though , no-one will be happy.
You're all right in that the choice is there, but put yourself in their shoes - to them, Clinton is the face of the establishment. She's a career politician. For those who voted, they didn't want another politician. Trump's background marks him as an outsider, and so to them, it's a chance of not having "more of the same".
I don't know if everyone knows how bad it is in the "Rust Belt" of the USA - think the destruction of the working class in the UK in the 80s, but at a slower rate and a much higher population figure involved. There are a lot people there who aren't dumb (along with people who are, but as I said, dumb people alone cannot carry unpopular decisions to a majority), they just want a better life. I doubt many like Trump, but to them, it's a protest. Again, it's not too different from Brexit.
I believe that too - unfortunately his party threw him under a bus.Just can't shake the feeling Bernie would've walked this and today would have been an incredible day towards a new future, instead...
The chances that either of these events happening, would have greatly diminished if the Democrats had a stronger candidate than Clinton and if the leader of the Labour Party was not a limp piece of celery like Corbyn.
The Americans get can rid of Trump in 4 years time. Brexit is for at least a generation.
The Americans get can rid of Trump in 4 years time. Brexit is for at least a generation.
Last edited:
What I don't quite understand, is how can this be combated by a nation who are so vehemently against any form of socialism? Surely the obvious go to solution of tax the rich and give it to the poor, is totally contrary to the principles their nation was built on?
You are right, we are not far from such philosophical debates. However, I would argue that they are relevant in understanding the situation. As for your objection, the logical implication would be that rapists or paedophiles cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. The society might still find it useful to take measures in order to protect the rest of society (but without the moral component in the sentence, you would not "punish" the rapist as some evil being). But you are right, this might take us far from the issue at hand.
I would argue the exact opposite. Finding out the factors which explain the voters' decision plays a huge part in understanding it. When all the factors are taken into account, you would have nothing left to argue that the voters' were not "forced" to vote for Trump. Granted the factors might be numerous and complex to analyze, but they can all be given in terms of genetics or environment which are ultimately not the result of the voters' decision. On the other hand, saying that the Trump's voters could have "chosen" otherwise might push us to discard their decisions as mere "choices", which frankly is something that seems obscure to me (you would have to argue how the basis of such "choice" can come from anything other than genetics/environment).
To sum up, understanding how the voters' were "forced" to vote for Trump allows us to : (1) leave out accusations or blame which might block any discussion, (2) analyze the factors to hopefully grasp what exactly lead to the current situation.
Random points:
1. Every Dem (including Clinton) has done well (solid majorities) among union households in the rust belt as compared to non-union families of people doing the same jobs.
You can see what unionised workers thought of Trump's attempts to win them over here, and, significantly, what they thought of Hillary.
2. The wealth gap showing that "it can't be poor people's resentment" is misleading.
A lot of the margin Clinton had in the lowest income brackets would be through minorities. For it to remain even vaguely competitive, it means a hefty polarisation for Trump among poor whites.
However, these things are certainly true: the rich are more likely to vote Republican; if 2 people have the same money but different education, the more educated one goes Democratic.
3. Trade: Trump was more hated than her in WI. He won because of trade. If you trust the exit poll numbers (CNN), it's clearly visible.
4. Racism: the exit polls skirt around the question and ask it indirectly. "Do you think in the US today, a. whites are running things? b. minorities are running things?" In FL and NC a and b both were about 15-20% of the electorate, of which the voters went 95-5 in the direction you'd expect them to.
1. Every Dem (including Clinton) has done well (solid majorities) among union households in the rust belt as compared to non-union families of people doing the same jobs.
You can see what unionised workers thought of Trump's attempts to win them over here, and, significantly, what they thought of Hillary.
“In all reality, I see Trump as an opportunist,” said Robert James, 57, a forklift driver at Carrier.
“He’s full of shit,” Tay Walker, 52, another Carrier worker, told me.
“I don’t think he’s for the people,” said Ron Terry, 60, who has worked in shipping and receiving at the plant for 17 years. “He’s for his pockets.”
“He’s a loudmouthed fraud,” said Frank Staples, 37, an-11-year veteran at Carrier.
In fact, in a dozen interviews with Carrier workers at the rally, members of United Steelworkers Local 1999, I couldn’t find a single Trump supporter, though workers told me they existed. “There are a few people out there that support him,” Staples said. But by and large, they see in Trump the same kind of corporate greed that led Carrier executives to outsource their own jobs.
“His own clothes come from China,” Staples said. “He’s talking about American workers. There’s 1,400 people losing their jobs at Carrier. He could employ 1,000 people making his clothes. Bring his company to Indiana. Bring something that’s not going to fail to Indiana. Everything he’s ever ran has [fallen]. His airline fell. He got kicked out of his own Miss America pageant. I mean, come on. The Apprentice fell. He’s a reality star.”
Trump loves Carrier. Turns out, many Carrier workers don’t love him back.
...
Even if Sanders cedes the nomination battle to Clinton, and Clinton faces Trump in the general, he won’t vote for Trump. “I will probably end up writing Bernie in,” he said. “I hope he runs as an independent if he doesn’t get the nomination.”
“He’s full of shit,” Tay Walker, 52, another Carrier worker, told me.
“I don’t think he’s for the people,” said Ron Terry, 60, who has worked in shipping and receiving at the plant for 17 years. “He’s for his pockets.”
“He’s a loudmouthed fraud,” said Frank Staples, 37, an-11-year veteran at Carrier.
In fact, in a dozen interviews with Carrier workers at the rally, members of United Steelworkers Local 1999, I couldn’t find a single Trump supporter, though workers told me they existed. “There are a few people out there that support him,” Staples said. But by and large, they see in Trump the same kind of corporate greed that led Carrier executives to outsource their own jobs.
“His own clothes come from China,” Staples said. “He’s talking about American workers. There’s 1,400 people losing their jobs at Carrier. He could employ 1,000 people making his clothes. Bring his company to Indiana. Bring something that’s not going to fail to Indiana. Everything he’s ever ran has [fallen]. His airline fell. He got kicked out of his own Miss America pageant. I mean, come on. The Apprentice fell. He’s a reality star.”
Trump loves Carrier. Turns out, many Carrier workers don’t love him back.
...
Even if Sanders cedes the nomination battle to Clinton, and Clinton faces Trump in the general, he won’t vote for Trump. “I will probably end up writing Bernie in,” he said. “I hope he runs as an independent if he doesn’t get the nomination.”
2. The wealth gap showing that "it can't be poor people's resentment" is misleading.
A lot of the margin Clinton had in the lowest income brackets would be through minorities. For it to remain even vaguely competitive, it means a hefty polarisation for Trump among poor whites.
However, these things are certainly true: the rich are more likely to vote Republican; if 2 people have the same money but different education, the more educated one goes Democratic.
3. Trade: Trump was more hated than her in WI. He won because of trade. If you trust the exit poll numbers (CNN), it's clearly visible.
4. Racism: the exit polls skirt around the question and ask it indirectly. "Do you think in the US today, a. whites are running things? b. minorities are running things?" In FL and NC a and b both were about 15-20% of the electorate, of which the voters went 95-5 in the direction you'd expect them to.
I think there's some connection because it shows how the politicians as well have lost touch with many of the 'common' people.
"White people in majority white country having a say is a problem"
To paraphrase the words of so many right now
To paraphrase the words of so many right now
It's not white people having a say that's a problem (that would be absurd), but when us white people begin to actively vote for a candidate who is running on a White Nationalist platform who may want to suppress non-whites, then there's a major problem that needs to be addressed.
At the very least you can't trust numbers from places like CNN. They've been demonstrably wrong about everything.
Firstly, it's not white people like us. I don't know you and I have nothing in common with you. I'm an individualist, and don't perceive any connection between people because they share a similar color of skin.
Secondly, there was no white nationalist platform, and there's no suppression of non-whites.
Thirdly, is it a problem that the majority want to benefit though? Isn't that how we decide ethics and morality in the first place, it's what the majority want.
And finally, even if what you said was true, it doesn't change the absolute garbage spouted by many about whites being a problem and white people deciding the vote and that somehow being bad.
Media goes a lot further than the Daily Mail and The Sun, and a lot of it is heavily and vocally left leaning.
These numbers have been consistent throughout the election, and agree with interviews of Trump supporters too.
Don't be jealous. It's unbecoming and speaks volumes alongside your usual pontificating.
The number throughout the election have been proven to be wrong though
There's an old saying, 'watch out when someone makes you an offer that seems too good to be true as it usually is.'
There's a difference between thinking all Trump supporters are stupid and racist and pointing out that a large amount of his supporters are exactly that. The KKK backing him is hardly a plus.
Neither is ignoring the problem. There are reasons for voting for Trump but I haven't seen any rational ones put forward aside from "he's not Clinton". Every other argument is either irrational (e.g. "Clinton is worse", "he's a great businessman") or based primarily on a fear of not living in the early 1900s anymore (e.g. "Make America Great Again") and that's coming from someone who is normally critical of the people most commonly referred to as SJWs.
It's wrong to boil all this down to race and ignorance but wrong to ignore that it was a large part of it. It was a mixture of idiots, racists, diehard Republicans and desperate people who opted for the unknown.
You mean the man who stated he wants to ban Muslims from the US, who consistently said Mexicans are criminals and rapists, who was endorsed by the KKK, who continued to challenge the birthplace of a non-white President quite clearly because of his skin colour, and who has regularly incited racial hatred was not running on a white nationalist platform, to any degree? Come off it.
Sun, Mail, Mirror.
Facebook has more users seeing it's news feed than all those combined, then doubled, and more.
Sun, Mail, Mirror.
i?
Silly line of argument. Older people have much more experience of life and, more importantly, many will have been around before we joined the EU so they can give an accurate judgment about what its like not to be part of it versus being part of it. I think their opinion is much more valid than the younger population - many of whom couldnt be bothered to turn out to cast their vote. People need to have some respect for the people who have lived through more than they have.
- Islam isn't a race. Anyone can be a Muslim. Clearly not racist
- Some Mexicans are rapists and criminals. He didn't say all of them are, he also didn't consistently say anything negative about Mexicans. He was consistently anti-illegal immigration though. Which has nothing to do with race
-Who cares who endorses him. Saudi Arabia and Qatar support Hillary, so her supporters must love corporal punishment, honor killings and hate gays right? RIGHT?
-Lots of people questioned Obama's place of birth. Some of the people who did so could be racist. So? Do you have proof that anyone who did is racist? No you don't. Trump also takes the piss all the time. Take it with a grain of salt. People could also openly question the birth place of white presidents if they doubted they were born in the US, rightly or wrongly.
-Trump didn't incite racial hatred. No one running for president is going around inciting racial hatred.
You sound like a Liverpool supporter.
I disagree that older people shouldn't be allowed to vote btw. But to suggest their opinion is more valid than others is laughable.
Hip offshoot to the independent that got bought out earlier this year.
Just because you have lived a long life don´t make people wise or more intelligent. It is a fact that Britain was far worse of economically pre EU than after and also a lot of old people always remember the good times and forget how hard it was. A lot of elderly in Britain voted brexit without even knowing the basics of how EU functions and what laws are entirely made by their own parliament. They ignore all logical arguments and just decided to go with the Braveheart approach ( a lot did, but not all granted ).... FREEEEDOM! that is not wise or an intelligent way to deal with complicated issues.
Are you saying Facebook is left leaning?
1. Old people have more experience of life but that doesn't make them smarter or mean they make better choices. They're also more likely to be nostalgic or vote based on fear of a changing world (how often does that work out?).
2. There are so many other factors that have changed the UK over the last 43 years that believing you can tell the effect the EU has had just by being around for that time is a huge stretch.
3. Young people that didn't vote don't make the ones that did less important or their views less valid.
4. "People need to have some respect for the people who have lived through more than they have." - Why? How about having respect for the next generation who have decades ahead of them?
Turnout was almost identical across all age ranges.
In an ideal world, people will recognise they were wrong. In this one, they will blame the EU/Mexico and China, the political elite and immigrants. As well as the people that aren't patriotic enough to ignore the evidence and join them in their fantasy (as the Telegraph did: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...-brexit-for-this-rate-cut-blame-project-fear/).
Everyone's opinion is of equal value, we need to move away from this "young people have more to lose/old people have more experience" line.
Baby Boomers like me (and there are a lot of us) hope to still have a good number of years left to live and therefore decisions made about the future of our country are very important. I can also understand why people just starting out in life feel aggrieved, but I'm afraid being young doesn't make your opinion more valuable than that of someone in their 50, 60s or whatever.
All I can say is that having been around and doorstep-campaigned for us to join the EEC when I was a teenager in the 1970s, my sense of loss is just as great as someone who's never known a Pre-Europe UK.
To say "some Mexicans ARE rapists and murderers so it's alright to say what he said because it's just the truth" is the biggest load of bollocks I've heard in a long time.
He said "they're not sending us their best, they're sending their rapists and murderers" and it's a fecking disgusting, racist, xenophobic thing to say.
The effects of the political climate around the world will be absolutely devestating, to me there's very little doubt about that. This election result is not the final nail in the coffin, but we're getting very close now. It looks like everything is falling down slowly but steadily while no one can really stop it, as a matter of fact there's so much damage that has been done this during this year with many people hardly realising it happened. Devestation as an end result is hardly a bold prediction by the way, and it's not doom mongering either, when looking back at history and the enormous ammounts of unsolved big societal problems of the last decades.
What can you do against this mechanism? Is there something to be done, should something be done? I'm still not sure, and I've been fascinated by this concept long before I ever went to law school, and even after finishing and thinking about these type of subjects for years I still don't really have an answer. It's a given that history will repeat itself, that's about the safest bet you can ever make. Things go well - relatively speaking - then they fall down, and usually they have to fall all the way down before they can be built up again. It's an endless loop, that seems to be as old as nature itself.
In the end I guess, while there's not much that can be done, you can always do a little bit. First by realising how lucky you sometimes are, to be doing what you while living where you are living, and not taking that for granted. Never give up the fight, that's a good start too. And I don't mean that in an idealistic or political way at all, feck idealism and most definitely double feck politics. If you think you know what's right and what's wrong, don't talk too much about it. Talk is cheap, the only thing you honestly should interested in is in walking the actual walk.
Do something about it (and please forgive me for my hollow phrasing). You're not helping the world by donating 5cts of your purchase at H&M to Unicef, going to some outdated protest, or by getting angry and dissappointed at the news of people making silly decisions. Just try to think of a concrete problem in your life, see if you can help yourself, someone else and then do it. If you succeed, don't be happy. Try to do more, you can always do more. And try not to care abou whether your efforts get appreciation. Then maybe you can help the world a little bit. not much perhaps, but at least something will be more than nothing.
On a sidenote, I can't actually believe I just wrote this, and I hope no one actually reads it. Normally I'd probably rather literally kill myself than resort to these type of shallow points and fake idealistic logic that doesn't really say or change anything.
But today is a very historic day, it's a date to remember for always, and not for good reasons.
What can you do against this mechanism? Is there something to be done, should something be done? I'm still not sure, and I've been fascinated by this concept long before I ever went to law school, and even after finishing and thinking about these type of subjects for years I still don't really have an answer. It's a given that history will repeat itself, that's about the safest bet you can ever make. Things go well - relatively speaking - then they fall down, and usually they have to fall all the way down before they can be built up again. It's an endless loop, that seems to be as old as nature itself.
In the end I guess, while there's not much that can be done, you can always do a little bit. First by realising how lucky you sometimes are, to be doing what you while living where you are living, and not taking that for granted. Never give up the fight, that's a good start too. And I don't mean that in an idealistic or political way at all, feck idealism and most definitely double feck politics. If you think you know what's right and what's wrong, don't talk too much about it. Talk is cheap, the only thing you honestly should interested in is in walking the actual walk.
Do something about it (and please forgive me for my hollow phrasing). You're not helping the world by donating 5cts of your purchase at H&M to Unicef, going to some outdated protest, or by getting angry and dissappointed at the news of people making silly decisions. Just try to think of a concrete problem in your life, see if you can help yourself, someone else and then do it. If you succeed, don't be happy. Try to do more, you can always do more. And try not to care abou whether your efforts get appreciation. Then maybe you can help the world a little bit. not much perhaps, but at least something will be more than nothing.
On a sidenote, I can't actually believe I just wrote this, and I hope no one actually reads it. Normally I'd probably rather literally kill myself than resort to these type of shallow points and fake idealistic logic that doesn't really say or change anything.
But today is a very historic day, it's a date to remember for always, and not for good reasons.
My favourite bit was when he said Trump is definitely not inciting racial hatred because... he's running for president. Um. Ok.
Exactly my point. If we step away from that we're stepping into dangerous ground.
Watching that last night was utterly depressing. This election result has destroyed my opinion of the US people, because it effects the safety of everybody. You can rationalise it all you want but they voted for a dangerous racist, a car crash of a human being. Donald Trump is a buffoon. I said Brexit would go through and he would get in, unfortunately my lack of faith in people came to be true. Living in England for a few years, I knew outside city life the shy ignorant racist existed. That was there opportunity, the US have done it on a more extreme level. I understand the reason why some voted in the rustbelt state's, they think massive change is coming back. There in for a massive shock when the real Trump gets to power.
The south has always had the Republican stronghold, the Bible belt would not have cared if he raped and murder somebody, they were not voting for Clinton. She's a crook too, dishonest but of more sound mind. Trump can't even be trusted to look after his twitter account as Obama stated. The three debates were pathetic from him, his policies were vague and more focused on attacking her. He's an intolerant sociopath promoting hate. He's beyond right wing. His comments against women would have destroyed every Democrat. We all know the right wing and South have a different view though. I know there many good people voting down there to keep him out, my generalisation is pure frustration. I'm worried, on to scared that he will destroy the western hemisphere. The idea he has access to nuclear weapons should give everyone nightmares, get the fallout shelter's ready. I fear for many in Europe and what the Russians may do now he's in.The world in my opinion has never been in a more precarious position since the hieght of the cold war.
Shame on America, to go from Obama to that. It proves one thing, anybody can be president in that country. If you thought George W was bad, wait to you see this joke.
The south has always had the Republican stronghold, the Bible belt would not have cared if he raped and murder somebody, they were not voting for Clinton. She's a crook too, dishonest but of more sound mind. Trump can't even be trusted to look after his twitter account as Obama stated. The three debates were pathetic from him, his policies were vague and more focused on attacking her. He's an intolerant sociopath promoting hate. He's beyond right wing. His comments against women would have destroyed every Democrat. We all know the right wing and South have a different view though. I know there many good people voting down there to keep him out, my generalisation is pure frustration. I'm worried, on to scared that he will destroy the western hemisphere. The idea he has access to nuclear weapons should give everyone nightmares, get the fallout shelter's ready. I fear for many in Europe and what the Russians may do now he's in.The world in my opinion has never been in a more precarious position since the hieght of the cold war.
Shame on America, to go from Obama to that. It proves one thing, anybody can be president in that country. If you thought George W was bad, wait to you see this joke.
What happened? The dump, rascist deplorable shit discovered they can vote. Warned this could happen years ago and that we should be happy our election turnouts are so low.
You dont have any idea of who vote for what. As far as I remember, the ballot paper doesnt include a name - just a tick in a box. Any numbers that you see are not accurate - theyre based on exit polls of a small subset of people that is then multiplied to give a percntage of the population.
And also... how do you know the reasons behind how everybody who is "old" voted? Those people may have children and grandchildren they care about. Do you not think that their decision was made for whats best for their children, grandchildren and maybe great grandchildren - not to mention themselves... you know, because they are still alive and still have a right to vote for whatever agenda they want.
And the normal people forgot how to vote? Because the voter turnout was lower this year than last time. Can you show your math/facts?
Ha ha, that's some bizarre logic right there.