Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
The rust-belters happened to be the swing votes in 2016. But the real difference that no one counted on was the 60 million people who reliably vote Republican for any conceivable candidate - no matter how terrible.
This is why everyone was laughing at Trump. Both sides of the aisle believed that the (R) candidate couldn't just scoop booty by spewing a bunch of ridiculous racist garbage in the primaries - w/o having to answer for it in the general. The collective wisdom was that moderate Republicans would be repulsed.
Oops.
Sure, sure. But then why *Trump* and not Ted Cruz or Rubio or Kasich or whoever? Why a buffoon noted most for stoking white racial animus?
The answer imo is in my last post. Where did Trump get the
primary support that built to his nomination?: the south, Appalachia, the industrial midwest. Read: racist whites.
Where did he flip votes or turnout more voters than Romney?: not the south or other traditional GOP strongholds. As you know, general elections are something of a fait accompli. The (R) candidate is guaranteed a huge floor. But where did he flip votes?
My MS Paint skills are garbage but this is the best I can do in 120 seconds. Obviously not you know like exactly accurate but you know, it's a meta point. The arrows are migration patterns of the 20th century:
He got votes
where white people fled to when black people migrated north. Suburbia, exurbia, one-horse industry towns across the midwest built largely during the middle part of the 20th century.
So we go back to the point: is that *economic* anxiety? Those places are largely hot garbage right now, mostly just an assortment of meth addicts, opiate addicts and Walmarts. So, well, kinda economic anxiety? But there's NO WAY to tell the story in an accurate and meaningful way without diving into the history of migration and racial anxiety like 100 years in the making.