The 2016 United States Presidential Election

Well lets look at the referrals.From RAZD Nope it didn't.From you. From those comments I was expecting something actually insightful. It is insightful if you mean not presenting actual facts but lots of distortions, and epic stereotypes and racism.

So forget the article. I still think it's important to understand how Trump supporters came to feel as they do, because the article is right: Even if Trump is no longer around in four years, the people who supported him will be, and if they still feel alienated and disenfranchised then they'll still be looking for ways to send a message.--Percy

I grant that RAZD's politics can be a bit tough to follow, and I don't get the bit about Bernie, either. I'm sorry if you didn't like it and that I caused you to waste your time, but your criticisms are so far out of alignment with my own reading that I'm wondering where you found the "distortions and epic stereotypes and racism."--Percy

Yeah, but I already knew that. I wonder who the article is actually trying to convince.

Here are some select quotes.
What's newsworthy about a bunch of toothless hillbillies crying over a flattened trailer?Looking back, I think the idea was that the local minorities were fine ... as long as they acted exactly like usyou know, the guys with the weird slang, music and clothes, the dope fiends who murder everyone they see. It was all part of the bizarro nature of the cities, as perceived from afar -- a combination of hyper-aggressive savages and frivolous white elitesWhere I'm from, you weren't a real man unless you could repair a car, patch a roof, hunt your own meat, and defend your home from an intruder. It was a source of shame to be dependent on anyone -- especially the government. You mowed your own lawn and fixed your own pipes when they leaked, you hauled your own firewood in your own pickup truck.When you don't own anything, it's all somebody else's problem.Stereotypes.

I sincerely hope you're right, Diomedes.I watched one of her speaches at some rally at a college campus somehere in New Hampshire last night. She was talking about her fighting for the rights of women, equal marriage, pro-choice, dignified retirement, etc. etc etc.One thing she failed to mention were men. Heterosexual men. Maybe she should start pointing out that having equality in everything also is to the advantage of white, heterosexual men?Maybe her lack of pointing that out is why she's loosing heterosexual white men? Just mention them, Hillary.Maybe she should also start pointing out that she's fighting that equal rights for everyone is also advantageous for heterosexual, white men, too.

Johnny Carson's once said something like "It isn't funny if you have to explain it," and I think the same applies for much sarcasm, hyperbole, exaggeration, etc. So if the parts you quoted don't work for you then I don't think there's anything I could say to make them work for you, but I do have some comments/questions.

quote:

---

What's newsworthy about a bunch of toothless hillbillies crying over a flattened trailer?

---

Here's the fuller context:

quote:

---

"Nothing that happens outside the city matters!" they say at their cocktail parties, blissfully unaware of where their food is grown. Hey, remember when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans? Kind of weird that a big hurricane hundreds of miles across managed to snipe one specific city and avoid everything else. To watch the news (or the multiple movies and TV shows about it), you'd barely hear about how the storm utterly steamrolled rural Mississippi, killing 238 people and doing an astounding $125 billion in damage.

​

​

No sports team = no fucks given.

​

But who cares about those people, right? What's newsworthy about a bunch of toothless hillbillies crying over a flattened trailer? New Orleans is culturally important. It matters.

---

Sure, the part you quoted is an "epic stereotype", but if it wasn't just a comedic device that was part of a larger point made in an entertaining way, then what was it? If you don't see Wong as making the point that people matter who don't live in culturally important cities, then what do you think he's saying?

quote:

---

you know, the guys with the weird slang, music and clothes, the dope fiends who murder everyone they see. It was all part of the bizarro nature of the cities, as perceived from afar -- a combination of hyper-aggressive savages and frivolous white elites

---

This is another "epic stereotype". Again, if you don't see this as a comedic device employed while describing how Chicago seemed to him when he lived in the hinterlands, then what do you think he was saying?

quote:

---

Where I'm from, you weren't a real man unless you could repair a car, patch a roof, hunt your own meat, and defend your home from an intruder. It was a source of shame to be dependent on anyone -- especially the government. You mowed your own lawn and fixed your own pipes when they leaked, you hauled your own firewood in your own pickup truck.

---

How deep into an urban environment must one be embedded before one doesn't know anyone this describes?

quote:

---

When you don't own anything, it's all somebody else's problem.

---

There's no context for this one, so here's the whole paragraph, it's relatively short:

quote:

---

Not like those hipsters in their tiny apartments, or "those people" in their public housing projects, waiting for the landlord any time something breaks, knowing if things get too bad they can just pick up and move. When you don't own anything, it's all somebody else's problem. "They probably don't pay taxes, either! Just treating America itself as a subsidized apartment they can trash!"

---

If this isn't another "epic stereotype" employed to be entertaining while making a point about how people in the city can seem to people in the country, then what is it?--Percy

I always find it fascinating to see people grab on to some aspect of an argument and ignore the message, using that aspect as an excuse to dismiss the information. I think you nailed it Percy. Many times in the article he dismisses his portrayals as knowingly wrong, but that it is emblematic of how urban america seems to rural america.The media portrayal of Trump supporters is KKK supremacists and toothless NRA hillbillies, all educationally challenged. Talk about stereotypes.Hillary dismisses them as "the deplorables" rather that trying to actually understand them or to feel their pain. This is comparable to Romney's 47% comment that showed he was out of touch with the electorate.Those stereotypes are wrong and basing your actions and\or proposed solutions on them are doomed to failure.Enjoy

I get what the writer was trying to do. Instead of being funny and insightful it was sophomoric and offense. Stereotypes are always damaging whether in jest or not.

So to defend stereotypes you use stereotypes of the media. Okay, you might want to do a little self reflection here.

You are so funny. You haven't yet actually discussed the message of the article, just find excuses to dismiss it.

I don't think anybody disagrees on the message of the article. I agree with Percy on the importance of understanding why folks picked Trump as their candidate and I think it is important to appreciate the long term consequences of that reality.Much has been written on the subject. I don't apologize for finding this particular attempt ham-fisted and silly.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Whatever you think of the way the article was written, there are points made that need our attention to understand fellow Americans. For me it helped explain how a person could be for Bernie and then switch to Trump when the candidates are so antithetical.Enjoy

I can't recall much if anything being written in this thread about the importance of the two sides understanding each other's concerns. And I've maybe seen a couple editorials about this. If you're bored of the subject, fine, we know now, you can stop telling us. Who thinks you have to apologize? People rarely love all the same books, plays or TV shows. I thought it was entertaining and insightful, you didn't, no big deal.But it would be very interesting if you could provide links to the attempts making the same point that you didn't find ham-fisted and silly. And if they're also entertaining then all the better. --Percy

My comments about what has been written were not limited to what has been posted in this thread. Or even on this board. You seem to want to fight where there is nothing to fight about. I did not claim that the subject was boring. I criticized the depiction of each sides concerns as described in the article.The article was not all that great or insightful in expressing each sides concerns. If anything the article described Trump supporters in ways I find completely unsympathetic and attributed beliefs to those folks that were crude and stereotypical depictions of urban folk.Edited by NoNukes, : Remove some barbs.