Where do we go from here?

[CarolinaFever]

Thank you so much for writing this out. I have enjoyed reading it, and I hope that we can gain from folks' experiences similar to yourself. I do admit that I am more negative than you regarding going forward. I feel like there needs to be significant change in the party's direction along with messaging, and overall persona - losing like this (all three) to a party as fucking insane, hateful, selfish as the current maga party is an indication, imo.

I don't think it's the Democratic party. I think, unfortunately, this is just how the majority of Americans are right now.

 

[stankeylegjones]

I don't think it's the Democratic party. I think, unfortunately, this is just how the majority of Americans are right now.

I’m not following you. Can you elaborate?

 

[CarolinaFever]

I’m not following you. Can you elaborate?

I don't think it is anything the Dems are or aren't doing. It's just how the country is right now. There is no reason anyone should support Trump. It shouldn't even matter with a person like that. Unfortunately, half of the country does for some reason. Mostly it comes.from racism, bigotry, and greed. But a lot of people are just too ignorant to get out of their own way, too.

 

[Mulberry Heel]

Why do the Democrats need a plan for this? It’s not like the Pubs had a plan. Tariffs were their plan? If people took that as a valid plan then the Dems should just make up plans too.

The Trumper plan for these Rust Belt states is to blatantly lie to people and tell them that they'll raise tariffs and that will force companies to bring all their old manufacturing jobs back to their dying towns and cities, and they'll roll back all of these social advances by LGBTQ people and uppity women and minorities and sexual freedoms and people in the Midwest can all party just like it's 1972 again. And it's all bullshit of course, but since that's exactly what they want to hear so they buy it.

 

[CarolinaFever]

The Trumper plan for these Rust Belt states is to blatantly lie to people and tell them that they'll raise tariffs and that will force companies to bring all their old manufacturing jobs back to their dying towns and cities, and they'll roll back all of these social advances by LGBTQ people and uppity women and minorities and sexual freedoms and people in the Midwest can all party just like it's 1972 again. And it's all bullshit of course, but since that's exactly what they want to hear they buy it.

And some people here don't want to believe that the majority of Americans are just hateful and deplorable people who can't be reached no matter what.

 

[mpaer]

The Trumper plan for these Rust Belt states is to blatantly lie to people and tell them that they'll raise tariffs and that will force companies to bring all their old manufacturing jobs back to their dying towns and cities, and they'll roll back all of these social advances by LGBTQ people and uppity women and minorities and sexual freedoms and people in the Midwest can all party just like it's 1972 again. And it's all bullshit of course, but since that's exactly what they want to hear they buy it.

And cut all their benefits

 

[stankeylegjones]

I don't think it is anything the Dems are or aren't doing. It's just how the country is right now. There is no reason anyone should support Trump. It shouldn't even matter with a person like that. Unfortunately, have of the country does for some reason. Mostly it comes.from racism, bigotry, and greed. But a lot of people are just too ignorant to get out of their own way, too.

Thank you for elaborating.
I still think many voters who voted for the magats did so out of economic struggles, which led them to not think clearly. But still, as you rightly put it, a whole lot of racists and bigots also voted.

 

[Paine]

Understanding the Immigrant Swing Toward Trump

Liberal pundits have puzzled over increasing support for Trump by immigrants and people of color. To understand the trend, we should look to economic issues and the way institutions like unions and churches affect political socialization.

jacobin.com

 

[hedge]

I still think many voters who voted for the magats did so out of economic struggles, which led them to not think clearly. But still, as you rightly put it, a whole lot of racists and bigots also voted.

Seems like politics these days is a lot like sports fandom. I know many people are fans of a team due to some personal connection (you went to that school or you're from the city where the team is based or you moved there, whatever). Unfortunately there are only two teams in this sport and the other side is the most hated rival. This isn't everybody, to be sure, but I think it's a lot more than anybody wants to admit. It's not about policy or messaging or any of that, it's just you live around lots of people that are fans of one of the teams and so you're a fan of that team. I think this applies to Maga more than dems or traditional repubs. They probably won't even care if Trump's policies cause their team to lose, they'll still be a fan of their team, just like sports fans don't stop being fans of their teams every time they lose, the reactions of some fans on message boards every time their team loses notwithstanding...

 

[LeoBloom]

Understanding the Immigrant Swing Toward Trump

Liberal pundits have puzzled over increasing support for Trump by immigrants and people of color. To understand the trend, we should look to economic issues and the way institutions like unions and churches affect political socialization.

jacobin.com

I was not familiar with this publication until you posted some of their articles and I still have not delved into what exactly it is. It does not appear to be an academic publication, which is fine, but they do, I believe, need to support some of their claims. For instance:
"Numerous studies show that Latinos and Asians are less likely to identify with either the Democratic or Republican Party compared to white and black voters." They need to cite these specific studies so I can know how they were conducted, within what groups were these studies done, and what exactly are the numbers they are talking about. Without that information, it is hard for me to take their conclusions as other than just mere speculation.

Yes, they provide a lot of anecdotal evidence based on interacting with a specific immigrant group in Hawaii. I do not mean that their conclusions are all invalid. However, their conclusions also may be jumps based on minimal actual data.

For one, Hawaii, as they mention, is unique. Getting some goods to Hawaii is more difficult then other states. How does that factor into all of this?
Surely it is not a surprise that immigrants from this community who consume their news from Fox, Newsmax, etc. are more predisposed to support Trump? Also, surely it is not a surprise that immigrants who are deeply involved in evangelical churches are more likely to be conservative?

I get what this is saying or trying to say - there are more factors than just racism and sexism. OK, yes, but when a group is consuming media from places that clearly have the demonization of others as part of their rasion d'etre, how minimal is the racism and sexism? What about the churches these evangelical immigrants attend? Are they being bombarded from the pulpit and the pew with how evil certain politicians are? How anti-Christian some politicians are?

I do not think only racism and sexism were the reason for some of these votes. Obviously, economic concerns played a significant role. Maybe even the most significant.

Union members in this piece skewed Democratic. No surprise there either. But here's the thing if we are talking about going forward: conservatives have spent decades denigrating unions, equating them with communism, with a lack of freedom, with corruption, etc. Unions do not have the power they once had. In the south, they are basically non existent. Personally, I am very pro union. But how do we bring them back, make them stronger after so much denigration?

What realistic alternatives do we have to evangelical churches? I don't know.

 

[Paine]

I was not familiar with this publication until you posted some of their articles and I still have not delved into what exactly it is. It does not appear to be an academic publication, which is fine, but they do, I believe, need to support some of their claims. For instance:
"Numerous studies show that Latinos and Asians are less likely to identify with either the Democratic or Republican Party compared to white and black voters." They need to cite these specific studies so I can know how they were conducted, within what groups were these studies done, and what exactly are the numbers they are talking about. Without that information, it is hard for me to take their conclusions as other than just mere speculation.

Yes, they provide a lot of anecdotal evidence based on interacting with a specific immigrant group in Hawaii. I do not mean that their conclusions are all invalid. However, their conclusions also may be jumps based on minimal actual data.

For one, Hawaii, as they mention, is unique. Getting some goods to Hawaii is more difficult then other states. How does that factor into all of this?
Surely it is not a surprise that immigrants from this community who consume their news from Fox, Newsmax, etc. are more predisposed to support Trump? Also, surely it is not a surprise that immigrants who are deeply involved in evangelical churches are more likely to be conservative?

I get what this is saying or trying to say - there are more factors than just racism and sexism. OK, yes, but when a group is consuming media from places that clearly have the demonization of others as part of their rasion d'etre, how minimal is the racism and sexism? What about the churches these evangelical immigrants attend? Are they being bombarded from the pulpit and the pew with how evil certain politicians are? How anti-Christian some politicians are?

I do not think only racism and sexism were the reason for some of these votes. Obviously, economic concerns played a significant role. Maybe even the most significant.

Union members in this piece skewed Democratic. No surprise there either. But here's the thing if we are talking about going forward: conservatives have spent decades denigrating unions, equating them with communism, with a lack of freedom, with corruption, etc. Unions do not have the power they once had. In the south, they are basically non existent. Personally, I am very pro union. But how do we bring them back, make them stronger after so much denigration?

What realistic alternatives do we have to evangelical churches? I don't know.

Jacobin is a socialist magazine that has pieces from a ton of different authors. The author of this piece specifically is a sociologist at Grinnell College who has written about and researched immigrant diaspora communities. Don’t think it’s fair to call her data anecdotal.

Home | Sharon M. Quinsaat, PhD

I wish I had the answers to your questions. I think the piece did a good job of laying out the tension we’ve been discussing here.

 

[altmin]

For one, Hawaii, as they mention, is unique. Getting some goods to Hawaii is more difficult then other states. How does that factor into all of this?
Surely it is not a surprise that immigrants from this community who consume their news from Fox, Newsmax, etc. are more predisposed to support Trump? Also, surely it is not a surprise that immigrants who are deeply involved in evangelical churches are more likely to be conservative?

Also Hawaii is probably the most integrated state in the union background wise, with a crazy high cost of living (goods shipped in like you said, but also crazy high housing cost), and the majority of the jobs being pure service industry with low wages, and a super-gigantic gap between a large amount of people living in poverty and the upper class. The federal government is also a huge employer via the military and other things like National Park service etc.

It is very hard to blow a Hawaiian data point up to scale for the rest of the country.

 

[Paine]

The Age of Class Dealignment

Over the course of decades, social democracy abandoned workers. Then workers abandoned social democracy.

jacobin.com

Here’s another Jacobin article on the topic by their editor. More in depth than some of the others I’ve posted here. Just trying to get people to incorporate a genuinely leftist perspective into their news diet.

 

[LeoBloom]

Jacobin is a socialist magazine that has pieces from a ton of different authors. The author of this piece specifically is a sociologist at Grinnell College who has written about and researched immigrant diaspora communities. Don’t think it’s fair to call her data anecdotal.

Home | Sharon M. Quinsaat, PhD

I wish I had the answers to your questions. I think the piece did a good job of laying out the tension we’ve been discussing here.

Perhaps in other articles she provides data. In this article it is anecdotal. That’s the presentation here.

 

[LeoBloom]

Also Hawaii is probably the most integrated state in the union background wise, with a crazy high cost of living (goods shipped in like you said, but also crazy high housing cost), and the majority of the jobs being pure service industry with low wages, and a super-gigantic gap between a large amount of people living in poverty and the upper class. The federal government is also a huge employer via the military and other things like National Park service etc.

It is very hard to blow a Hawaiian data point up to scale for the rest of the country.

Excellent points.

 

[Paine]

Also Hawaii is probably the most integrated state in the union background wise, with a crazy high cost of living (goods shipped in like you said, but also crazy high housing cost), and the majority of the jobs being pure service industry with low wages, and a super-gigantic gap between a large amount of people living in poverty and the upper class. The federal government is also a huge employer via the military and other things like National Park service etc.

It is very hard to blow a Hawaiian data point up to scale for the rest of the country.

I don’t think the author of the piece is trying to blow a data point up to scale for the rest of the country, and she says numerous times in the article that she’s not trying to do that due to Hawaii’s unique nature.

She’s simply taking her expertise and offering a perspective of why and how people from immigrant backgrounds could turn to such a xenophobe as Trump, something many posters here have asked since 11/5.

 

[finesse]

The Age of Class Dealignment

Over the course of decades, social democracy abandoned workers. Then workers abandoned social democracy.

jacobin.com

Here’s another Jacobin article on the topic by their editor. More in depth than some of the others I’ve posted here. Just trying to get people to incorporate a genuinely leftist perspective into their news diet.

I have a lot of trouble when so much of this seems to be about the philosophy of politics while it seems to ignore the cause and effect of world events. I didn't put a lot of thought or careful reading into this because this ignores the base elements of humanity that drives so many of these problems. They frequently don't have anything to do with left or right but more with prejudice, fear and greed which doesn't actually have a side.

 

[Paine]

I have a lot of trouble when so much of this seems to be about the philosophy of politics while it seems to ignore the cause and effect of world events. I didn't put a lot of thought or careful reading into this because this ignores the base elements of humanity that drives so many of these problems. They frequently don't have anything to do with left or right but more with prejudice, fear and greed which doesn't actually have a side.

The “theory of politics”, as far as left wingers like Sunkara are concerned, is directly tied into base elements of humanity. I really don’t know how you could read that whole article and come away with that he’s just talking about left vs right.

 

[superrific]

I was not familiar with this publication until you posted some of their articles and I still have not delved into what exactly it is. It does not appear to be an academic publication, which is fine, but they do, I believe, need to support some of their claims. For instance:
"Numerous studies show that Latinos and Asians are less likely to identify with either the Democratic or Republican Party compared to white and black voters." They need to cite these specific studies so I can know how they were conducted, within what groups were these studies done, and what exactly are the numbers they are talking about. Without that information, it is hard for me to take their conclusions as other than just mere speculation.

Yes, they provide a lot of anecdotal evidence based on interacting with a specific immigrant group in Hawaii. I do not mean that their conclusions are all invalid. However, their conclusions also may be jumps based on minimal actual data.

For one, Hawaii, as they mention, is unique. Getting some goods to Hawaii is more difficult then other states. How does that factor into all of this?
Surely it is not a surprise that immigrants from this community who consume their news from Fox, Newsmax, etc. are more predisposed to support Trump? Also, surely it is not a surprise that immigrants who are deeply involved in evangelical churches are more likely to be conservative?

1. If you're familiar with the old public intellectual journal Dissent, you might think of Jacobin as a 21st century, new media version. Dissent used to come out four times a year, and usually had one lead piece and then three or four 5-10 page essays (sometimes commenting on that story) plus other stuff. I think. It's been a long time. Anyway, Jacobin has shorter pieces (like everyone these days), and it comes out more frequently.

Dissent was not an academic journal, but most of its contributors were academics. That appears to be roughly true of Jacobin, but maybe less concentration of academics. I do think Dissent was a bigger deal in its heyday, which is more a comment about our media world in general than Jacobin in particular. Dissent would pull in bigger names and more prominent people, but again, comparing a quarterly print journal from the 80s to an on-line new media thing is unfair.

2. It seems to be that the author of this piece is conducting an ethnographic study, and if so, you're both right!

Ethnography is a well-respected, fully accepted mode of research with a very long pedigree in sociology and anthropology. Ethnography was how Levi Strauss got started, and Margaret Mead was an ethnographer. In the old days -- that is, until the mid 90s -- the researcher would embed him/herself in the community for a while (a year, two years, something like that), become friends with or at least friendly with the people in the area, and then the ethnographer writes observations. That might still be the method, but a) I haven't read an ethnography since the 90s so I don't know; and b) I have seen wisps of commentary over the years that suggested to me that the basic embedding idea was being reconsidered, but the key word there is wisps.

Anyway, ethnography is not supposed to stand on its own. Well, in the 1920s-1940s, it was; ethnographers would defend their disciplines from encroachment by the statistical analysts. Not a super hard defense to make in the 1920s, but in the 1950s, ethnography and statistical analysis began to be viewed as complements. Without statistics, ethnography isn't necessarily connected to the world; without ethnography, stats are sterile and miss rich detail. That's how I see them. I read a fantastic book about 25 years ago by an academic named Phillippe Bourgeouis, who lived in El Barrio for two years hanging out with drug dealers. I can't remember the title right now, but it was his book from the mid to late 90s and it shouldn't be hard to find.

There are research methods associated with ethnography. It's not just "hang out and then make things up." I can't speak to any of them as I never have been a sociologist or anthropologist.

3. Nothing about that piece strikes me as inherently suspect. The author surely recognizes that Hawaii is not the mainland (I believe she says that explicitly, though it scarcely needs to be said), but I don't think the patterns she identifies would be limited to Hawaii. It's not exactly ground-breaking to suggest that people's views of the world depend on how they get their information, but the argument here is a bit more subtle than that and anyway, we need scientific confirmation of intuitions lest some things we assume to be true turn out not to be.

It is worth mentioning that Duterte in Philippines was one of the first right-wing autocrats (along with his minions) to weaponize social media as mass disinformation. So it's possible the Filipino population was/is especially prone to misinformation. That said, Filipinos in America are often conservative. George Conway is Filipino. David Lat is Filipino (when I found out he worshipped Clarence Thomas, I was floored). There are a couple of Filipinos who right-wingers have put on the bench and they are conservative IIRC.

 

[finesse]

The “theory of politics”, as far as left wingers like Sunkara are concerned, is directly tied into base elements of humanity. I really don’t know how you could read that whole article and come away with that he’s just talking about left vs right.

Thought I made it clear that he couldn't hold my attention. When he started to discuss things like oil shortages, spending cuts on this or that without discussing why that happened, he lost me. The idea of politics as theory instead of an exercise in pragmatism is not a path I can follow.