I would like to explore the whys and hows of this apparent step backwards in so many things and why Trump was voted like he was and this reductionist view helps no one.
On the other hand, it's a fallacy to assume that there must be merit to an argument just because it's championed by a majority.
I'm aware that it's politically suicidal to say that "most people are stupid", but I'm not a politician (I'm not even American) and I feel like "stupidity" should not a priori be ruled out as an explanation.
That there is a divide between the two parties and the average intellectual ability of their supporters is a well-known fact. I'd contest that this is less of an issue than their racism.
If you're in the 90th IQ percentile, sure, most people are stupid to you.
Which seems to actually be the case quite often.
I believe social media has widened the most extreme opinions and forced polarisation on most people, I can feel it with the UK too, where a very clearly corrupt government, with a revolving door of leadership: one losing the country enough money in 14 days to pay for the NHS for a decade… are being talked about favourably over a meek, awkward, slightly right of centre leader who happens to be wearing a red badge instead of a blue one.
Discourse is so swollen with bitter defence and snide attacks with soundbites of “sides”, I really do believe that its the fault of platforms showing the most divisive voices most often.
The thing that pushes me towards right for example, is seeing people dehumanising men for being men (not behaviours, just clear misandry against the gender) on social media so openly- and to much fanfare. I would otherwise be considered extremely left wing by UK standards.
Is this something you do actually experience in real life though?
Because I'm with you that social media is part of the problem. When I was using Twitter, many years ago, I also saw a lot of these super-woke people that I thought were just crazy.
But in real life, I don't see these caricatures so often (where they do exist, they tend to stick together in close-knit organisations and so are easy to avoid). Most women, gay and trans people, minorities etc. that I met just want to have some basic rights and don't care about culture wars about language use etc.
More impressionable people might hide stronger beliefs, like my mum, who is a reformer in the UK and parrots all their talking points and soundbites, but only down the pub with her like minded friends, or with me. Never to a labour supporter or in a public forum- so they almost never get challenged; and they become so deep rooted.
Messages from certain leaders can resonate deeply with people. If a message is well-received by so many, it could mean the opposing side didn’t present a strong enough argument—basic politics.
In my persoanl view, the discourse needed to challenge figures like Trump is limited by U.S. politics, which is heavily influenced by corporate funding. This influence likely explains why the Democratic Party often seems unwilling to take bold stances.
Policies like stronger unions, better social protections, higher taxes for the wealthy, and a meaningful minimum wage increase are hard to promise if campaigns depend on corporate backing.
When optimising globally, sometimes a backward step is required to escape a local minima. It is possible that progressive politics has made a misstep, and that correcting that is the right thing to do.
There is probably no single thing that you could ascribe to 70M voters except that they vote. However, there are plenty of themes that are touted amongst supporters, many (all?) of which are easily shown to be false. Also, his biggest benefactors are people with a lot of money or influence... which are definitely not most of those 70M voters.
The man was convicted by a jury, impeached, and is known to have raped people. He is a known national security risk. ... the "critiques" are endless.
IMHO, to say that there is a useful message to be sent by electing him is naive at best. The fact that nobody can seem to discern that message despite truly trying is also telling.
Is the message, "people just want to watch the world burn?" Is it something else? As far as I can tell, nobody actually knows.
Meanwhile, he has declared victory before the votes are actually finalized. Is the probability high? Yes. Does it undermine the process? Also, yes.
Are there factors such as, "Kamala is a black female" at play? Almost definitely. Does Trump pander to groups that are covertly/overtly racist? Yes. Do all of his supporters understand/admit that? No.
Trump promises to truly crater it, Musk stands behind him and promises said austerity.
Voters still vote for Trump on the basis of economy.
Are there any other ways to interpret it? Than that your average voter simply doesn't know the basics of econ?
Singapore has nationalized housing and is extraordinarily prosperous. Perhaps rent control isn't a good measure and we should simply do that instead.
We have a first pass the post voting system which only allows for two parties.
We have this thing called the electoral college that further obfuscates the popular will.
Both of these flawed systems disillusion millions of people every election cycle. People in non-swing states who have a minority opinion feel they have no voice, and often do not vote.
People who have serious issue with the two major parties have no viable method to express their political will.
---
Media:
We have a highly polarized media environment where a large number of people only get their facts from highly biased sources. This can happen on "both sides" but it's particularly evident with conservative media such as Fox News. In this outlet, millions of people see an alternate reality to the one we live in. They don't see Trump's age-addled brain or his most offensive rhetoric.
---
Policy:
Many people seem to think that the Democratic party is responsible for the inflation of the past 4 years. Many people seem to think that Trump stands for lower taxes for the working class, in ways that won't hurt them.
If we take Trump literally, he wants to deport many millions of people who live and work in this country peacefully, but do not have proper documentation. He wants to give Ukraine to Russia. I believe he is at best ambivalent to a national abortion ban. He doesn't show any support for combating climate change.
I'm probably leaving some points out, it's late.
Would you find a popular vote system that entirely ignores the votes of dozens of states in favor of just a few somehow carrying less obfuscation of the will of the people?
They're just more uneducated than ever, more conservative than ever, and idolizing dehumanization and evil totalitarians more than ever.
The root of everything is social insecurity and bad education, caused by the USA actually not being a country for its people but for corporations and billionaires.
I'm sorry but if you want a pathological liar, criminal and an overall horrible human being as a president of the (probably) most powerful and influential country in the world, you're just scum. Keep the downvotes coming.
Fix inequality.
[1] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2015/dea... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stiglitz
This is precisely what I'm talking about. You really think this comment is going to do anything but push even more people to vote for the right? Because why would they side with your camp when you just called them scum, because you don't understand their intentions for voting for him/the party?
Which is extra unfortunate, because your comment up until that part was pretty good.
I also understand that they willfully choose to ignore massive red flags and are a bunch of hypocrites. These people have no shame and need to be shamed. It is the key emotion that leads to change and motivates to action.
Sadly, due to electoral interference by totalitarian regimes, media outlets, Musk, and the internet in general, these people who would otherwise be ostracized by the community due to their antisocial behaviours have been normalized.
Once you're set up like that, it's extremely difficult to get out of. I am afraid that the US has check-mated itself for at least an entire generation. The only thing that can drive a change is hope and basic human decency, ethics and morality.
Which brings us back to people wilfully being the exact opposites of those values. We've had lying oppressive demagogues probably since the dawn of humanity. Most certainly in the last century.
However, despite being afraid and frustrated, many people sided against such leaders. And this is why I consider not doing so a personal moral failing.
[1] https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/11/trump-voters-li...
You can chalk it up to "stupidity", which is rather silly on its face, or you can acknowledge that this result is the symptom of something far deeper, and try to explore what those issues are, and try to find solutions.
One's easier though, I imagine.
I put it - as an outside chance - that it is possible that the policies and outcomes of said policies have a bearing on the voting decisions people make.
Erosion of democracy didn't seem to trouble the minds of the land of the free very much. I'm not too worried by Trump's second term, but I'm anxious about his third and fourth. One other issue is a fear of turning into Mexico, which people seem to think might happen by letting Mexicans in, but may yet be accomplished in a home-grown manner through insurrections and dismantling institutions.
So, not stupidity, no. But a lack of education can look similar.
You can be against Trump for many good reasons, but a good look at why he won is about much more than just deriding his supporters as ignorant.
Trump is engaging in hate and divisive politics, he rules GOP. Democrats are constantly trying to play the high ground, they are loosing.
I think that the politics got to this point because the "sides" are graded on the curve. No matter how bad one side gets, you are supposed to project best possible intentions on them, worst possible intentions on their liberal opposition just so someone can say "they are the same". Like common. The long term plan to destroy Roe vs Wade for real and worked. The rights of gays and trans are going down the drain. There is literal plan to make anticonception harder to get. Trump was literally talking about this being last election and literally tried the coup after last election.
Can we please, stop with the nonsense? I remember center mocking feminists when they said abortion rights are at dangers. Guess what, they were right.
This is not about needing to listen in a more approving way. It is about needing to listen and oppose more strongly, because what they say about themselves is that they find "evil" to be something to aspire to.
Second, he literally said he aspires to be a dictator, talks approvingly about dictators, and he does engage in literal extremist rhetoric on his rallies. You can be Nazi, an extremist, a dictator while not being literally Hitler in every single detail.
He likes when people say that about him. Not saying those is just lying, insisting that others dont say those is insisting on everyone lying.