[andrewstuart]

Addressing the concerns of the Trump supporters is the only way forward. Why are they angry?

Silicon Valley - one of the richest sectors of society, is up in arms because the disenfranchised "have nots" are expressing their anger about being "have nots" by just tearing the whole damn thing down. The "have nots" say - through Trump and his actions - "OK, you got everything, we got nothing, here's the payback".

The have nots are angry and simply want to smash everything. The process is only just starting.

The ONLY solution is to bring the "have nots" back to being "haves". When you fight Trump, you simply fight the "have nots". You cannot fight them, you must take away Trumps support base by winning them over, not opposing them.

[jondubois]

I bet that there are a lot of Americans who completely disagree with Trump's policies and yet at the same time they feel avenged by them.

The working class enjoys watching the elites get worked up and horrified about Trump.

I think that this election is a manifestation of inter-class conflicts according to "Maslow's hierarchy of needs" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs ).

On one side, we have the working class made up of people who don't care too much about moral ideals because they can barely afford the "Safety" step on the Maslow pyramid.

On the other side, we have the elites who don't seem to care about the daily struggles of the working class and instead prefer to indulge their need for self-actualization by focusing on convenient moral ideals instead of inconvenient practicalities.

Why weren't any of these celebrities protesting when Washington bailed out the big banks during the financial crisis? That issue had much more significant ramifications on the average American but the elites didn't care because doing something about it would have hurt their stock portfolios.

[puranjay]

Man, I'm working out of an office in an industrial area in New Delhi, India.

Literally across my office is a scrap metal dealer. He has about a dozen guys literally hammering metal to flatten it storing it.

This is work that can be done in minutes by a simple machine. But he has 12 people doing it because it's likely cheaper or because he doesn't know that a machine like that exists.

This is happening all across the world and no one is willing to address it. People are angry because there is no "real work" left for them anymore. Even in startups around me, I see so many jobs that don't need to exist. We're just "creating work" by adding jobs that don'tn need to exist, or refusing to adopt technology.

The way the world is right now, something had to give. Trump is just a symptom of that.

[mdemare]

Have nots? Trump voters were richer than Clinton voters.

[maxsilver]

This is "true" in that "you can pull up some statistics that 'prove' this", but it misses the major issues entirely.

Yes, technically Trump voters have a slightly higher income than some Clinton voters if you pull some census data and overlay that to voter data. But income alone is not a great way to measure wealth. Clinton voters earning <$30k are often "wealthier" than Trump voters earning $40k, once you account for non-income wealth.

Clinton voters <$30k here get access to subsidized high-quality urban housing, in the heart of the city, with lots of educational resources, business resources, the experience and culture of many diverse residents, and access to a poor-but-better-than-nothing public transit system. These folks have slightly higher discretionary income, after expenses are paid.

Trump voters in $40k households here live almost exclusively in old suburban sprawl, with poor quality housing (they "make too much" to qualify for the benefits previously mentioned). These areas have little to no educational or business resources, no diversity of residents, and no usable public transit. Many have sick relatives or have children, driving their costs up. Much of the benefits of cities are entirely outside of their reach -- and will remain that way their entire life. After accounting for higher living expenses, these folks have less discretionary income.

In this way, Trump voters have higher income, but have lower wealth, than lower-income/higher-wealth Clinton voters. There is no dollar amount put on any of those mentioned benefits, it does not show up on an census income report, folks will never get to see this from their coastal office highrise. But that is a very real and valuable form of wealth, that some have but many don't.

---

Someone will condescendingly summarize those stats as "Trump voters just feel poorer than Clinton ones", as if they are lying for fun or something. But there is an actual fact-based argument for Trump voters being real-world poorer than Clinton ones, despite having on-paper slightly higher average incomes.

Similarly, if these folks complain about jobs, someone will argue "the US-BLS shows unemployment is actually down, so your wrong". Ignoring how wage growth has been mostly flat, despite inflation. Ignoring the huge 50%+ cost-of-living increases in Housing, Education, and Medical expenses (even in places like Michigan). Ignoring how many people are significantly under-employed. Ignoring the massive over-inflation of job/education requirements for even just entry-level positions. Ignoring that most of these jobs are being created in high-COL markets that none of these people will ever be able to afford to participate in.

---

I live in Michigan. I am not a Trump voter in any way, but I am surrounded by them and live in an environment that tends to create them. People aren't complaining for fun. This isn't entertainment. They are frustrated to hell and back. And while I don't agree with their vote to "trash the system", and I can at least understand why they feel the way they do, and why they feel this is the best-or-only way to lessen the pain.

If we want to solve this, fundamentally we have to take these problems seriously. Right now, I'm not seeing that. I'm seeing "fact checkers" trying to "prove" these problems are fake, or solved, or getting better, and telling people "your wrong" for mentioning them. Shouting census data at people who are struggling will not win you any support, and will not fix any of the real (factually-real) problems many are struggling with.

[Quarrelsome]

on average is not actually.

[splike]

Source?

[geowwy]

Probably this: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps...

TLDR: * Households earning <$30,000 were significantly more likely to vote for Clinton. * Households earning $50,000-$99,999 were a little more likely to vote for Trump. * Other income brackets are more or less the same.

[rtpg]

The question now: how big is his base?

His approval is in free fall. What's the low point?

40%? 30%? 20%?

The French president was at one point at 8% approval.

[icu]

The only thing that matters now is Trump's approval in the next election.

If he keeps his voter base happy and is seen to be actually doing more things right than wrong he may even pick up more votes.

I honestly can't think of one Democrat at the moment who can take Trump on. They would have to be whiter than fresh snow and 'straight talking' and pro-economic growth and sensible immigration enough to swing Trump supporters... quite an ask.

[majewsky]

There is another way. Trump mostly won because of voter disenfranchisement: It's not that more people voted Republicans than last time, but a lot fewer people voted Democrats than 2008 and 2012. A good Democratic candidate could pull these people back to the polls.