[arcseco]

This is the result of globalism and a liberalization of nation state markets to trade freely without fear of tariff penalties. It's not hard to see why blue collar workers would rather work in 'poorer' conditions rather than sit idle and lose hope in their futures. If the west has to compete with manufacturing from abroad, that will mean a lowering of work place safety and environmental standards until domestic manufacturing is cost competitive. The end result will be an equalization of living standards between free trading nations, the west will have to capitulate to the lowering of living standards at some point if it hasn't already.

[krapp]

>It's not hard to see why blue collar workers would rather work in 'poorer' conditions rather than sit idle and lose hope in their futures.

Trump's promises have never included the caveat of poorer conditions or lower wages, as far as I'm aware, and I see little evidence of blue collar workers intending to make any sort of tradeoffs in that regard. What he has promised, however, are "more jobs and better wages."

[alphabettsy]

To be fair, Trump didn't offer much in the way of actual policy with stated goals. The 'How' of his plans were seemingly filled in by both imagination and the media.

Saying one is going to put a stop to job killing regulations is deliberately non-specific and some who support him believe he will make things better without acknowledging potentially negative consequences. There are many who supported Clinton or Obama with the same magical thinking, real life is messy and anyone promising simple or easy solutions is a fool or thinks you might be.

[arcseco]

Trump did offer quite a bit in the way of policy. On his first day he shuttered the Trans Pacific Partnership, a monumental shift away from the movement towards globalization. He's pledged to renegotiate trade with Mexico and China, both countries have extremely unbalance trade deficits with the US. I would suggest that President Trump's promises have been more reflected in reality than his predecessors. The effectiveness of his policies can be questioned, but he's set out a path achieve or has achieved many of his core objectives (namely trade and immigration).

[vacri]

To be fairer, people don't vote for policies, they vote for promises. Trump made few policies, but he made a ton of substantial promises. "I'm going to stimulate the economy by twiddling this lending regulation" means nothing to the general public, whereas "I'm going to ensure you'll get paid more" is easy to digest.

[kalleboo]

This is something I don't understand at all. Both how people could vote for Brexit with no plan for what it even means, and how people could vote for a Trump healthcare without any concrete plan or knowing if the GOP would even agree with what the President has promised!

[arcseco]

The reality of the situation has already been set. I think President Trump's move to stop the current trend of opening trade between countries with wildly dissimilar economic standings is the right one, but much of the damage has already been done. Something like 95% of all metropolitan areas in the US have seen a shrinking of the middle class between 2000 and 2016 [1]. If that's not a powerful indictment of the past 30 years of drawing back on the protectionist stance that the US gov't had held over the 70yrs prior, maybe the popularity of unconventional politicians is.

[1]https://a.msn.com/r/2/BByItCi?m=en-ca