[legolas2412]

griffoa was arguing that people have lost trust in the system. Whether is it organically arosen from disagreement with the opposite side, or disinformation from political propaganda is a separate topic. It does not change the fact that america is a divided country where the rural half has lost trust in the urban half of the country.

[krapp]

>It does not change the fact that america is a divided country where the rural half has lost trust in the urban half of the country.

There is no "rural half" and "urban half." Trump's rural support is primarily from white voters, but his support among other demographics is far lower. Black people seem to be voting for Biden in droves this time, and not all of them are in cities. And per capita, the urban half is closer to 80% versus the rural 20%.

The narrative of "urban vs. rural" is populist propaganda, intended to imply that a solid half of the US supports Trump and that he represents the entirety of "rural" American identity, which isn't true.

[legolas2412]

You seem to be implying that the divide is not rural or urban, but whites vs blacks, or rural whites vs everyone else.

Seems to be away from the topic right? There is half the country supporting a candidate like trump because they are disgruntled of the other candidates. That was the point, and you don't get to wash your hands off the fact that the country is divided.

[krapp]

>You seem to be implying that the divide is not rural or urban, but whites vs blacks, or rural whites vs everyone else.

I'm implying that race and class divisions are more relevant in American culture and politics than rural vs. urban, yes. As is right vs left. The narrative that the primary motive for Trump's support is a deep cultural anger by rural Americans against city-dwellers is entirely populist fiction.

>There is half the country supporting a candidate like trump because they are disgruntled of the other candidates.

Only about half of eligible voters even voted in 2016, and only half of them voted for Trump, a slight majority voted for Clinton. And eligible voters comprise about a third of the total population. Even if you took for granted that all rural voters support Trump, and all urban voters don't, Trump supporters would still be in the minority.

>and you don't get to wash your hands off the fact that the country is divided

Are you trying to imply there's blood on my hands? What precisely are you implying that I should be ashamed of?

Your increasingly accusatory tone makes me not want to continue this conversation further.

[dragonwriter]

> Only about half of eligible voters even voted in 2016, and only half of them voted for Trump

~46%

> a slight majority voted for Clinton.

A plurality (~48%).

[zepto]

Trump had huge support amongst Hispanic voters this time around.

Also, urban vs rural may be propaganda, but it’s also simply true from a statistical point of view.