Support NeoGAF

[kirblar]

And pass up the opportunity to turn a bunch of the WWC into felons that won't get their voting rights back thanks thanks to GOP legislatures? I think not. Fight fire with fire.

I'd rather actually win an election in 2020, get both houses, kill the fillibuster, and send through 40 years of backlogged legislation. Including a new VRA.

 

[royalan]

Double post but whatever They think the wall does help though. "Less illegals taking our jobs."

I think this is part of what the article gets wrong too in saying offer training. I think it is the solution, but it's one they don't want by and large.

They don't want to retrain. They don't want to be the college educated professional they resent and distrust.

They want their old manly! jobs back, they want them to pay the equivalent of what they used to in current terms so they can live in equivalent comfort, they want to be in charge of things from a social standpoint.

None of this is happening.
But Trump offers them the lie.

Exactly.

This is why I think it would be folly for Democrats to make more of a play for these voters than they already are. These voters don't want the truth.

THEY. CAN'T. HANDLE. THE. TRUTH.

They don't want to be told that the golden age of American manufacturing and coal is never coming back. They don't want subsidies and they don't want new industry. All things Democrats have promised well before Hillary. They want their old coal jobs back. They want their old factory culture back. Nothing else.

And so long as there's a political party selling this dream to them, even if the dream is never realized they will continue to stay angry and distrustful of Democrats.

 

[XenodudeX]

Honestly WWC voters are just lazy and want a government handout. They need to learn how to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and work harder!

 

[Wilsongt]

Honestly WWC voters are just lazy and want a government handout. They need to learn how to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and work harder!

Social security and medicaid is the penultimate government handout. Lol

 

[kadotsu]

Social security and medicaid is the penultimate government handout. Lol

The ultimate being public health funerals?

 

[chadskin]

I don't understand the alt-right's obsession with Putin/Russia. Am I right in reading them as betas who subconsciously resent their own beta-ness and see Putin as the alpha they should aspire to be? Otherwise I don't get it; Russia doesn't seem like a particularly pleasant place to live.

They see Putin as a strongman and defender of the 'traditional, conservative, Christian values' in opposition to the West's multicultural, transnational liberalism

It's not a new thing. This was in 2013:

The Kremlin apparently believes it has found the ultimate wedge issue to unite its supporters and divide its opponents, both in Russia and the West, and garner support in the developing world. They seem to believe they have found the ideology that will return Russia to its rightful place as a great power with a messianic mission and the ability to win hearts and minds globally.

As the West becomes increasingly multicultural, less patriarchal and traditional, and more open to gay rights, Russia will be a lodestone for the multitudes who oppose this trajectory. Just as the Communist International, or Comintern, and what Soviet ideologists called the "correlation of forces" sought to unite progressive elements around the globe behind Moscow, the world's traditionalists will now line up behind Putin.

"While his stance as a defender of traditional values has drawn the mockery of Western media and cultural elites, Putin is not wrong in saying that he can speak for much of mankind," conservative American commentator Patrick Buchanan wrote. "Putin may be seeing the future with more clarity than Americans still caught in a Cold War paradigm."

The 21st century, Buchanan adds, may be marked by a struggle pitting "conservatives and traditionalists in every country arrayed against the militant secularism of a multicultural and transnational elite."

http://www.rferl.org/a/vladimir-ilyich-putin-the-conservative-lenin/25206293.html

With Brexit and Trump, his approach appears to have been quite fruitful this year.

 

[Wilsongt]

The ultimate being public health funerals?

Corperate tax breaks

 

[geomon]

Exactly.

This is why I think it would be folly for Democrats to make more of a play for these voters than they already are. These voters don't want the truth.

THEY. CAN'T. HANDLE. THE. TRUTH.

They don't want to be told that the golden age of American manufacturing and coal is never coming back. They don't want subsidies and they don't want new industry. All things Democrats have promised well before Hillary. They want their old coal jobs back. They want their old factory culture back. Nothing else.

And so long as there's a political party selling this dream to them, even if the dream is never realized they will continue to stay angry and distrustful of Democrats.

So what's the solution? Hang on for dear life until they die off?

 

[thehypocrite]

Exactly.

This is why I think it would be folly for Democrats to make more of a play for these voters than they already are. These voters don't want the truth.

THEY. CAN'T. HANDLE. THE. TRUTH.

They don't want to be told that the golden age of American manufacturing and coal is never coming back. They don't want subsidies and they don't want new industry. All things Democrats have promised well before Hillary. They want their old coal jobs back. They want their old factory culture back. Nothing else.

And so long as there's a political party selling this dream to them, even if the dream is never realized they will continue to stay angry and distrustful of Democrats.

I disagree, you are building a monolith using individual grains of sand. I don't think your generalization is accurate. Some people =! all people. Sure, some people are moved by those pie in the sky things that aren't happening, that's were an adequate message, using a credible avatar can help a lot.

 

[i_am_ben]

 

[mo60]

They see Putin as a strongman and defender of the 'traditional, conservative, Christian values' in opposition to the West's multicultural, transnational liberalism

It's not a new thing. This was in 2013:


http://www.rferl.org/a/vladimir-ilyich-putin-the-conservative-lenin/25206293.html

With Brexit and Trump, his approach appears to have been quite fruitful this year.

I wonder if his approach will work with Le Pen because I highly doubt it will at this point.

 

[whyamihere]

@DrJillStein
Fidel Castro was a symbol of the struggle for justice in the shadow of empire. Presente!

god, she is the worst

 

[Team Alucard]

I wonder if his approach will work with Le Pen because I highly doubt it will at this point.

if its Fillon vs. Le Pen I think Le Pen is going to win.

I don't see PS voters supporting a guy who wants to rollback labor rights, eliminate the safety net, and privatize and deregulate everything.

I'm not French though so what do I know.

 

[whyamihere]

if its Fillon vs. Le Pen I think Le Pen is going to win.

I don't see PS voters supporting a guy who wants to rollback labor rights, eliminate the safety net, and privatize and deregulate everything.

I'm not French though so what do I know.

This feels right. I think we're fucked if Fillion is the nominee.

 

[dramatis]

So when is the NAFTA renegotiation going to occur?

Also, the renegotiation will undoubtedly benefit the USA but I wonder if it can ever be renegotiated to the extent his supporters want.

I don't think the renegotiation is guaranteed to benefit the USA.

There were several articles going over what would happen if NAFTA got busted shortly after the election. Even if Trump 'renegotiates', Congress might make hay since they'd have to be caught with a vote on a new NAFTA. Secondly, if negotiations fail, and Trump folds NAFTA, the jobs won't come back to the rust belt. Moreover, they'll have the southern states that benefited from NAFTA breathing fire.

You can't upend the status quo without a lot of consequences, and they're not so easily distilled into "benefits".

 

[AntraxSuicide]

I disagree, you are building a monolith using individual grains of sand. I don't think your generalization is accurate. Some people =! all people. Sure, some people are moved by those pie in the sky things that aren't happening, that's were an adequate message, using a credible avatar can help a lot.

Eh, I'm sure we can find a gay black atheist who voted Trump, but that doesn't mean we should use such a voter to build strategy. Trump's base was made of people with above average pay without college, which is precisely the people in trade work who have skills that are almost obsolete.

 

[Totakeke]

I disagree, you are building a monolith using individual grains of sand. I don't think your generalization is accurate. Some people =! all people. Sure, some people are moved by those pie in the sky things that aren't happening, that's were an adequate message, using a credible avatar can help a lot.

These evaluations feel like that they are often are made in a vacuum, who says the candidate from the Democratic party is more credible than the Republican party's candidate? And the barometer for credibility is Trump. Even if the Democratic party puts up the ideal white guy, who says the guy on the Republican side cannot just tell bigger lies? Therein lies the problem when we talk about a "credible avatar" while discounting the actual policy proposals and feasibility plans. It's a race to the bottom.

And yeah, it's hard to believe royalan when he's a young black guy too.

 

[whyamihere]

Oof, Corbyn defending Castro here (along with Trudeau) is a terrible look. At least Hollande talks mostly about the embargo:

http://www.nytimes.com/video/world/...partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

 

[numble]

Exactly.

This is why I think it would be folly for Democrats to make more of a play for these voters than they already are. These voters don't want the truth.

THEY. CAN'T. HANDLE. THE. TRUTH.

They don't want to be told that the golden age of American manufacturing and coal is never coming back. They don't want subsidies and they don't want new industry. All things Democrats have promised well before Hillary. They want their old coal jobs back. They want their old factory culture back. Nothing else.

And so long as there's a political party selling this dream to them, even if the dream is never realized they will continue to stay angry and distrustful of Democrats.

That's a very broad brush. For instance, coal mining is not relevant at all in Michigan and not very big in Ohio as well--in terms of the Mid-West, it is mostly in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Indiana.

The auto industry is more relevant to Michigan and Ohio, for instance, and Obama won many of these voters with a strong anti-NAFTA and pro-auto bailout message. The Republican Party for the most part hasn't been hitting the same notes--I believe every other Republican candidate except Cruz supported the TPP.

Even the American auto industry was opposed to the TPP:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/b...-from-the-trans-pacific-partnership-pact.html

The Ford Motor Company strongly criticized the Trans-Pacific Partnership on Monday for not including a currency provision in the actual trade agreement. “To ensure the future competitiveness of American manufacturing, we recommend Congress not approve T.P.P. in its current form, and ask the Administration to renegotiate T.P.P. and incorporate strong and enforceable currency rules,” said Ziad Ojakli, Ford’s group vice president for government and community relations.

The same applies to other manufacturing jobs. Forget about the coal industry--or agriculture and construction (where most "illegals" work). I think the margins are small enough in Michigan (not sure about Ohio), that even just focusing on this narrow group of previously reliable Democrats can be enough to tip the balance.

There are larger numbers of anti-trade, pro-manufacturing Democrats in Congress than there are similar Republicans. Just look at how the votes on TPP fast-track authority went--only 4 GOP senators voted against fast-track, while 33 Dems voted against fast-track. Only 13 Dems voted in favor of fast-track, while 47 GOP senators voted in favor. Similar numbers in the House. These platforms are still part of the Democratic base, even if a large number of these voters went for Trump in the last election.

Finally, because young and college-educated people are leaving the Rust Belt every year, while the electoral vote apportionment won't take place until after the next election in 2020, there will be proportionately more of these voters in the Rust Belt in 2020, while young and college-educated will be fewer. You will not win a Rust Belt state in 2020 if you cede these voters to the GOP.

 

[royalan]

So what's the solution? Hang on for dear life until they die off?

No, we appeal to other voters who aren't tied to dying industries and are greater in number.

Eh, I'm sure we can find a gay black atheist who voted Trump, but that doesn't mean we should use such a voter to build strategy. Trump's base was made of people with above average pay without college, which is precisely the people in trade work who have skills that are almost obsolete.

Exactly this.

Spoiler

I'm actually friends with a black, gay, opera-singing atheist who voted Trump.

That's a very broad brush. For instance, coal mining is not relevant at all in Michigan and not very big in Ohio as well--in terms of the Mid-West, it is mostly in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Indiana.

The auto industry is more relevant to Michigan and Ohio, for instance, and Obama won many of these voters with a strong anti-NAFTA and pro-auto bailout message. The Republican Party for the most part hasn't been hitting the same notes--I believe every other Republican candidate except Cruz supported the TPP.

Even the American auto industry was opposed to the TPP:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/b...-from-the-trans-pacific-partnership-pact.html


The same applies to other manufacturing jobs. Forget about the coal industry--or agriculture and construction (where most "illegals" work). I think the margins are small enough in Michigan (not sure about Ohio), that even just focusing on this narrow group of previously reliable Democrats can be enough to tip the balance.

There are larger numbers of anti-trade, pro-manufacturing Democrats in Congress than there are similar Republicans. Just look at how the votes on TPP fast-track authority went--only 4 GOP senators voted against fast-track, while 33 Dems voted against fast-track. Only 13 Dems voted in favor of fast-track, while 47 GOP senators voted in favor. Similar numbers in the House. These platforms are still part of the Democratic base, even if a large number of these voters went for Trump in the last election.

Finally, because young and college-educated people are leaving the Rust Belt every year, while the electoral vote apportionment won't take place until after the next election in 2020, there will be proportionately more of these voters in the Rust Belt in 2020, while young and college-educated will be fewer. You will not win a Rust Belt state in 2020 if you cede these voters to the GOP.

But then this takes us back to the question that's been asked in this thread dozens of times since the election: How do Democrats appeal to this group without outright lying to them?

You can't sell an anti-trade message because that would be dishonest. And besides, trade (smart trade) is a good thing. A strong global economy led by the US SHOULD be the way forward. How do you push that as a Democrat? You're used to winning the trade argument by default against a standard Republican, but can't against a candidate like Trump who will run dangerously far to your left on the issue.

 

[Totakeke]

...

Do you have numbers as to how many jobs would be created/kept and where if the government was more anti-trade and specifically to your proposals?

 

[ampere]

Best way to get WWC voters is having a charming candidate

Like, no lie. We aren't going to sway them with policy, just need someone charming like Obama

 

[numble]

I don't think the renegotiation is guaranteed to benefit the USA.

There were several articles going over what would happen if NAFTA got busted shortly after the election. Even if Trump 'renegotiates', Congress might make hay since they'd have to be caught with a vote on a new NAFTA. Secondly, if negotiations fail, and Trump folds NAFTA, the jobs won't come back to the rust belt. Moreover, they'll have the southern states that benefited from NAFTA breathing fire.

You can't upend the status quo without a lot of consequences, and they're not so easily distilled into "benefits".

Technically, if NAFTA is folded up, that means the US auto tariffs of up to 25% apply to vehicles imported from Canada and Mexico (versus no tariffs under NAFTA). That would mean that it is not economically feasible to build cars in Canada and Mexico, and they would need to build more cars in the Rust Belt for the US market.

Of course there are longer range consequences as you imply, but specifically addressing the one specific point that was bolded, jobs can come back.

 

[Totakeke]

Best way to get WWC voters is having a charming candidate

Like, no lie. We aren't going to sway them with policy, just need someone charming like Obama

Hot take: Even Obama might have lost to Trump if it was the 2016 elections. Like what barometer would you actually measure him on that would give a clear sign of him winning over Trump?

Plus I thought part of the problem was that Obama managed to do too little for the WWC so that anti-Democrat/establishment fervor increased.

 

[ampere]

Hot take: Even Obama might have lost to Trump if it was the 2016 elections. Like what barometer would you actually measure him on that would give a clear sign of him winning over Trump?

Favorability for one

Obama Most recent weekly average 56

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx

Hillary Clinton 40

Trump 33

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1618/favorability-people-news.aspx

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Hot take: Even Obama might have lost to Trump if it was the 2016 elections. Like what barometer would you actually measure him on that would give a clear sign of him winning over Trump?

Plus I thought part of the problem was that Obama managed to do too little for the WWC so that anti-Democrat/establishment fervor increased.

Obama's attacks like "he wouldn't let you on his golf course" and "you didn't build that" would've been so effective. I'm annoyed that Hillary didn't go after his wealth. Fuck, she did the opposite... Trump was secretly a poor man going through financial difficulties.

 

[Totakeke]

Favorability for one

Obama Most recent weekly average 56

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx

Hillary Clinton 40

Trump 33

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1618/favorability-people-news.aspx

Given the state-level polling errors this election, not sure how useful that is, but fair enough.

Obama's attacks like "he wouldn't let you on his golf course" and "you didn't build that" would've been so effective. I'm annoyed that Hillary didn't go after his wealth.

If we take the HBR article at face value, and assuming we have a Obama that hasn't been president, isn't it like liberal elite black law professor who only had a brief Senate stint vs rich white guy who WWC aspires to be? Not sure those attacks would have stuck.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Obama's attacks like "he wouldn't let you on his golf course" and "you didn't build that" would've been so effective. I'm annoyed that Hillary didn't go after his wealth.

Because she's filthy rich. Likely richer than Trump.

 

[thehypocrite]

Eh, I'm sure we can find a gay black atheist who voted Trump, but that doesn't mean we should use such a voter to build strategy. Trump's base was made of people with above average pay without college, which is precisely the people in trade work who have skills that are almost obsolete.

But I didn't say that either. We are talking about marginal gains, not the whole. There no way to turn all voters into Democrats, but, you just need an appropriate margin of them to win.

These evaluations feel like that they are often are made in a vacuum, who says the candidate from the Democratic party is more credible than the Republican party's candidate? And the barometer for credibility is Trump. Even if the Democratic party puts up the ideal white guy, who says the guy on the Republican side cannot just tell bigger lies? Therein lies the problem when we talk about a "credible avatar" while discounting the actual policy proposals and feasibility plans. It's a race to the bottom.

And yeah, it's hard to believe royalan when he's a young black guy too.

I said it has to be, not that's going to be. There's no certainty on the outcome and then again, I honestly care more about 2018, in 2020 let the best one prove itself to voters during the primaries.

 

[numble]

But then this takes us back to the question that's been asked in this thread dozens of times since the election: How do Democrats appeal to this group without outright lying to them?

You can't sell an anti-trade message because that would be dishonest. And besides, trade (smart trade) is a good thing. A strong global economy led by the US SHOULD be the way forward. How do you push that as a Democrat? You're used to winning the trade argument by default against a standard Republican, but can't against a candidate like Trump who will run dangerously far to your left on the issue.

Look at Sherrod Brown, Tim Ryan, Ed Rendell for the blueprints. Look at Obama in 2008 and 2012. Your opponent will not always be Trump, unless you cede advocacy of such issues to the GOP. You also need to win these voters in the mid-terms, and GOP Congressional candidates are also not Trump.

Do you have numbers as to how many jobs would be created/kept and where if the government was more anti-trade and specifically to your proposals?

You can read the advisory committee reports on the TPP--these are committees assembled by Obama and the USTR to advise on the TPP.

Industry Trade Advisory Committee on Automotive Equipment and Capital Goods
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/ITAC-2-Automobile-Equipment-and-Capital-Goods.pdf

ITAC 2 Automotive Equipment members note that commitments made by Japan to the United States in the Appendix D and the automotive-related side letters, aimed in large part at addressing the non-tariff barriers U.S. motor vehicle exports face in Japan, marginally improves U.S. automakers access to the Japanese domestic automotive market.
...
However, given the scope of what is covered and the decades long experience in previous agreements with Japan that have taken similar approaches, the view of ITAC 2 Automotive Equipment members is that these commitments will not lead to a substantially larger U.S. presence in the Japanese motor vehicle market.

ITAC 2 Automotive manufacturers note that the Asia-pacific region is home to several countries, including parties to the TPP and others that have expressed interest in joining TPP, that have regularly used exchange rate policies to gain an unfair trade advantage. As such, it was recommended that a strong and enforceable commitment to prohibit currency manipulation be included in the TPP agreement, with the view that without such a commitment a serious threat to the expected benefits of the TPP would persist.

The establishment of a separate macroeconomic policy authority forum among TPP party countries designed to focus on exchange rate policies, transparency and reporting, and consultations coupled with the commitments expected from the yet-to-be-approved Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act, falls short of the aforementioned recommendations, but could, if handled properly, represent an important opportunity.

Labor Advisory Committee
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/file...e-for-Trade-Negotiations-and-Trade-Policy.pdf

As was noted in an initial evaluation of the TPP published in the Wall Street Journal, the combined U.S. trade deficit in manufacturing, including automobiles and auto parts, would increase by $55.8 billion under the TPP. Utilizing the conservative estimate of the Department of Commerce that each $1 billion in trade correlates to 6,000 jobs, the TPP will cost, at a minimum, 330,000 jobs in the manufacturing sector.

The single greatest threat to manufacturing in the TPP results from the rules of origin provisions in the auto and auto parts sector. Under this provision, which requires 45 percent, at most, of a finished automobile to consist of value originating in the TPP countries, the majority of an auto could consist of value created outside of the TPP, from a country such as China. The North American Free Trade Agreement began the fundamental shift of auto assembly and auto parts production from the U.S., with massive outsourcing of production to Mexico. Under NAFTA, 62.5 percent of the value of a vehicle must originate in the signatory countries to qualify for preferential trade treatment. The immediate reduction of that requirement to 45 percent, with the potential for significantly more foreign-sourced parts to be deemed as originating in the TPP for calculation purposes, will deal a devastating blow to U.S. production and employment.

Now that the tariff schedules have become available, it is clear that tariffs on many of Japan’s agricultural products will not be eliminated, while the tariffs for U.S. cars, trucks, and auto parts will be. We view this as a failure to achieve the promised outcome.

Japanese automakers eventually stand to receive a one billion dollar annual tax break on exports to the U.S., regardless of whether promised new markets in Japan materialize for U.S. exporters. We reiterate that the TPP should have required that Japan actually open its market to imports before enjoying tariff reductions from the U.S. Hard working U.S. families have heard enough empty promises. Japan is far from the only country in the TPP that has a strong manufacturing base and a long history of maintaining a closed market. All remaining U.S. tariffs on cars, trucks, and parts will eventually be eliminated. It is less than certain, however, that non-tariff barriers deployed by all TPP participants will in fact be eliminated.

Its weak rules of origin, lack of rules on currency manipulation, and benefits that would apply to Chinese companies operating in any of the TPP countries mean that China has very little incentive to change its mercantilist model that has been undercutting U.S. manufacturers and displacing millions of U.S. jobs for more than a decade. For example, if Chinese intermediate parts are exported to Malaysia for final assembly and export to the U.S., those parts can be made out of compliance with TPP standards, but still receive TPP benefits as part of the finished product. In the case of automobile parts, Chinese exports made out of compliance with TPP standards can even constitute more than a majority (55 percent) of the value of a vehicle’s content.

 

[Totakeke]

I said it has to be, not that's going to be. There's no certainty on the outcome and then again, I honestly care more about 2018, in 2020 let the best one prove itself to voters during the primaries.

I am talking about the future though, most of the talk about "let's just put a better candidate" sort of assumes that the republicans can't put a far better candidate.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Technically, if NAFTA is folded up, that means the US auto tariffs of up to 25% apply to vehicles imported from Canada and Mexico (versus no tariffs under NAFTA). That would mean that it is not economically feasible to build cars in Canada and Mexico, and they would need to build more cars in the Rust Belt for the US market.

Of course there are longer range consequences as you imply, but specifically addressing the one specific point that was bolded, jobs can come back.

To my knowledge, those jobs would be few in number (due to automation) and would require skills that these people don't have (given their education). That's what people generally mean when we talk "those jobs won't come back." These people want to work the line like their grandpas did and make that same salary (adjusted for today's dollar), but that particular job is obsolete. It gets done overseas because it's cheap, and if forced to pay decent wages here in the States, most of this work can be effectively given to the machines. Sure, people need to maintain those, but those people will be educated transplants, not rural workers who live there now.

It's brutal, but right now, the typical worker in the Rust Belt has all of the marketable skills of a 17 year old kid applying for their first positions. Sure, you technically have skills, but no one needs them anymore. Certainly not for the pay you'd want, at least. And I assure you, these people aren't voting this way because they want factory jobs at minimum wage. They want good pay for obsolete work. It's a fantasy that Dems shouldn't be pushing.

Yes, this is harder than lying to voters, but that's not a deal with the devil I can live with. Let them vote their own economic interests away, but I will not support anyone who outright lies for votes.

 

[wutwutwut]

Technically, if NAFTA is folded up, that means the US auto tariffs of up to 25% apply to vehicles imported from Canada and Mexico (versus no tariffs under NAFTA). That would mean that it is not economically feasible to build cars in Canada and Mexico, and they would need to build more cars in the Rust Belt for the US market.

Of course there are longer range consequences as you imply, but specifically addressing the one specific point that was bolded, jobs can come back.

The jobs that will come back are for people like my partner, who has a degree in EE and years of experience in robotics. The WWC is not going to benefit.

 

[royalan]

Obama's attacks like "he wouldn't let you on his golf course" and "you didn't build that" would've been so effective. I'm annoyed that Hillary didn't go after his wealth. Fuck, she did the opposite... Trump was secretly a poor man going through financial difficulties.

Those attacks wouldn't have worked. Trump's voters know he's an elitist. They're not blind to that. That's why attacking Trump's businesses and his corruption fell on deaf ears; his voters didn't care and never will.

They know he's an elitist.
They know he's not going to bring them jobs.
They know he's not going to build an actual wall.
They know the man is a liar and a con artist.

And they don't care, because Trump didn't actually run on those things. He ran on white pride and machismo. We all joked about "Make America Great Again" really being code for "Make America White Again" but it's fucking true. The racism, the 'strength before reason', more than classism, more than economic anxiety, was the consistent throughline in the Trump campaign. It was Obama's blanket Hope and Change; the thing that made you forget everything else because you could project whatever you wanted onto that core, central message.

Trump may be a corrupt con artist, but now he'll be one for us. They were telling us this whole time.

And I don't think even an Obama focusing solely on his lack of business acumen would have been able to overcome that.

 

[i_am_ben]

Ultimately for Trump it doesn't matter if NAFTA brings back any jobs. Only that NAFTA is significantly changed enough that he can run for re-election on the back of it.

 

[excelsiorlef]

god, she is the worst

She probably has a closet of Che shirts.

 

[numble]

To my knowledge, those jobs would be few in number (due to automation) and would require skills that these people don't have (given their education). That's what people generally mean when we talk "those jobs won't come back." These people want to work the line like their grandpas did and make that same salary (adjusted for today's dollar), but that particular job is obsolete. It gets done overseas because it's cheap, and if forced to pay decent wages here in the States, most of this work can be effectively given to the machines. Sure, people need to maintain those, but those people will be educated transplants, not rural workers who live there now.

It's brutal, but right now, the typical worker in the Rust Belt has all of the marketable skills of a 17 year old kid applying for their first positions. Sure, you technically have skills, but no one needs them anymore. Certainly not for the pay you'd want, at least. And I assure you, these people aren't voting this way because they want factory jobs at minimum wage. They want good pay for obsolete work. It's a fantasy that Dems shouldn't be pushing.

Yes, this is harder than lying to voters, but that's not a deal with the devil I can live with. Let them vote their own economic interests away, but I will not support anyone who outright lies for votes.

The jobs that will come back are for people like my partner, who has a degree in EE and years of experience in robotics. The WWC is not going to benefit.

You guys are looking too far ahead--there is still a big labor-intensive auto manufacturing industry in these states, and many of the voters are still working at these plants. UAW salaries are public--$20-$30/hour for entry level workers.

The auto bailout happened in 2009 and saved 1 to 1.5 million jobs in the auto industry--primarily concentrated in the Rust Belt. Clinton loss by a fraction of that in the Rust Belt. People opposed the TPP because it would accelerate job losses faster than through automation.

We might as well oppose greater funding for higher education because many of those jobs are predicted to be replaced by automation sometime in the future anyway.

 

[thehypocrite]

I am talking about the future though, most of the talk about "let's just put a better candidate" sort of assumes that the republicans can't put a far better candidate.

Is gonna be Trump again. He loves campaigning, it boost his #Brand that's what's happening I think.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

You guys are looking too far ahead--there is still a big labor-intensive auto manufacturing industry in these states, and many of the voters are still working at these plants. UAW salaries are public--$20-$30/hour for entry level workers.

The auto bailout happened in 2009 and saved 1 to 1.5 million jobs in the auto industry--primarily concentrated in the Rust Belt. Clinton loss by a fraction of that in the Rust Belt. People opposed the TPP because it would accelerate job losses faster than through automation.

We might as well oppose greater funding for higher education because many of those jobs are predicted to be replaced by automation sometime in the future anyway.

You're conflating the time scale there. Those manufacturing jobs are going to be automated in the next decade, not the next 50 years. It's not the example you just gave, it's someone investing in flip phones in 2008. The obsolescence of these peoples' jobs is not some far-off specter to shrug at, and lying to them is not something I'm ever going to support.

I can assure you that no one is going to be worried about recommending med school to their kids for decades, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone recommending manufacturing to kids today.

 

[Suikoguy]

You're conflating the time scale there. Those manufacturing jobs are going to be automated in the next decade, not the next 50 years. It's not the example you just gave, it's someone investing in flip phones in 2008. The obsolescence of these peoples' jobs is not some far-off specter to shrug at, and lying to them is not something I'm ever going to support.

I can assure you that no one is going to be worried about recommending med school to their kids for decades, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone recommending manufacturing to kids today.

Don't forget all of the trucking jobs about to go 'poof'.
And it won't even be jobs lost to "those damn foreigners!".

Dems should probably start messaging about that now, and hope it persists through goldfish memory.

 

[numble]

You're conflating the time scale there. Those manufacturing jobs are going to be automated in the next decade, not the next 50 years. It's not the example you just gave, it's someone investing in flip phones in 2008. The obsolescence of these peoples' jobs is not some far-off specter to shrug at, and lying to them is not something I'm ever going to support.

I can assure you that no one is going to be worried about recommending med school to their kids for decades, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone recommending manufacturing to kids today.

I'd wager there are still many people recommending that their kids look for work at the local plant than to go to med school. Only 20,000 people enter med school each year.

If you are really confident that the jobs will be replaced in the next decade, then you should be confident that Trump will see a decrease in manufacturing jobs and have difficulty appealing to the group in 2020.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Don't forget all of the trucking jobs about to go 'poof'.
And it won't even be jobs lost to "those damn foreigners!".

Dems should probably start messaging about that now, and hope it persists through goldfish memory.

Yep, I agree. The free market is killing these places, and lies won't fix them. We need to push for real solutions, which involves some hardcore economic lefty policy hopefully wrapped in some libertarian-sounding social statements (need more Kanders, JBEs, and Kaines who can relate to pro-gun, pro-lifers without actually breaking from the Dems on those policies).

Edit: I'm extremely confident that Trump will see those jobs decline and will lose favorability with those people. Extremely confident. Reality doesn't change because you will it to, and obsolescence doesn't get re-written if you wish really hard.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I disagree, you are building a monolith using individual grains of sand. I don't think your generalization is accurate. Some people =! all people. Sure, some people are moved by those pie in the sky things that aren't happening, that's were an adequate message, using a credible avatar can help a lot.

Who is a credible avatar for actual solutions, and what are those actual solutions, long term solutions though? That are acceptable to these voters. That they actually want.

You're not reversing automation. You're not reversing operations management techniques.
I guess you could start a trade war with China.

 

[sphagnum]

Who is a credible avatar for actual solutions, and what are those actual solutions, long term solutions though? That are acceptable to these voters. That they actually want.

You're not reversing automation. You're not reversing operations management techniques.

Time to secretly indoctrinate Joe Biden into Marxism

 

[Dan]

Don't forget all of the trucking jobs about to go 'poof'.
And it won't even be jobs lost to "those damn foreigners!".

Make America Great Again 2.0 will include stuff like the Flesh Fairs from AI.

If you are really confident that the jobs will be replaced in the next decade, then you should be confident that Trump will see a decrease in manufacturing jobs and have difficulty appealing to the group in 2020.

There's a decent enough chance of that happening, but people so willing to ignore reality and give in to pipe dreams and cognitive dissonance (Trump says he'll make coal come back and expand fracking and natural gas!) might still be willing to talk themselves into believing Trump or someone else's moving goalposts. Democrats will need to be ready to offer something to the subsection of Trump supporters who end up disillusioned.

 

[Totakeke]

Anti-establishment 2.0, but this time framing Trump as an elite.

 

[PBY]

Can't fucking believe Trump has the moral high ground on this recount. Let it go geez.

 

[Totakeke]

Can't fucking believe Trump has the moral high ground on this recount. Let it go geez.

Trump has moral high ground on Jill Stein? Yeah probably.

 

[Suikoguy]

Trump has moral high ground on Jill Stein? Yeah probably.

That's a really difficult Moral High Ground to judge, bwhahaha

 

[numble]

Yep, I agree. The free market is killing these places, and lies won't fix them. We need to push for real solutions, which involves some hardcore economic lefty policy hopefully wrapped in some libertarian-sounding social statements (need more Kanders, JBEs, and Kaines who can relate to pro-gun, pro-lifers without actually breaking from the Dems on those policies).

Edit: I'm extremely confident that Trump will see those jobs decline and will lose favorability with those people. Extremely confident. Reality doesn't change because you will it to, and obsolescence doesn't get re-written if you wish really hard.

Who is a credible avatar for actual solutions, and what are those actual solutions, long term solutions though? That are acceptable to these voters. That they actually want.

You're not reversing automation. You're not reversing operations management techniques.
I guess you could start a trade war with China.

Just like the auto bailout "saved jobs" but did not create them, throwing TPP out the window can also be trumpeted as saving jobs.

I am not confident that companies will not trade deep tax cuts, deregulation and tax breaks for marginal increases in jobs.