A big question: did Trump's racism and demagoguery ultimately help him or hurt him?

[Fast Walker 52]

A lot of people were apparently taken in by his "economic" message. But how well would that economic message have stood up without his racism and demagoguery about Muslims and immigrants?

11 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	he would have won either way because of his economic message
	1 (9%)
	he would have done better without the racism and demagoguery
	1 (9%)
	he would have done worse without the racism and demagoguery
	9 (82%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Laf.La.Dem.]

1. WOW - trick question?

[Fast Walker 52]

5. sort of-- I had a feeling about the answer but was wondering what others thought

[TwilightZone]

2. As I've said in a few threads, exit polls showed him winning on terrorism and immigration.

Latinos and Muslims. Build a wall and throw 'em over it. That's the message.

Some may have voted for his economic message. If they did, they overlooked the fact that a) he's a pathological liar, and b) the chances of the epitome of American capitalistic elitism giving a shit about them were zero.

[Fast Walker 52]

6. Yes, I agree. I wonder if when these people said they liked his economic message, they either

a) gave that as an easier, less controversial answer

b) subconsciously incorporated the racist stuff into the "economic message"

[TwilightZone]

11. Conscious and subconscious biases work their way into many of our decisions.

I think some of them may honestly believe that they voted for him for his economic message and will insist so, but the economic message he was selling was almost entirely based on bigotry and fear.

It's difficult to separate the two. I don't think they're all racist and/or sexist, but they voted for someone who was quite clearly both and a pathological liar, to boot. They accepted those traits in their preferred choice, even if the voters themselves don't share those traits to the same degree.

[treestar]

16. This

They may feel economically threatened by the immigrants. That's been a nativist thing for centuries.

[TwilightZone]

17. Agreed.

Sure, that's certainly a factor.

And, just to be clear, I don't mean to imply that there couldn't have been an economic component, just that the catch-all assumption being bandied about that economic concerns were the primary motivation in voting for Trump doesn't seem to have much basis in fact.

[Dems to Win]

3. Trumps non-PC comments helped him because they diverted Hillary from talking about jobs

Interesting article here:


https://medium.com/@jesseleburke/how-trump-won-or-how-hillary-lost-aa6dfbcd4b8b#.23sl1oh2k
snip...
Consider — if you believe the preceding arguments about the vast majority of his voters (enough of the general pop to win) prioritizing economic security and justice over social issues, it stands to reason that the best strategy to ensure/expand the size and loyalty of that group would be to ensure that Hillary never gets their ear. So, if I (Trump) want her to stay off the topic of economic security and justice, my strategy is:
1. First position social issues as the misguided (in that they’re not thinking about us and our survival) obsession of the out-of-touch elite who care about me not at all
2. Second, ensure then that she only talks about those very elitist social issues (thereby, creating the cognitive association of her as elite and not for them).

[Fast Walker 52]

7. makes sense, and scary it worked. Did he do it on purpose because he's so smart, or it just worked

out that way?

[Dems to Win]

9. Trump is a Reality TV Master. A master of persuasion.

Scott Adams (Dilbert writer) has written a lot about Trump's persuasion skills on his blog, and I read some of it. Trump is a master at accessing our lizard brains, using simple language and repeating himself. In this way, I have to grudgingly admit he's far smarter than me. My persuasion skills are at absolute zero.

Not that I respect the politics of either Trump or Adams, but I do think they have skills in this area.

[Fast Walker 52]

10. yes, but it also helps that he can lie so easily

I think most of us are too honest. Trump is a true sociopath.

[TwilightZone]

12. And, yet, everyone knew he was a liar.

He's historically known for being a liar, every fact checker in existence confirmed that he lied nearly constantly in unprecedented numbers during the campaign, but they still voted for him anyway.

I think they mostly know he's a liar, but he said what they want to hear, so they're hoping he'll somehow come through for them anyway.

It's like the lottery. Almost everyone is going to lose, but hope sells tickets.

[Fast Walker 52]

13. we all knew that, very well

I suspect conservatives deluded themselves into thinking he was just an ordinary liar, like all politicians.

[TwilightZone]

14. Yeah, that's possible.

They're used to being lied to. The extent maybe doesn't matter as much as we think it should.

I also think that our natural tendency to believe stuff that validates our preconceived notions plays a part. They want to believe Trump will restore jobs, because they've been buying the GOP "jobs, jobs, jobs" nonsense for a couple decades now.

As many of us often thought during the campaign, Trump's message isn't counter to the Republican ideals - it's just more overt about it. Their ideas are racist, but they weren't (usually) openly racist about them in public. Trump is.

It's not a new message, really. It's just a different verse of the same song. Or a metal cover version. haha

[BainsBane]

4. It was central to his campaign

and intertwined with his economic message. The entire discourse of make American great again and taking America back is about restoring uncontested white male supremacy.

[Fast Walker 52]

8. Yes, it's clear that he didn't win SIMPLY because he had a good non-racist economic message

[Fast Walker 52]

15. kick for a few more votes