I'm going to have to reread this to try and have an idea of what campaign themes the Democrats can use to keep the base mollified while attracting back rural FDWVFT.
FDWVFT: Former Democrats Who Voted For Trump
Link to Brooks "The GOP Health Care Crackup"
Showing posts with label Angry Blue Collar Voters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Angry Blue Collar Voters. Show all posts
Friday, March 10, 2017
Thursday, December 29, 2016
Trump's Proposed Policies Will Not Achieve Their Goals
George Will on Trade Policy and Thomas Friedman on Israel explain why what Trump is proposing will not help the people they are aimed at helping.
Link to George Will column
Link to Thomas Friedman
And if you bothered to click on this post, I have a depressing reward for you. Millions of American Voters on both sides of the partisan divide believe in conspiracy theory and distrust government officials who try to persuade them otherwise. That is not a good thing for our democracy.
Link to Washington Post column on Conspiracy Belief
Link to George Will column
Link to Thomas Friedman
And if you bothered to click on this post, I have a depressing reward for you. Millions of American Voters on both sides of the partisan divide believe in conspiracy theory and distrust government officials who try to persuade them otherwise. That is not a good thing for our democracy.
Link to Washington Post column on Conspiracy Belief
Monday, December 5, 2016
Why I Think Donald Trump Won the Election
Well, he didn't win the popular vote so you cannot say the Democratic ideas were rejected by a majority of the people. But he did win the Electoral College by winning about 100,000 votes across some key states.
Yes, he coalesced the Alt-Right in all its variations but they haven't voted for a Democrat in a good number of years. So that is not the reason 100,000 people who used to vote for a Democrat voted for Trump.
I think the reason is these people (i) could not afford gridlock in Washington anymore and (ii) they are so cut off from their traditional points of education (unions, union shops, factory floors, mines) that they swallowed Trump's anti-immigrant anti-free trade economic policies even though the ideas they bought will never be implemented; although Trump will do his best to create the aura that he is doing something along those lines.
There isn't much the Democrats can do to restore the traditional points of education, but neither can the Republicans do that. So the Democrats have to find a way to end gridlock while protecting the economic interests of the middle class. I know it is ironic and heartbreaking to reward Mitch McConnell's "Just Say No" policy, but the Democrats have to become the party that has policies and Congressional action that gives these 100,000 people hope. Because it was 100,000 people this year, it could be 500,000 or 1,000,000 people in a few more years. Economic interests are not unique to white voters.
The Democrats must find a way to be competitive in most of the 50 states without giving up protections for every individual and the environment.
Yes, he coalesced the Alt-Right in all its variations but they haven't voted for a Democrat in a good number of years. So that is not the reason 100,000 people who used to vote for a Democrat voted for Trump.
I think the reason is these people (i) could not afford gridlock in Washington anymore and (ii) they are so cut off from their traditional points of education (unions, union shops, factory floors, mines) that they swallowed Trump's anti-immigrant anti-free trade economic policies even though the ideas they bought will never be implemented; although Trump will do his best to create the aura that he is doing something along those lines.
There isn't much the Democrats can do to restore the traditional points of education, but neither can the Republicans do that. So the Democrats have to find a way to end gridlock while protecting the economic interests of the middle class. I know it is ironic and heartbreaking to reward Mitch McConnell's "Just Say No" policy, but the Democrats have to become the party that has policies and Congressional action that gives these 100,000 people hope. Because it was 100,000 people this year, it could be 500,000 or 1,000,000 people in a few more years. Economic interests are not unique to white voters.
The Democrats must find a way to be competitive in most of the 50 states without giving up protections for every individual and the environment.
Monday, October 24, 2016
Anger is Very Tiring
I don't know about you but I am mentally exhausted by this campaign. While watching the NLCS be won by the Cub's for their first championship in 71 years, I was subject to Donald Trump PAC advertisements slamming Hillary with falsehoods that were deemed to be falsehoods months ago.
Of course, this is all in support of a guy who spouted Birthism for years and is still reluctant to admit that he was wrong about any number of lies that he has promulgated.
Which only makes me more exhausted. We have the future spectacle that the House of Representatives will be controlled nominally by the GOP, but in reality will likely be in the control of the Freedom Caucus which will have the sole goal of stopping a President Clinton of accomplishing anything.
The only path I can see for this not to happen is for Clinton II to govern from the middle and provide some cover to the few moderate Republicans who are interested in solving the problems that have caused such anger to boil over in Trumpism.
But what I am really wondering is how can the collective totality of the GOP sustain this anger at Democratic Presidents. They have been angry with President Obama for over 7 years. They are building themselves up to be angry with President Clinton II for the next 4 years.
While I have been upset with the GOP's intransigence for the last 7 years, I cannot sustain the anger that they can. And I don't know how they do it. They must be as mentally exhausted as I am.
And while most of my readers are in other countries, I urge my U.S. readers to get out and vote for Democrats across the board because we need to undo GOP gerrymandering in many state legislatures.
Of course, this is all in support of a guy who spouted Birthism for years and is still reluctant to admit that he was wrong about any number of lies that he has promulgated.
Which only makes me more exhausted. We have the future spectacle that the House of Representatives will be controlled nominally by the GOP, but in reality will likely be in the control of the Freedom Caucus which will have the sole goal of stopping a President Clinton of accomplishing anything.
The only path I can see for this not to happen is for Clinton II to govern from the middle and provide some cover to the few moderate Republicans who are interested in solving the problems that have caused such anger to boil over in Trumpism.
But what I am really wondering is how can the collective totality of the GOP sustain this anger at Democratic Presidents. They have been angry with President Obama for over 7 years. They are building themselves up to be angry with President Clinton II for the next 4 years.
While I have been upset with the GOP's intransigence for the last 7 years, I cannot sustain the anger that they can. And I don't know how they do it. They must be as mentally exhausted as I am.
And while most of my readers are in other countries, I urge my U.S. readers to get out and vote for Democrats across the board because we need to undo GOP gerrymandering in many state legislatures.
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
Both Political Parties Need to Create Hope
Reading way too much about the state of the election campaign I uncovered a glimmer of truth. Many Trump supporters want change in Washington D.C. And even though Trump is campaigning on more trickle down economic and tax cuts for the rich, they believe that an outsider is needed to bring about change in policy that is not working for them. They don't connect the dots between globalization and automation that have lead to their economic stagnation and that trickle down economics will not have any effect on those trends. What Trump does not connect on is breaking trade agreements and disrupting manufacturing doesn't undo the effects of automation or supply chains and he will not be able to help these people with his policies.
I have long written that I don't have a solution, but I know there are think tanks out there with people who understand how policies effect people and there must be some good ideas there.
I can see RedStateVt fuming that I am advocating more income redistribution, but that is not the case. The dependency economy is one of the things that people are angry about, even those who benefit from it and rely upon it. People want to work. Many of the most angry, however, don't want to move to find work.
So there must be something done about job creation and wage stagnation and the distribution of employment around the country. That would involve state policies perhaps more so than federal policies. But something must be done to create hope, because when you don't have hope, you allow a tyrant to stoke fear and gather votes.
Two columns this morning provide insights around this.
David Leonhardt on how stagnation creates anger
David Brooks on the damaged psychological make up of Trump
And just when I thought I could get on with my day, I read the following on how unfit the current GOP is to lead any part of the government.
No Profiles of courage in the GOP
I have long written that I don't have a solution, but I know there are think tanks out there with people who understand how policies effect people and there must be some good ideas there.
I can see RedStateVt fuming that I am advocating more income redistribution, but that is not the case. The dependency economy is one of the things that people are angry about, even those who benefit from it and rely upon it. People want to work. Many of the most angry, however, don't want to move to find work.
So there must be something done about job creation and wage stagnation and the distribution of employment around the country. That would involve state policies perhaps more so than federal policies. But something must be done to create hope, because when you don't have hope, you allow a tyrant to stoke fear and gather votes.
Two columns this morning provide insights around this.
David Leonhardt on how stagnation creates anger
David Brooks on the damaged psychological make up of Trump
And just when I thought I could get on with my day, I read the following on how unfit the current GOP is to lead any part of the government.
No Profiles of courage in the GOP
Sunday, May 8, 2016
Sunday Musings 5/8/16 Free Trade is not the Issue
Perhaps campaigns have always been like this, catering to voter's preconceived notions of what needs to happen. I am quite sure Donald Trump's and Bernie Sander's supporters would agree that is what should be happening.
But then there is reality.
U.S. manufacturing is not in the toilet. U.S. manufacturing now produces 47% more than it did 20 years ago. The problem is automation allows that production to occur with 29% fewer workers. Meanwhile, energy production has shifted from coal to natural gas and it takes far fewer workers to produce and use natural gas than it does coal in the production of electricity. As a result, many younger workers are industries that have a global presence and are both earning a living being globally competitive and producing good returns for shareholders. That is how a competitive economy operates.
We have a 5% rate of unemployment.
The level of manufacturing and employment is the result of good economic policy with free trade agreements in place. Tearing up those free trade agreements cannot be a positive for economic stability. Those who are not able to find work in the global economy need a different kind of assistance. And that assistance should vary greatly between people of different ages and skills.
But that is not a pithy campaign line nor does it cater to angry preconceived notions on the part of certain categories of voters.
Meanwhile, Ross Douthat produced a scathing column on why Donald Trump is not fit to be President.
But then there is reality.
U.S. manufacturing is not in the toilet. U.S. manufacturing now produces 47% more than it did 20 years ago. The problem is automation allows that production to occur with 29% fewer workers. Meanwhile, energy production has shifted from coal to natural gas and it takes far fewer workers to produce and use natural gas than it does coal in the production of electricity. As a result, many younger workers are industries that have a global presence and are both earning a living being globally competitive and producing good returns for shareholders. That is how a competitive economy operates.
We have a 5% rate of unemployment.
The level of manufacturing and employment is the result of good economic policy with free trade agreements in place. Tearing up those free trade agreements cannot be a positive for economic stability. Those who are not able to find work in the global economy need a different kind of assistance. And that assistance should vary greatly between people of different ages and skills.
But that is not a pithy campaign line nor does it cater to angry preconceived notions on the part of certain categories of voters.
Meanwhile, Ross Douthat produced a scathing column on why Donald Trump is not fit to be President.
"But there still remains the problem of Trump himself. Even if you find things to appreciate in Trumpism — as I have, and still do — the man who has raised those issues is still unfit for an office as awesomely powerful as the presidency of the United States."
"His unfitness starts with basic issues of temperament. It encompasses the race-baiting, the conspiracy theorizing, the flirtations with violence, and the pathological lying that have been his campaign-trail stock in trade."
"But above all it is Trump’s authoritarianism that makes him unfit for the presidency — his stated admiration for Putin and the Chinese Politburo, his promise to use the power of the presidency against private enterprises, the casual threats he and his surrogates toss off against party donors, military officers, the press, the speaker of the House, and more."
.......
"Trump would not be an American Mussolini; even our sclerotic institutions would resist him more effectively than that. But he could test them as no modern president has tested them before — and with them, the health of our economy, the civil peace of our society and the stability of an increasingly perilous world."
"In sum: It would be possible to justify support for Trump if he merely promised a period of chaos for conservatism. But to support Trump for the presidency is to invite chaos upon the republic and the world. No policy goal, no court appointment, can justify such recklessness."
"To Trumpism’s appeal, to Trump’s constituents, conservatives should listen and answer “yes,” or “maybe,” or “not that, but how about…”
"But to Trump himself, there is no patriotic answer except “no."
Once again the professional pundit writes it better than I can, which is why they get paid to do this.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
I Didn't Realize How "Wrong" I Was on Globalization
Long time readers know I have recognized that U.S. Factory workers have suffered economically from globalization. What I didn't realize until a New York Times article this morning was how much it was influencing the outcomes for this primary election season.
I have been focused on Trump's birtherism against President Obama and all his other crude remarks towards various peoples. But it is really his anti-trade agreement stance that is fueling many of his supporters who are angry at the GOP establishment for not doing anything to protect their jobs.
This mistrust of trade agreements is also fueling some support for Bernie Sanders, including one Verizon workers (currently on strike) who says if Bernie isn't a candidate in November, he will probably vote for Trump. Now I can make a case that free trade has no effect on that Verizon workers employment prospects. His industry is a purely domestic one that is being buffeted by changes in technology, and he benefits from the lower cost of goods that globalization brings.
And overall, trade and globalization provide the revenues and profit margins that allow many companies to pay their workers very well. But the benefits of trade are spread across the whole population in a diffuse manner while the costs are concentrated in the lives of workers who lose their jobs.
Where I have been really really wrong is in my belief that people who have been sucking up their disappointment with what has happened to their livelihood without disrupting the overall trend would continue to do so, and allow time to equalize wages, at which point jobs will migrate back to the U.S. when it makes competitive sense for that to occur. And it is happening in some ways already.
But what Trump and Sanders have tapped into is that exact disappointment and there may be a sufficient numbers of votes for that concentrated issue that Congress will feel compelled to do something that I believe would be very dangerous to the overall health of the global economy.
And what is most interesting to me is that when the North lost these jobs to the South, the focus was on the roll of Unions in the North and the weakness of Unions in the South with costs being lower in the South. Now these Southern workers have lost their jobs and they are angry about it. And those workers in the North who are left are angry about it.
My tendency based upon my education in economics is to let the market and time force adjustment on capital and labor so that we have an efficient market economy. But individual people don't have the luxury of time as too much time just ends up with them being dead. And now they are rising up!
Will the people based in the global economy be able to protect the global economy? We shall see over the next 7 months. And it is no wonder the conservative blogosphere is so silent on this, this problem is not a point on the partisan spectrum so it is out of their framework. It is a bipartisan problem in need of a bipartisan solution.
I think the solution is some movement minimum wage increases (with different urban and rural levels) and infrastructure spending. With unemployment at 5%, you wouldn't need to export the 11 mm immigrants, you would need them to fill jobs. One benefit of that would be the Fed could raise interest rates and savers could return to the bond market with their investment capital.
Link to NYT article that motivated this blog
I have been focused on Trump's birtherism against President Obama and all his other crude remarks towards various peoples. But it is really his anti-trade agreement stance that is fueling many of his supporters who are angry at the GOP establishment for not doing anything to protect their jobs.
This mistrust of trade agreements is also fueling some support for Bernie Sanders, including one Verizon workers (currently on strike) who says if Bernie isn't a candidate in November, he will probably vote for Trump. Now I can make a case that free trade has no effect on that Verizon workers employment prospects. His industry is a purely domestic one that is being buffeted by changes in technology, and he benefits from the lower cost of goods that globalization brings.
And overall, trade and globalization provide the revenues and profit margins that allow many companies to pay their workers very well. But the benefits of trade are spread across the whole population in a diffuse manner while the costs are concentrated in the lives of workers who lose their jobs.
Where I have been really really wrong is in my belief that people who have been sucking up their disappointment with what has happened to their livelihood without disrupting the overall trend would continue to do so, and allow time to equalize wages, at which point jobs will migrate back to the U.S. when it makes competitive sense for that to occur. And it is happening in some ways already.
But what Trump and Sanders have tapped into is that exact disappointment and there may be a sufficient numbers of votes for that concentrated issue that Congress will feel compelled to do something that I believe would be very dangerous to the overall health of the global economy.
And what is most interesting to me is that when the North lost these jobs to the South, the focus was on the roll of Unions in the North and the weakness of Unions in the South with costs being lower in the South. Now these Southern workers have lost their jobs and they are angry about it. And those workers in the North who are left are angry about it.
My tendency based upon my education in economics is to let the market and time force adjustment on capital and labor so that we have an efficient market economy. But individual people don't have the luxury of time as too much time just ends up with them being dead. And now they are rising up!
Will the people based in the global economy be able to protect the global economy? We shall see over the next 7 months. And it is no wonder the conservative blogosphere is so silent on this, this problem is not a point on the partisan spectrum so it is out of their framework. It is a bipartisan problem in need of a bipartisan solution.
I think the solution is some movement minimum wage increases (with different urban and rural levels) and infrastructure spending. With unemployment at 5%, you wouldn't need to export the 11 mm immigrants, you would need them to fill jobs. One benefit of that would be the Fed could raise interest rates and savers could return to the bond market with their investment capital.
Link to NYT article that motivated this blog
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)