HRC won most voters on economic issues.
"In fact, if we extend that out to every state for which we have exit polling, in 22 of those 27 states a majority of people said that the economy was the most important issue. And in 20 of those states, voters who said so preferred Hillary Clinton. In 17, in fact, a majority of those voters backed Clinton."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/02/in-nearly-every-swing-state-voters-preferred-hillary-clinton-on-the-economy/?utm_term=.5a7035f6c1e1
Most DT voters were not working class, and cultural anxiety drove them - not economic. The Democratic Platform is too progressive to appeal to that particular xenophobic, nationalist, homophobic, anti-reproductive rights, non-college educated demographic that spans the economic spectrum. And saying we should back off of our progressive ideology to appeal to this Demographic will cost us our base, and cost us elections.
“In short, the narrative that attributes Trump’s victory to a ‘coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters’ just doesn’t square with the 2016 election data. According to the election study, white non-Hispanic voters without college degrees making below the median household income made up only 25 percent of Trump voters. That’s a far cry from the working-class-fueled victory many journalists have imagined.”
https://politicalwire.com/2017/06/05/trump-voters-not-working-class/
Controlling for other demographic variables, three factors stood out as strong independent predictors of how white working-class people would vote. The first was anxiety about cultural change. Sixty-eight percent of white working-class voters said the American way of life needs to be protected from foreign influence. And nearly half agreed with the statement, “things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country.” Together, these variables were strong indictors of support for Trump: 79 percent of white working-class voters who had these anxieties chose Trump, while only 43 percent of white working-class voters who did not share one or both of these fears cast their vote the same way.
The second factor was immigration. Contrary to popular narratives, only a small portion—just 27 percent—of white working-class voters said they favor a policy of identifying and deporting immigrants who are in the country illegally. Among the people who did share this belief, Trump was wildly popular: 87 percent of them supported the president in the 2016 election.
Racism and sexism predicted support for Trump better than economic dissatisfaction.
Of course, Trump’s rhetoric went far beyond targeting racial and ethnic groups; he also invoked language that was explicitly hostile towards women. These remarks were often focused 7 directly at opponents, such as Carly Fiorina and Hillary Clinton, or news reporters, such as Megyn Kelly. Adding to the litany of sexist remarks he had made during and before the campaign was the release of the Access Hollywood tape, which made major news about a month before Election Day, and caused many Republicans to withdraw their support of him. Such rhetoric was likely all the more salient given the presence of the first female major party nominee for president in the race. Scholarship on the role of sexism and gender stereotypes on vote decisions involving women candidates is mixed. While many studies find that women candidates do not suffer a penalty from voters (e.g. Claassen and Ryan 2016; Dolan 2014; Hayes2011; Pearson and McGhee 2013), other work has pointed to important challenges faced by women when they run (e.g. Huddy and Terklidsen 1993; Bauer 2016; Streb et al. 2008). Bos et al. point to the importance of role incongruity theory (RCT) for understanding when a female candidate’s gender may become salient to voters during a campaign. Specifically, RCT is based
on the notion that people tend to think that women should behave, but that political leaders ought to be assertive and independent. It may be the case that when a campaign highlights the way in which a female candidate is behaving incongruously, attitudes on sexism may become a stronger predictor of vote choice.
http://people.umass.edu/schaffne/schaffner_et_al_IDC_conference.pdf
. I staunchly supported Senator Sanders in the 2016 primary. I did everything I could to help elect Clinton and Kaine after the primary ended and Bernie made his endorsement. First off, does Mrs. Clinton really believe that the pussy-grabbing man-baby in chief really need Bernie's permission to attack her? The Senator's critique of Hillary, particularly surrounding campaign finance, was overall a well-deserved critique of the entire current political system as a whole. Considering the timing, I don't see the book as being too damaging, but it is divisive within a left/Democratic Party that DESPERATELY needs to unite.
= new reply since forum marked as read
