Trump win reveals new white extremism in middle America

More stoking the flames and opinions of division. I imagine such racial voting patterns across all candidates must represent something, right?

Not new... they just needed an good reason, in their eyes, to come out.

So the graphic proves it, the dumb people... sorry, that's uneducated ... voted for Trump.

Not really.

What one has to watch out for and what may be part of the real reason people voted for Trump is a kind of "Stop bullshitting me and assuming I can't see the obvious". As example, what we see here with the Globe and Mail opinion piece is what's called 'Lies of omission."

They give you their graph but what it doesn't show you is Trump gained on the demographics of minorities, women and young voters from the last election. Trump stole Obama voters from the last election. Remember Obama? The first black president.

Did you ever hear the infamous quote of the "Progressive" President, Lyndon B Johnson once deciding to have Democrats join the push of Republicans and classic Liberals in his own party to adopt civil rights legislation?

He said: "We'll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 100 years."

Well LBJ, Trump is looking like he may make this the shortest 100 years we've ever seen.

But fair's fair. "Progressive" propagandists have been offering us their opinion of, "Let's hate Trump voters cause 'racist'."

Let's hear from the other side. Let Lauren explain about crybaby millennials who can't accept the results of a democratic election cause "indoctrination since childhood."

. Yep. Mussolini, ISIS, Trump, all the same MO. This is how you can differentiate right wing extremists from Left wing extremists. The latter believes the mythical golden age is in the future and yet to come, not a bygone era to ne revived. Believing in any kind of golden age at all is what makes someone an extremist.

All calling out "Racist" over and over again shows is that's what crybabies do these days.

If other races have the right to think in terms of community identity, i.e. black identity, Hispanic identity, then whites have the right to do the exact same thing if they feel they're under threat from a system they perceived as having turned on them. Somewhere along the line, and it shows what dunces liberals can be if they didn't think this would eventually happen, whites got tired of being blamed for everything and being told they had to pay more and more taxes all the time in order to prop everyone else up. The warnings were there for decades that the day of reckoning was finally going to happen. Liberals might have believed it wouldn't but anyone paying real attention knew it was inevitable, and now it's arrived.

One probably shouldn't underestimate what the images from Europe over the last year from the rapefugee invasion have generated in terms of apprehension either. Trump cornered this from the beginning, with a blunt "no, we're not taking any of those fuckers in". This issue is probably, even more than economic concerns, what tipped the referendum in favour of Brexit. I'm not sure that anyone should be surprised that it also affected the US election, even if no one wants to acknowledge it.

So, white identity is here now and it's here to stay. The selling-out of each other in the name of capitalism and making whites perpetually guilty for the past is coming to an end. Liberals are just going to have to get used to it. Personally I hope Trump ratchets it up even more. Do something completely wild, like at the same time illegals are being booted out and Muslims are being banned from entry, announce that any South African whites or remaining Rhodesian whites will be granted immigrant status in the US at the earliest possible opportunity if they want to get out of Africa before someone there does a genocide on them. This would have the twin bonuses of reinforcing the growing identity movement as well as driving liberals absolutely apoplectic. If we should have learned anything from the 1990's Balkan wars, or even from the 1947 partition of India, it's that ethnic/racial separation is one of the few things that dials down tensions and in the long-term (after the initial angry spasms) will reduce the potential for inter-tribe violence. North America and Europe might have haughtily thought they were exempt from this reality, that the multi-cultural rainbow fantasy land that's been built up over the last sixty years was the new and permanent order. But it isn't. All of us are tribal and always will be. Unenlightened as it seems to some that's still just the way it is.

After all, the skin you're in is all you're ever going to be, no matter how much you'd like to think otherwise.

So much wrong with this piece.

First, it assumes that if someone who was white voted for Trump than it must be "extremism and racism". Now, of course, they can't answer for those who weren't white who voted for him. Simplified, broad stroke labels are more dangerous than some acknowledge.

These were two very flawed candidates. Trump isn't even a Republican on many of his ideals, especially economic and some foreign policy is further left than Clintons. He found where the anguish and hurt was and he addressed it, he campaigned to those voters. This isn't anything new.

For a guy who has never been in politics before he read the environment better than anyone else, tapped into a forgotten voting base. Saw that the Supreme Court replacement would be enough to get the NRA and Evangelical to support him regardless of what he said or proposed otherwise. Thus; he wisely released a list of 20 SC nominations so that everyone could see they were strong Conservative and/or constitutionalist judges and that would be enough for them, they could safely turn the TV off until voting day.

I've said it many times before, if Bernie would have ran against him, he would have won. Bloomberg would not have run, that was just posturing. If he did. I doubt he would have obtained more than 10% of the vote. The reason he would have beaten him is that he would have taken a significant number of the rustbelt voters and gained a massive increase in Millenial voters and had a generally larger turnout from Democrats who had six million less voters than in 2012, Trump had no increase overall. Bloomberg would have split all party migrants equally. It was clear that the party and media were in the tank for Clinton, the Wiki leaks just made it far worse, and more clear to them. That generation reads everything, they protested by not showing up.

Bernie would have been the worst president in my opinion, turning America into Sweden. Clinton would not have been perfect but at least she would have been more central, and she would have been good for Canada on the whole, though I state that from an Ontario perspective.

Trump is a mixed bag, but he won on two premises that noone else took: building a wall and getting rid of free trade agreements. Both of these policies have their problems, but in a country in which 70% believe is going in the wrong direction, it was the right thing to say. No other candidate anywhere took these positions, though Bernie would have surpassed him on this populist message against free trade and pro protectionism.

I am telling you now, that the race issue was only for a small pocket of hillbillies. Much like a small pocket of BLM vote only based on race issues. More broadly it was rejection of political correctness, trade agreements that send jobs overseas, a shoulder shrugging attitude to illegal immigrants, a general lack of patriotism, the rejection of attacks on police and military that drew the voters out. Whether he could solve these issues or not, he addressed them and he WASN'T a politician, this was key.

In all of the forum hopping and reading I have done, I have heard very little racism from Trump supporters, even as I attacked him mercilessly at some points as I didn't want him to be the nominee. In time, I understood his message, and I pulled back from lecturing, really who am I to tell others what to believe? It is their experience and they know the tone in America better than I do. I never doubted Trumps love of America, or his business acumen, I certainly questioned his economic positions and his credentials. Once he was the nominee, I didn't chirp as much since neither candidate screamed confidence to me and I became a sponge (as most reasonable people should).

Furthermore, people like Ben Carson; a reknowned African American surgeon were EXTREMELY popular with Republicans, and he wasn't targeting the rust belt voters at all. At one point, only he and Trump were over 20% in the polls for nominee, not long after the first debate I believe. It wasn't until Carson appeared soft on some issues an was clearly out of his element as a salesman that he started to fall and Trump, Rubio and Cruz took top spots. Carson brought strong Conservative values, and his arguments were cerebral (which probably would have hurt him in a general election).

The electorates are mad as hell in the U.S and they want change. 13% Of black men voted for Trump, at one point it was 2% in the polls. Why? They want change just as so many others do. There are many blacks veterans in the U.S military. Many black sheriffs and police who were sick of being kicked and blamed for everything that ailed society (consider Chief Brown out of Dallas and his powerful speech after the terror attack on five of his officers). You can imagine many of these same people supported Trump.

I supported in spirit Obama both times he ran, he was far from perfect, but he was reasonable and fair to Canada, outside of his decision on XL Pipeline which I never fully understood. Regardless, this isn't some racial uprising, this is purely about people wanting to see America become the powerful, assertive nation it once was, there is simply too much pain and unhappiness across the nation.

You're mixing up the race of individuals with race issues. People can be perfectly non-racist, have no problem with people of a particular race, and still vote in preference of candidates that will put their race ahead of other races - sometimes even if the candidate is of the other race himself. Non-whites have been doing it for years, and are lauded for it. As Thanos says, maybe now the whites are playing the same game as they see their circle of privilege shrinking. It becomes a problem when any race does it mostly if it results in government putting one race ahead of another. To many people, unfortunately, even just putting races on an equal footing looks like the former.

. The difference is that the system is owned and operated by whites, and it delivers different results and a different life experience for non-whites. When that happens, it's inevitable that the people on the losing end will form an identity. The fact is Black people are treated differently, by police, bu judges, by juries, by prospective employers, so in what universe would that not contribute to a Black identity?! And the second the system starts consigning - say - blonde people to ghettos and prisons and dead end low income jobs, there will be a distinct blonde experience and a blonde ethnic identity.

Furthermore,there is no shared "white identity" because there is no shared white experience. The lives of white people vary as much from each other as they do from people of other races. The identity and experience of white people is determined by our socioeconomic class. Black people get hassled by police whether they're rich or poor -skin colour is the primary factor- but white people only get hassled if their conspicuously poor-wealth is the factor.



Not the past, the present. The injustice is also in the present.

This was a protest vote with an economic undercurrent, no question. I think 58% of whites voted for Trump, 88% of blacks voted for Hillary. He had far less partisan support than she had, and this is just assuming it was a racial vote without breaking down other components. Last time Romney got 59% of the white vote. Were the upscale wealthy whites who voted for Romney any more or less racially driven than Trumps, rust belt, low income whites?

If he never spoke any strong words about banning Muslims or his ridiculous comments about those who entered America, noone would bring up the race issue (actually, it would still have been brought up by the Democrats, because they seem to always have a fascination of painting Republicans and Conservatives as racist). His offensive comments made him the easiest target in history, ultimately, this was what people wanted, call him Rob Ford 2.0. Far more offensive and strong willed, and he is a global brand.

This is not nearly as easy an election to break down as some have been trying to paint it. Many elements, I believe race was/is far down the line on concerns.

Sure not everyone who voted for Trump did so for racial or gender issues, perhaps even most didn't. However, given the racial/gender issues that came up, some feel it's racist/misogynist to ignore it.

For example imagine an election where a Muslim guy said "I'm not an islamist, and I don't agree with ISIL's "punish all infidels policy" but I voted for them anyway because I like their tax policy, so don't think I'm a bad person."

So if Trump is promising to bring a lot of bad things to women and non-whites then yeah I could see why someone would think it's racist and misogynistic to accept that.