Some key points in the podcast:
"538 talks how support for Nazis is still low, but support for white supremacy/confederacy is still very high among the unwashed masses. However, Congress is much less supportive of white supremacy. Part of the reason is that a lot of people are ignorant(willfully or not) about what the statues mean to America. For example, a decent percentage of the supporters just want to stick it to liberals, or want government out of their lives. But the underlying issue is that America is built upon being unequal to minorities. Taking on this issue requires dismantling most myths of America that people don't want to confront.
Approval isn't the same as racist/moral.
The only difference between Trump and Republicans is that Republicans prefer to not answer the question(white supremacy/confederate statues) or say 'it's a local issue'. Trump just strips away the ambiguity. The media should not be surprised that Trump is a racist, nor should the media be surprised that Trump's voters are ok with him being racist (and voted for Trump anyway). Liberal/progressive/BLM groups are rudderless/disorganized, especially compared to Fox News/Breitbart/Koch brothers."
The frustrating part is that Trump's favorability polls are right where it was when he won vs an unpopular rival candidate. Which means Trump will have the incumbency bonus when he runs against whatever old white dude the Democrats run. So no guarantees for 2020, but it's not very secure for Trump either. Though 2018 should be interesting. Right now, Democrats have a +8% boost to their 2016 numbers, but that merely makes them competitive to take the House. This still bodes poorly for Democrats to minimize Senate losses. So we're still in trouble.
Belial wrote:I'm having difficulty confirming this but if true, it's great.
The only one I can find info on is the Syracuse rally, which is off.
Edit: well, Breitbart is whining about it so....
ObsessoMom wrote:The Guardian published a few chapters of Paul Butler's Chokehold: Policing Black Men a week ago. I found Butler's perspective on the implicit racism of "law and order" and "war on drugs" talk such as Trump's (and that of many other Republicans) eye-opening.Spoiler:Paul Butler wrote:The chokehold is something like an employment stimulus plan for working-class white people, who don’t have to compete for jobs with all the black men who are locked up, or who are underground because they have outstanding arrest warrants, or who have criminal records that make obtaining legal employment exceedingly difficult. Poor white people are simply not locked up at rates similar to African Americans. These benefits make crushing the chokehold more difficult because if it ends, white people lose – at least in the short term.
Progressives often lambast poor white people for voting for conservative Republicans like Donald Trump, suggesting that those votes are not in their best interests. But low-income white folks might have better sense than pundits give them credit for. A vote for a conservative is an investment in the property value of one’s whiteness. The criminal process makes white privilege more than just a status symbol, and more than just a partial shield from the criminal process (as compared to African Americans). Black men are locked up at five times the rate of white men. There are more African Americans in the US criminal justice system than there were slaves in 1850.
By reducing competition for jobs, and by generating employment in law enforcement and corrections, especially in the mainly white rural areas where prisons are often located, the chokehold delivers cash money to many working-class white people.
sardia wrote:While the argument of reducing illegal/minority labor isn't as popular, it still falls under the assumption that the economy is a simple zero sum game.* So no, lower class whites are still wrong, just for slightly different reasons. Though it does correlate to previous ideas that white supremacy is much more popular than politicians think it is. Maybe Trump's onto something here.
*The presence of more people in the economy creates more jobs/grows the economy. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamespoulos ... ow-people/
sardia, I'm sorry, but the Forbes site never lets me read anything there for some reason (browser discrimination, maybe?). Could you please quote a few passages you found relevant?
CorruptUser wrote:Every economist agrees that more people means a larger economy, but the real question is per worker GDP.
Y = A * K^.7 * N^.3
Y is total economic output
A is "technology", which is anything other than the number of people or quantifiable capital which affects the economy, e.g., overall health, education, weather, etc
K is the vale of all capitol, such as bridges factories mines farms etc etc
N is number of people.
Immigrants increase the number of people, but they can't bring factories with them. Those do get built over time to match the people, but there are limits; you can always build more factories, but fisheries and farms and mines are limited. So the question is, do they being higher tech with them? Usually, but not always, and not necessarily enough to offset the lack of capital.
I've combined two of Sableagle's posts here:
Sableagle wrote:Anyone want to provide me with some answers to or questions for a Trump supporter?
Martin is in favour of genocide.mp3
(Filename does not contain any exaggeration, as far as I can tell.)Mutex wrote:Any chance of a transcript of the most interesting bits?Spoiler:MT: "Yeah, they just fall straight back on it, don't they? The instant something happens: 'I'm black. That's it. That's why.' I'm voting for fucking Donald."
x1: " ... Duck?"
x2: "He was firing people at the weekend."
x3: "What do they actually think about him over there? Is he actually quite well-liked?"
x1: "33% at the last poll?"
MT: "Some in each direction."
x3: "Oh, is it?"
MT: "Yeah, they are. They either absolutely love him or they fucking hate him."
x1: "All the Nazis love him, and all the like Black, Jews, Muslims, gays, lesbians, transgender people, environmentalists, socialists hate him."
x2: "he's actually got quite a lot of ..."
MT: "He's got a lot. It's not Nazis. A lot of the Republicans follow him. I've got a lot of Republican friends there and they think he's great."
x1: "... and all the Nazis love him."
x2: "Well yeah, but you get extreme leftists as well."
MT: "Who commits most of the crime in the United States? Are they white or black? Where are most of the shootings? They're black, black-on-black. So what people should you annihilate to make the country better? All the black people. It just stands to reason."
x1: "You're in favour of genocide, then?"
x3: "At least we know where we stand."
MT: "That's it. ... happy if they were Muslims. Wars and everything's over. Nuke the fuckers. Turn the whole Middle East to glass and just send people in suits in to get the oil."
x4: "Do wasps as well at the same time."
MT: "Do wasps. You gotta do wasps. Be careful saying that in here, though, because there's a lot of ginger people around."
x5: "But mine's accidental."
MT: "That sort of makes it worse somehow, Liz. You're accidentally ginger, luv."