General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsToo many white people have a "red problem"
This is a longstanding and troubling trend:
I don't know how their eyes can be opened, but it's discouraging to see that generations still don't get the message.
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)durablend
(7,460 posts)Look at the counties in western PA...Trump got 60-70-80+ % of the vote. You're not going to appeal to that without becoming a Republican.
people
(624 posts)have a racist problem which is the same as a red problem.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)Unbelievably, Trump got MORE votes from Black and Hispanic voters this time.... Figure that out.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-increases-share-black-hispanic-vote-1544698
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/28/upshot/election-polling-racial-gap.html
FakeNoose
(32,637 posts)You should delete this post!
Black men voted for Biden at the rate of over 80% which is the same number for every presidential candidate except Obama. The exit polls for this election are faulty or misleading, since people who voted in person on election day tended to be Chump supporters, due to bad faith in the mailed ballots and early voting dates.
Polybius
(15,398 posts)So that would include 2016 too. You're right about the rest though, he did about the same as W. Bush.
FakeNoose
(32,637 posts)They're all worthless until they can be compared to the actual voting numbers. This is a very weird situation this year anyway, so we can't compare it to other elections.
shrike3
(3,583 posts)Hillary got 82 percent. Joe got 80 percent. Granted, it should have been higher, but that's a negligible drop.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)He does better with men than women across the board. He seems to have some "macho" appeal that unfortunately transcends race, at times.
Here's a Newsweek article about it..
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-appeals-men-fragile-masculinity-1236701
whathehell
(29,067 posts)However disconcerting that may be to some here.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)They are both reliable sources -- No need to delete them, especially before they are read.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)People only want to see stats that reinforce their own biases.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)and I know exactly what you mean about confirmation bias.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Polybius
(15,398 posts)It doesn't make sense. He improved his standings with white women, blacks, and Hispanics.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)should provide some answers.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)News to me.
Polybius
(15,398 posts)He can't match his 2016 Electoral totals.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)His matching means nothing.
A win is a tragedy.
IndyOp
(15,522 posts)to various constituencies for the last 4 years. They've done an excellent job of identifying issues they can use as wedges and micro-targeting groups. Many Hispanic groups are very entrepreneurial, small "c" conservative in that they prize traditional family roles are pro-life Catholics and anti-gay.
Keeping in mind that Biden may get 10+ million more votes more than Trump - and that's important and should cause everyone criticizing the Democratic Party to chill out - Dems still need to figure out how to cross some divides.
Just my opinion....
Response to whathehell (Reply #4)
pinkstarburst This message was self-deleted by its author.
Polybius
(15,398 posts)I understand 2020 might be too early for data.
Bettie
(16,100 posts)I have been in the Blue minority of white people.
It truly sucks that the white community isn't willing to address its problems.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)..close to 50% in most presidential elections.
People constantly spoke of how Obama got 'only' 42% of the white vote, implying it was about Race more than Party, even though it was the same percentage given Bill Clinton in the '90's.
JI7
(89,249 posts)that's why democratic gains are mostly becsuse of demographic changes.
Klaralven
(7,510 posts)I'm assuming that someone must have complained about the Democratic party being assigned the color associated with international socialism.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)Last edited Thu Nov 5, 2020, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)
The Dems haven't even gone near the color red since the 1950's Red Scare.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,853 posts)... in the old days by the national media?
whathehell
(29,067 posts)Buckeye_Democrat
(14,853 posts)CBS used red for Carter in '76, though.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)but that was quite a few years before 2020,.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,853 posts)When Republicans Were Blue and Democrats Were Red:
The era of color-coded political parties is more recent than you might think
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-republicans-were-blue-and-democrats-were-red-104176297/
Excerpt:
Thats right: In the beginning, blue was red and red was blue and they changed back and forth from election to election and network to network in what appears, in hindsight, to be a flight of whimsy. The notion that there were red states and blue statesand that the former were Republican and the latter Democraticwasnt cemented on the national psyche until the year 2000.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)but the staunch refusal of Democrats to associate themselves with the color Red goes back to the post Red Scare 1950's I learned that back in my 1982 Poli Sci class.
Response to Buckeye_Democrat (Reply #30)
whathehell This message was self-deleted by its author.
Klaralven
(7,510 posts)Since the 1984 election, CBS has used the opposite scheme: blue for Democrats, red for Republicans. ABC used yellow for Republicans and blue for Democrats in 1976, then red for Republicans and blue for Democrats in 1980, 1984, and 1988. In 1980, when John Anderson ran a relatively high-profile campaign as an independent candidate, at least one network provisionally indicated that they would use yellow if he were to win a state. Similarly, at least one network would have used yellow to indicate a state won by Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996, though neither of them did claim any states in any of these years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states
whathehell
(29,067 posts)A longer, broader one mandated Democrats never ally themselves with Red, Red, since it was so closely connected to Communism, i.e. "Red China",, "Better Dead than Red", "Pinko", etc.
crickets
(25,969 posts)when they truly aren't. Two important elements of any strategy to address this:
1. Fix the media problem that has ballooned out of control since the demise of the Fairness Doctrine. I don't know what the solution is, but it needs to be addressed in some way. RW radio, FOX News, and social media bots are killing our country by degrees and we need to do something about it.
2. Fund public education properly, and stop teaching students to take standardized tests without imparting real knowledge. Civics, world history, and critical thinking need to be taught in our schools well before students graduate from high school.
Those two things alone would go a long way in changing the discourse in this country.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)crickets
(25,969 posts)I saw the first version of your post. Thanks for changing it. Peace.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)I'm glad you saw the first version of my post..
Peace back at ya.
Roisin Ni Fiachra
(2,574 posts)Reasoning with fascists is like trying to reason with a crocodile.
True Dough
(17,304 posts)Things are obviously very divisive, polarized. Bloodshed could ensue under existing conditions, no doubt. But how could the balkanization of the U.S. proceed without provoking a full-on civil war?