Angry white males propel Donald Trump...and Bernie Sanders

[davideinstein]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/angry-white-males-propel-donald-trumpand-bernie-sanders-1457495579?mod=e2fb

[TulsaMoon]

The main point is stupid, uneducated white men are angry and keeping Trump and Sanders alive.

"Here's a bit more evidence that the Trump army is made up of people angry over the belief the economy has left them behind: Among white college graduates in Michigan, he (Trump) lost to Mr. Kasich. But among whites without a college degree, he (Trump) won by almost 20 percentage points"

"In Michigan, they ( men ) kept him ( Sanders ) nearly even with Mrs. Clinton, offsetting her big advantage among women and among minorities. Among women, exit polls indicate, he finished just behind Mrs. Clinton"

Can you imagine if instead this was about Clinton and the headline was:

"Angry uneducated women and minorities keep Clinton in the Presidential race according to exit polls"

The OMG they are attacking women or the OMG they are attacking minorities would be shouted from every news outlet, but he's a white man so it's A-Okay that we bash him/them. THIS is why the race issue and the inequality issue still has an ugly head in our society. When you have a so called respected newspaper printing a story that in essence says every man voting for Trump or Sanders is an uneducated dope, well then you have just fueled more anger and more division in our society.

I did not vote for either of these men, but had I done so I would be angry about being accused of voting for them because I was unedumacted......

[AquaMan]

I used to enjoy the WSJ years ago before its ownership change. Its still a vital source of detailed business news. When it veers into politics and social theory, not so much.

I am angry. I am white. I am college educated. I don't support Trump. I do support Sanders. Mostly because I am old, white and angry. Maybe there's a news story there somewhere.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I used to enjoy the WSJ years ago before its ownership change. Its still a vital source of detailed business news. When it veers into politics and social theory, not so much.

I am angry. I am white. I am college educated. I don't support Trump. I do support Sanders. Mostly because I am old, white and angry. Maybe there's a news story there somewhere.

WSJ is just another Murdochian rag....just like The Sun.


"FREDDIE STARR ATE MY HAMSTER"

[AquaMan]

There must be good money in rags.

[Conan71]

The main point is stupid, uneducated white men are angry and keeping Trump and Sanders alive.

"Here's a bit more evidence that the Trump army is made up of people angry over the belief the economy has left them behind: Among white college graduates in Michigan, he (Trump) lost to Mr. Kasich. But among whites without a college degree, he (Trump) won by almost 20 percentage points"

"In Michigan, they ( men ) kept him ( Sanders ) nearly even with Mrs. Clinton, offsetting her big advantage among women and among minorities. Among women, exit polls indicate, he finished just behind Mrs. Clinton"

Can you imagine if instead this was about Clinton and the headline was:

"Angry uneducated women and minorities keep Clinton in the Presidential race according to exit polls"

The OMG they are attacking women or the OMG they are attacking minorities would be shouted from every news outlet, but he's a white man so it's A-Okay that we bash him/them. THIS is why the race issue and the inequality issue still has an ugly head in our society. When you have a so called respected newspaper printing a story that in essence says every man voting for Trump or Sanders is an uneducated dope, well then you have just fueled more anger and more division in our society.

I did not vote for either of these men, but had I done so I would be angry about being accused of voting for them because I was unedumacted......

So...basically black people aren't voting for Sanders.  Certainly not because of deeply held racist views within the Democratic Party that would keep them from voting for a white guy.

[AquaMan]

Multiple Michigan polls were done predicting a double digit loss and no minority support. They were wrong. Exit polls showed minority support for Sanders growing. The one thing I see in common with states that Sanders is winning is not so much the % of minority voters but the states that have extreme oppositional political demographics. IOW, solid extremist red states with solid extremist blue opposition and very little in between.

I think its a difficult path to prove racism in party politics. Only the extreme players seem willing to do so. People choose for so many different reasons.

[Hoss]

Multiple Michigan polls were done predicting a double digit loss and no minority support. They were wrong. Exit polls showed minority support for Sanders growing. The one thing I see in common with states that Sanders is winning is not so much the % of minority voters but the states that have extreme oppositional political demographics. IOW, solid extremist red states with solid extremist blue opposition and very little in between.

I think its a difficult path to prove racism in party politics. Only the extreme players seem willing to do so. People choose for so many different reasons.

The big part of Sanders' growing popularity is among the young voters.  Hillary is going to have a time if young voters start really showing up at the polls for the primaries.  An exit poll from Michigan showed something like 86% of primary voters under the age of 35 chose Sanders, regardless of race.

Independents in the Democratic primary also heavily favored (71 percent) Sanders.

[TheArtist]

I think there may be a difference between the types of "angry white males".  One group wants the US to be more like Europe, more urban more transit, more as they may see it though not necessarily true "sophisticated, modern and open minded" etc.  Another wants us to back to the"good ol days" rural and bigoted.  Thats where I think Clinton doesn't get it.  She seems to be more same ol same ol USA, but a lot of young people want a new more european style USA. 

[Conan71]

I think there may be a difference between the types of "angry white males".  One group wants the US to be more like Europe, more urban more transit, more as they may see it though not necessarily true "sophisticated, modern and open minded" etc.  Another wants us to back to the"good ol days" rural and bigoted.  Thats where I think Clinton doesn't get it.  She seems to be more same ol same ol USA, but a lot of young people want a new more european style USA. 

I'm just a pissed off old fart.

"Hey you kids...GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!"

[davideinstein]

I don't think people realize that sexism is playing a larger role in this election than racism.

[Conan71]

I don't think people realize that sexism is playing a larger role in this election than racism.

Hah, hah, hah.  2008 anyone?  How about the Palinizing of the GOP ticket?  Nothing sexist there, she was just an idiot, right?

I don't recall anyone screeching sexism then.

Hillary is a dreadful human being.  She's dishonest, conniving, and corrupt.  Need I say more?  If you think it's about her being female, you are in denial about how repugnant most people find her character.  I don't know many women who are excited about voting for her.  You can't tell me that's all based on sexism as well, can you?  Well, I guess you can, but I'm not buying.  I'll agree there's a small percentage of neanderthals out there who think a woman should not be president, but not enough to cost her the election, those same people also think a black male shouldn't be president either.  It's not people's attitudes that are her problem, she's got a ton of baggage that isn't passing the smell test with many voters.

The United States has broken down incredible racial, ethnic, and gender barriers in all levels of leadership over the last half century.

[davideinstein]

I'm excited to vote for her. I think she's by far the best option in the race.

[cannon_fodder]

I'm not a Hillary fan. I will defend her record against many detractors, simply because they misstate the facts or hold her to a standard no one else is held to (Colin Powel l, whom I like, used a private email server! Also, there were more than a dozen diplomatic attacks and 60 deaths of IUS personnel. Pick one standard.). But I simply don't trust her and I don't like her.

But at least I feel like she would be a responsible leader. Yes, there may likely be kickbacks and political favors to people she "owes." But compared to The Donald Drumpf, all of a sudden she's looking might fine.

"Excuse me sir, would you like to be slapped in the face or kicked in the crotch?"

[TulsaMoon]

I think there may be a difference between the types of "angry white males".  One group wants the US to be more like Europe, more urban more transit, more as they may see it though not necessarily true "sophisticated, modern and open minded" etc.  Another wants us to back to the"good ol days" rural and bigoted.  Thats where I think Clinton doesn't get it.  She seems to be more same ol same ol USA, but a lot of young people want a new more european style USA. 

You just played out 1958 - 1973 in one post...Hippies vs everyone else.  

When I was a young man I too wanted that European feeling of freedom, so I went to school there. It was both amazing and eye opening. Today though it is much different and proof is in England itself wanting to vote themselves out of the union. That vote will be on June 23rd and as of now the split is 60/40 to leave according to friends who live there.