These protesters really don't understand that their left-liberal identity politics is over, finished, kaput, do they?
It's really not. If anything this election will only reinforce identity politics. And as for the protestors: they have as much right to voice their disdain for the election result as Trump voters have the right to express racist and sexist views. Ironically the origin of identity politics isn't from the liberal left and nor is identity politics even exclusive to the liberal left.
These protesters really don't understand that their left-liberal identity politics is over, finished, kaput, do they?
There is a whole new blend of right-reactionary identity politics.
Odd thing, identity politics. It is to be encouraged, celebrated, lauded, if you are black, Muslim, female, LGBT, etc. So much so that it is all those differing groups are defined by. However, if you are WHITE, especially male and white, your identity is something to be scorned, derided, mocked, sneered at, demonised. There is no exception to this anywhere in the world, even (perhaps especially) in white majority countries. Indeed, white liberals and the liberal elite appear to be ashamed of their identity. The seething, deep rooted resentment that contributed to Brexit, and now a Trump presidency, has been in the making for many decades.
Yes, this is the inevitable reaction to the left playing identity politics for the last 30 years. The smug liberal class is now beginning to see what they have created with their policies of treating people as groups rather than as individuals.
These protesters really don't understand that their left-liberal identity politics is over, finished, kaput, do they?
I can see why you'd think that if they'd lost a landslide election... but given that the democrats won the popular vote- feels a bit premature to declare left-liberal identity politics as dead?
I've seen a few posts today of similar ilk. The election was won under the rules extant period! The percentage vote cast doesn't matter, similar to Labour or the Tories piling up votes in safe seats.
If the figures I've seen are right, and the US used the popular vote to elect - the winner would be chosen by NY, Los Angeles et al. The electoral college is absolutely the right way to choose a leader that reflects less populous regions.
The graphic of counties that voted GOP is pretty stark.
Then why do you support equalisation of constituencies ? Newcastle Central having 50000 electors should have been fine then. Surely, Montana , the Dakotas, Alaska getting three votes [ 1 House Rep and 2 Senators ], whereas New York having only 29 or Texas 38 is surely undemocratic.
The population of Wyoming is 586k [ less than a tenth of New York City ]. NY State has 19.8m.
NY State's population is 34 times Wyomings. WY has 3 votes, NY 29. California with 39.1 has 66 times in population and 18 times more EC votes.
It is thoroughly undemocratic. You support this anachronism because it helps your lot to win. Period.
Unlike partisan gerrymandering in the House of Representatives, the Electoral College wasn't devised to give an unfair advantage to one side. It's a feature, not a bug, that there's a slight degree of overrepresentation for small States.
The Democrats used to be able to win statewide contests in most small Prairie States. If their Presidential candidate can't appeal to the voters in such States, that's her fault, not the fault of the system.
The reason is that it is the STATES that appoint the president, not the people. Take away the 2 senator equivalent and an awful lot of states would have virtually no say in the matter.
During this campaign I have been ever more impressed how the people who set up the American Constitution ensured that no one could dominate the country save by the will of the VAST MAJORITY of the people.
That's not a "whitelash" is it? Maybe Polly should have spent her time lambasting racist black Democrats.
In the last election, blacks voted 90plus % Obama, even though the middle class amongst them would have been better off under Romney in monetary terms.
It could be argued it was the ethnic minority voters who made these elections about identity. The whites were late to that profoundly depressing party.
Jeremy Vine during the Beeb's coverage (paraphrase), "Hillary is not doing as well as Barack Obama did with African Americans, for obvious reasons"...
These protesters really don't understand that their left-liberal identity politics is over, finished, kaput, do they?
It's really not. If anything this election will only reinforce identity politics. And as for the protestors: they have as much right to voice their disdain for the election result as Trump voters have the right to express racist and sexist views. Ironically the origin of identity politics isn't from the liberal left and nor is identity politics even exclusive to the liberal left.
On the contrary, it is the right wing "social conservatives" that are obsessed by identity politics. Trumpism and Brexit are tbe apogee of the phenomenon, at least so far.
Also I'm suspending judgement on my call about the Dems have serious demographic problems until the full large scale Election survey is done. Finding out which 2012 Dems didn't turn out or voted for Trump is vital for understanding how deep a hole they are in. It could be superficially shallow or it could be a cavern
It's really not so deep, PA the swing state so around 0.8% swing needed
Also I'm suspending judgement on my call about the Dems have serious demographic problems until the full large scale Election survey is done. Finding out which 2012 Dems didn't turn out or voted for Trump is vital for understanding how deep a hole they are in. It could be superficially shallow or it could be a cavern
It's really not so deep, PA the swing state so around 0.8% swing needed
Comments
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-maps-out-a-new-administration-to-bring-a-seismic-shift-to-washington/2016/11/09/8bb6629e-a6a6-11e6-8fc0-7be8f848c492_story.html
Clinton lost because she lost Obama votes not Trump gaining Romney ones. She held the urban vote. She collapsed in the rural counties. The deplorables.
During this campaign I have been ever more impressed how the people who set up the American Constitution ensured that no one could dominate the country save by the will of the VAST MAJORITY of the people.
What could he possibly have meant?