this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2025
77 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19309 readers
1441 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
77
‘There are a lot of bitter people here, I’m one of them’: rust belt voters on why they backed Trump again despite his broken promises (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 8 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Summary

Despite broken promises like the return of factory jobs, Donald Trump continues to gain support in Ohio’s rust belt, including Youngstown, a former Democratic stronghold.

Voters feel abandoned by both parties but resonate with Trump’s anti-establishment rhetoric and perceived authenticity.

Economic decline, disillusionment with political elites, and anger over issues like trade deals and student debt forgiveness fuel their frustration.

Many voters believe Trump’s willingness to “tear down the system” aligns with their grievances, even as doubts remain about his solutions.

Their bitterness reflects decades of industrial decline and neglect.

top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I can get it. These were dyed in the wool democrats, or at least their parents were. The Democrat party hung them out to dry with free trade, and abandoned them through ineptitude or unwillingness to resist decades of Republican strong arm politics, and relied on them as a reliable bloc the whole time.

It's not a choice I could make, but to denegrate working people for having literally no place to turn doesn't seem like it's been working out.

It's the party's duty to serve the people. If they don't do that it's dumb to expect anything in return. Republicans got lucky/had crazy good strategy with making Jesus a Republican. They're lying, but it's working.

Parading around the Cheney family? One upping Republicans on all their talking points on immigration and Israel? Those of that voted against trump sure as shit didn't vote for the Democrats, we just voted for Republican lite.

If the democratic party wants to do something about it, they're going to have to start by differentiating the left from the right.

Trump just called everyone assholes and won the presidency twice.

I don't get how anyone thought voting trump was a good idea. I understand where they're coming from even if I don't get how they got there.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

This is probably one of the most polarizing elections.

Personally, as a trans person, I already felt like I was constantly fighting for my own survival. Now I'm fighting for access to my meds. If I lose them, I'm at high risk of osteoporosis. Every trans person I know is stockpiling meds for the inevitable ban.

The trans motto is Death Before Detransition. That motto carries a lot of weight with it, make of it what you will it. I know I'm not the only one preparing for the worst.

I fucking hate the Democratic party. A sliver of me is glad they're feeling some pain, but I'm mostly worried about my community's safety tbh. I hate this country.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They complain about jobs being industrial decline due to the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs, but then blame inflation on efforts to increase the minimum wage to a living wage, rather than corporate profit-gouging.

While many of them might not mind living in a country with a class of underpaid manufacturing workers—presumedly the undocumented immigrants they simultaneously want to deport—the better option is to invest in economic development that bolsters the country's modern service economy, or specialized manufacturing facilities that can compete without needing ineffective tariffs.

And when Trump implements those tariffs, rather than recognizing their role in inevitable price increases, those same people will instead blame underpaid workers, inevitable counter-tariffs, or anyone else but Trump.

They also won't recognize that any economic growth in the next four years won't benefit them in the slightest, but rather go straight into the pockets of those responsible for outsourcing jobs in the first place. All the while supporting them, with anyone else just needing to 'pull themselves up' with imaginary bootstraps.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Things aren't fine. Anywhere. 2 years ago. 4 years ago. 10 years ago.

It isn't about the solutions to these people, and why should it be? Both sides have been in power, neither side made a material difference to the situation of the general population in the rust belt.

So all that's even left to resonate is tone, and at least the "This country has been ruined" message from the R's at least aligns broadly with the general angst.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah. Too bad it’s the R’s that fucking helped ruin it. Fucking idiots vote for the very people that screwed then in the first place and then convinced them how bad things have gotten.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 minutes ago

I'm not going to say both sides are equal, they aren't.

But, look at this graph and I think you'll clearly see the differences between R and D control of the government.

Or, you won't, and see that regardless of who's been in government, there has been almost no impact on real wages while productivity continues to climb.

OBVIOUSLY wages aren't the only measure of how things are going, and OBVIOUSLY To leadership has made many things meaningfully worse for many people.

But like, there are some GLARING issues that are responsible for a massive chunk of people's unhappiness and neither party has the balls to do anything about it so they're both just running identity politics playbooks. It's pathetic.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Perceived authenticity.... fucking morons

[–] [email protected] 34 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

"The establishment" is the only thing keeping red states going...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 hours ago

And the "deep state"...

[–] [email protected] 42 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Stupid people voting against their own best interests isn't news.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

If there'd been one black sheep in that image, they could have put a caption over a white one saying, clearly he doesn't mean me, he must mean someone else, while looking at the black sheep.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

That’s already part of what the original comic says.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

I don't think so, what i said brings out the racism more.

Edir: you could do it without a caption as well, just looking at the black sheep.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It, objectively, is part of the original comic. But thinks on your notes about how to make it more bigoted and terrible. Glad to know where your head is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Well, I disagree. I don't think there's (edit: blatant or objective) racist intent in it, just ignorance or being an idiot.

Edit: and my change makes it objectively about it, and less about ignorance.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 hour ago

Denial is a nasty monster. All my best hopes that you can one day defeat it and thereby arrive at the truth.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Their bitterness reflects decades of industrial decline and neglect.

It also reflects their obscene lack of education to think they're doing anything but making their own situation worse.

You can be bitter all you want, it doesn't make you any less of a fucking idiot. Be bitter about it some more, dumbfucks, like I fucking care.

When the authoritarians come for them, I certainly won't stand for them, because they sure as fuck wouldn't stand for me. You reap what you sow, and the only thing these people are sowing is hate and ignorance.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Their only economic importance is their vote. Now that they've voted they will be neglected, not directly abused. Kinda like a pimp leading his hoes to think he cares about them.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 hours ago

Look no further than Rudy Guilliani. Dude is just entrenched in legal battles. Thats the future for you in MAGA.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 hours ago

The bitter clingers are going to get more bitter and cling even harder.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Voters feel abandoned by both parties but resonate with Trump’s anti-establishment rhetoric and perceived authenticity.

If their impression of Trump includes a perception of authenticity, these people are well and truly lost. I have nothing to say to them, and want nothing to do with them.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 hours ago

They still think he was doing Bigly Important Bidness Stuff (TM) on that goofy game show that he was given....

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

So I am not familiar with us elections but arent there other candidates then democrats and republicans? Like 3rd party? If they don't think trump will deliver, but dislike democrats, can they not vote someone else? Or spoil ballot? Here we also ended up with so far pretty useless labour but at the very least doing nothing is better than more years under conservatives or worse, racists that musk is keen to promote these days.

Here we have a choice of either useless labour or retarded fucktards, so I vote 3rd party. At least it fucking shows not everyone is looking at the two main ones. But looking at our shit turn out, we have similar apathy

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Basically no. Due to a variety of factors it has become essentially impossible to run a third party in the US.

[–] the_artic_one 3 points 4 hours ago

While the US doesn't have a parliamentary system, it's functionally impossible to win the presidency without a nation-wide party with a presence in multiple states backing you. This is because the president is elected by the states so you need the infrastructure capable of winning a plurality of voters in multiple states which you can test by your party's ability to win senate seats or governorships. Additionally, you would need support of enough members of Congress to actually implement any policy while during your term.

Most third-party presidential candidates in the US are grifters or fools as evidenced by the fact that they'll run for president every year without even attempting to build out party infrastructure, push for alternative voting via citizen ballot initiatives, or win lower positions necessary to actually be successful.

Making third parties viable in the US is possible, but it will take a lot of work. It's far easier to hijack one of the existing parties the way the Tea Party and later, Trump did.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

A functional voting system that allowed for the success of third parties in the United States would be great. Unfortunately, without ranked choice voting, voting for a third party candidate just means splitting the vote for one's next-preferred candidate. The most recent example of this would be George H. W. Bush's re-election loss in 1992, due in part to Ross Perot's popularity as a third-party candidate.

As things stand, the pragmatic choice is therefore to vote for the lesser of two evils. While I'd vote for a third-party candidate in a heartbeat if they had a realistic chance of winning, when the choice is a isolationist, corrupt, bigoted felon or anyone else, the easy choice is anyone else.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

Natural selection.