Why do people still support Trump?

Post Reply New Topic

No. It shows that in the present tense- right now- Whites who are Democrats ARE more progressive than Whites who are GOP. Look at the bottom right corner of the graph.

As for the earlier decades shown on the graph:it doesnt show a damned thing because it doesnt take into account one little thing: prior to 1994 there was such an animal as the "Dixiecrat" ( southern Whites who were pro segregation- and registered Democrat because and not despite that).

1)in the post war era the main enemy of the Black Civil Rights movement was the same political party as the main ALLY of the Black Civil Rights Movement: the Democrats.

2) Southern Whites were almost uniformly registered Democrats prior to 1972 (when the graph starts), and only slowly began to defect to the GOP from 1972 until 1994. The politicians who opposed MLK were all Democrats (StromThurmond, and George Wallace etc).

So prior to the 90s you would not assume that "White plus Democrat equals Progressive" because a big chunk of the White population of the South were still cross burning Dixiecrats. It was only after the 1994 "Republican Revolution" when folks who had been Dixiecrats defected to joining the GOP en masse, that you can assume that "Democrat of any skin color equals left of center, and GOP of any skin color equals right of center". Prior to that both parties were more diverse in attitudes about everything including about race.

Yes that's true. Many of the olden day victims of lynchings and mass killings happened in blue states .

Which, if true, makes the JUMP in Democrats against a black president and DROP (which barely rose thereafter) in Republicans who were against a black president all the more surprising...Democrat peak is 1996, with Republican low starting in the same year, after being equal in 1994...

Considering Joe Biden voted in favor of taxing retirees, social security, middle class to death in 1983, I think the answer should be obvious. He'll do the same thing again, if elected. Kamala will support the Green New Deal, I'm just not interested in socialism. Despite what he says, Biden has his eye on the money of the middle class. He won't follow through with taxing the wealthy, they never do. It's all up to us who are barely realizing our American dream to carry the load of the 'less fortunate.' I believe in charity, I believe in clean living, on my terms. That's freedom.

I know for myself, I want to be left alone. I want to pay my reasonable share for the privilege of living in the US, and then do my own thing. Trump has offered me that... He hasn't offered me an easier path, or to get what I want. That's up to each individual. Just let me live and I'll navigate the rest, thanks.

We are not in 1972 where based on the riots, "law and order", counterculture etc. Nixon thrashed McGovern

The electorate is younger and more diverse than in 1972.

True BLM is losing support as people are starting to see them for the "trained Marxists" they are.

While the public may not want to abolish the police a large percentage of white people believe "systematic racism" is real which was not true in 1972. A candidate could not say that as Biden has back in 1972.

Coded racist appeals are more likely to be seen through nowadays.

Trump rose in the polls a little bit but was that because of the riots or convention bounce? The convention bounce if that is what it was was very small in comparison to typical convention bounces.

Attempts to portray Biden and Harris as "woke" revolutionaries is a huge stretch.

Such an attempt might have a chance of working in just enough right places with a candidate who can stay on message. Trump can not stay on message over a day or two without going on some twitterstorm.

While the public is disturbed by the continuing unrest the riots only affect a certain amount of people, the pandemic and ensuing economic fallout affects everybody.

The public is disturbed by the chaos so are they going to decide rehiring Trump is the solution?.

Trump does have the electoral college advantage vs popular as he did in 2016. In 2016 he "threaded the needle" to win the electoral college, he is going to have to do something like that again.

Trump needs to narrow the gap with Biden about 4 or 5 points. Trump has not shown an ability to broaden his base so Biden has to lose support.

I do believe Biden has some sort of dementia issue, it is not just stuttering so some sort of "senior moment" meltdowns enough to make a difference is plausible. But I caution Biden showed the ability to keep it together in the one on one debate with Sanders and his acceptance speech.

I believe both the democrats panic and the MAGA's super confidence that they are going to have the mother of own the libs parties in November is an overcorrection to the 2016 surprise.

That said we are in an unprecedented time with the pandemic, with an unprecedented amount of mail-in voting (people including Trump are assuming that helps Biden, is that true?), fear of or actual violence at the polls, and after the election.

Conclusion: While I think Biden is likely to win anybody confident in how this is all going to turn out is a fool.

I keep hearing that BLM are marxists, but why are they? What does marxism have to do with wanting to have justice for black people in American, unless, they are just using that as a fraudelant front for an entirely different marxist agenda?

Because Americans will tie the communist/fascist label against any group they don't agree with in an effort to dehumanize them with seemingly 'evil' labels that have nothing to do with what those groups actually stand for. Also think for yourself, why would a lot of WHITE people want to do that to a group of BLACK people who are basically fighting for racial justice? It couldn't possibly be because of racism, could it?

What does destroying property and stealing from businesses (some owned by black people) across the country have to do with the stated claim that the protests were as a result of the death of one person in the process of his arrest?

It is important to note, that there are actually 2 "Black lives matter" components:
There is the "Black lives matter" "cause" where people are concerned about unarmed black people being killed by the police - A reasonable cause, although this issue affects people of all colours, not just black people.
Then, there is the "Black lives matter" "organisation", which is more interested in causing conflict. The fact that their names are the same allows for the organisation to cause mayhem, and deflect critism toward the "cause", trying to portray those who are against the "organisation"'s actions as being against the "cause".

All very confusing, but that is what helps the "organisation"...It would be interesting to see what would happen should the "BLM" organisation be added to a domestic terror list, as the riots\looting\destruction are taking place under their name.

Well so far some mayors and governors are giving into their demands of defunding the police, but if they are put on such a terror list, would their demands not be giving into anymore, if it's true that the U.S. government has a do not negotiate with terrorists policy?

Also, when it comes to telling the two BLM factions apart, when people hang BLM signs in their places of business, like I see them doing, which BLM are they supporting then?

Then, there is the "Black lives matter" "organisation", which is more interested in causing conflict. The fact that their names are the same allows for the organisation to cause mayhem, and deflect critism toward the "cause", trying to portray those who are against the "organisation"'s actions as being against the "cause...

Exactly. And who is organizing and funding it? Who has enough pull to tell the police to let them do as they please, and the media to treat them with kid gloves despite all of the damage done?

Hanging a sign could indicate support for the "cause" or be used as a "shield" to try and protect the business from the "organisation" (or even both)...There is no way to tell, unfortunately. With this in mind, however, if there are no riots in an area, it is safe to assume an agreement with the cause. Conversly, when riots are happening in the area, it is more plausible it is used as a way to try and protect the business from the BLM riot squad.

However, the "organsiation" and "cause" are combined in most people's minds, with support for the "cause" related to a person's opinion of the actions of the "organisation" - If people disagree with the actions of the "organisation", then support for the "cause" will drop as a result.

Oh okay. Well I live in Canada, and there hasn't been any BLM riots here as far as I know but some business are still hanging up BLM signs.

That would probably be in support of the cause, although there is the possibility it is being used as a "talisman" in order to prevent potential attacks should they start in the area as well...It's hard to know, based on how the BLM organisation acts.

Oh okay, but if rioters of the BLM are marxist, then would they care about small businesses, even if BLM signs were on display in them?

Probably not, but some people consider it prudent to do what they can, however futile the effort may eventually turn out to be, rather than not do something which may have prevented a problem occurring.

More accurate to say that while some of the founders of BLM are linked to marxism not all BLM supporters are marxist.