War On The Working Class, Which Helped To Elect Donald Trump: A Major Turning Point Against The Republican Future

The Republican Party seemed in an ideal position after the Presidential Election of 2016, as they had control of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House.

But having Donald Trump as their President was not the same, as say for instance, John Kasich or Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio would have been in the White House.

Donald Trump is a loose cannon, a reckless man who owes no allegiance to anyone, and he is unpredictable and dangerous for the long term future of the Republican Party.

Choosing to pursue health care, by destroying Obama Care completely, now seems a like a gigantic mistake, and even Trump seems ready to abandon the party and Speaker Paul Ryan on this, and move on.

But the image has been left that the GOP has declared war on the working class of America, ready to take away their health care without any concern, as to how it affects the white working class that put him in office, due to small margins in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

The Republican Party has decided that single mothers and their children, the elderly, and disabled also do not deserve health care, and their lack of concern about what many consider a basic human right, will reverberate against them and insure a return to the Democratic Party in power.

So many people who were against Obama Care were not against the Affordable Care Act, not realizing it is the same legislation, so it is clear what the Republicans did was promote racism against the “black man”, Barack Obama, who had promoted the law.

Now, however, many white working class people realize their own ignorance, and how it has now come back to bite them, and the racial appeal will no longer work among many of them.

States like Kentucky, West Virginia, Arizona and many others, who have benefited from Obama Care, will start to turn against the party which manipulated them, and the GOP will suffer long term.

And if that does not happen, by some pure stupidity of the white working class, then what happens to them is the proper punishment because of their prejudice and narrow mindedness, and with no sympathy to be offered.

13 comments on “War On The Working Class, Which Helped To Elect Donald Trump: A Major Turning Point Against The Republican Future

  1. Rustbelt Democrat March 24, 2017 4:23 pm

    Trumpcare is DOA…for now. Next…taxes.

  2. D March 25, 2017 1:01 pm

    At a recent CPAC, President Donald Trump told fellow Republicans he wants to transform the party into one for the working people. “The GOP will be from now on the party also of the American worker,” Trump declared. (See https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/02/24/donald-trump-claims-remake-gop-party-american-worker/PeF6IjybU9C77idKYgIshK/story.html .)

    That makes it sound like the reputation the Democrats used to have.

    In order to do that, realignments are necessary. A realignment for the Republican Party for working people. A realignment for the Democratic Party for people with money. (At least those with six-figure incomes.)

    The inverse of how they have long been recognized.

    It doesn’t sound too unreal, because Thomas Frank’s book, “Listen Liberal,” took plenty of notes on the meritocracy very prevalent in Democratic Party politics and philosophies from the leadership of those empowered (Bill Clinton, Barack Obama), and that they moved away from New Deal in the 1980s. (After Ronald Reagan was re-elected, in 1984, with 49 states, there was at least one Democratic politician who said that he figures the New Deal coalition is pretty much dead.) Then came the New Democrats, in the late-1980s and early-1990s (with Bill Clinton unseating George Bush and, on Election Night, then-Texas Gov. Ann Richards telling “ABC News” what “New Democrat” is in leadership).

    Now we have the middle class gutted. We have young people (the 18-29 voting-age demographic) with exorbitant student-loan debt that puts them in an incredible hole before they graduate and get work and maybe (but often not) get a job with good enough pay to reduce their debt. And then we have about half the people with employment making $30,000 or less per year. So, “New Democrat” appeared okay in the 1990s but not here in the late-2010s. Our needs have changed.

    So, can Donald Trump transform with a realignment the Republican Party into a party of the working people? If the Democrats don’t disavow Clintonism-type New Democrats, I think it’s possible. It takes years to feel it. But, it is possible.

    I want to take this time to talk electoral politics.

    I notice that, in the past four decades of presidential elections in which the White House flipped parties, a party-pickup winner flipped some select states which have since not flipped back to the party which lost them. Here is a list:

    • 1980: Republican pickup winner Ronald Reagan flipped Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas.

    • 1992: Democratic pickup winner Bill Clinton flipped California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine [statewide], Maryland, New Jersey, and Vermont.

    • 2000: Republican pickup winner George W. Bush flipped Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, and West Virginia. (He also flipped Arizona. But between the 1950s and 2010s, Arizona colored blue only for Bill Clinton’s re-election in 1996. It is not really in the same boat as those six states.)

    • 2008: Democratic pickup winner Barack Obama flipped Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Virginia.

    With 2016 the most recent presidential election, Republican pickup winner Donald Trump flipped Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. (He also won a pickup of the 2nd Congressional District of Maine.)

    It is something, when you look at Reagan, Clinton, and Bush Jr., at those particular states. Some of them went through bellwether periods. Texas voted for every winner from 1928 to 1988 except for Richard Nixon’s first election of 1968. California went for 22 of the 25 winning presidential tickets of the 20th century (getting it “wrong” in 1912, 1960, and 1976; the first two were California carried for a home-state candidate who did not win the election). Missouri was on a roll from 1904 to 2004 (getting it “wrong” with saying no to Dwight Eisenhower’s re-election in 1956). Now, these three states, as a few examples, are very much preferring one party over the other.

    So, it is remarkable that Nevada, in the winners’ columns in all since 1912 (except 1976 and 2016), has joined New Mexico (a companion state which first voted in 1912; they disagreed with each other only in 2000) to identify with the Democrats. And it looks that way with Virginia (which was Hillary Clinton’s No. 15 best-performed state in margins; it was Barack Obama’s No. 24 in both his elections) and Colorado (Hillary’s No. 16; Obama’s No. 23 from both 2008 and 2012). Ordinarily, I would have expected these 2008-established bellwether states (in 2016, Virginia was only +3.23 above the popular-vote margin; Colorado was +2.82 above) to have flipped to a Republican pickup-winning Donald Trump.

    So, this lead me to look at the states Trump flipped and ask myself, “Which one[s] do I think the Democrats have lost long term?” In other words, the next time the presidency flips from Republican to Democratic, which of Trump’s Republican pickup states will not return to flipping for a pickup winning Democrat?

    The average percentage-points margin of all six of Trump’s pickup states was +3.39. Iowa was R+9.41. Ohio was R+8.07. Florida was R+1.19. Wisconsin was R+0.76. Pennsylvania was R+0.72. Michigan was R+0.22.

    Looking at that, I think Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan have become purple states. They may be new bellwethers, beginning in 2016, and going forward. Florida, in the column of all winners since 1928 (except 1960 and 1992), remains a bellwether state.

    The two in question are Ohio and Iowa.

    I suspect Ohio, with an unbroken bellwether streak since 1964 (and in the column for all winners since 1896 except for 1944 and 1960), will scale back support for Donald Trump in 2020 should he get re-elected. In theory: He may gain +3 to +5 percentage points to win over the U.S. Popular Vote while Ohio draws back by the same level. That would bring it back to being within +5 point from the margin in the U.S. Popular Vote. (That is where Ohio performed from 1964 to 2012.)

    I think Iowa is the one that is gone. That the Democrats have lost it long term. The pattern in Iowa, to determine the winning party, was Democrats in the east and Republicans in the west. But, Trump flipped it with a better margin than Texas (which he carried by +9.00), and there were only six counties which were in the column for Hillary Clinton. There is the fact that Trump won a Republican pickup of the heavily industrial Dubuque County (Dubuque). It last carried Republican in 1956 for re-electing Dwight Eisenhower.

    It is a result like Dubuque County, and the state of Iowa, that should have Democrats concerned about whether Trump could realign a coalition away from the Democrats that they should not lose.

  3. Ronald March 25, 2017 1:31 pm

    WOW, D, again a fantastic and perceptive analysis that is great food for thought, and for concern, for those of us who are progressives and Democrats.

    The question is who can prevent what Trump wants, the working class and middle class, going to the Republicans long term.

    We will have to start analyzing potential nominees for 2020 in this regard fairly soon, if there is any chance to turn the tide three and a half years from now.

  4. Southern Liberal March 26, 2017 8:29 pm

    ABC World News had a report on tonight that in 15 years, 38% of jobs will be done by robots.

  5. Princess Leia March 26, 2017 8:41 pm

    That’s why Magic Donald ain’t going to be able to take us back to the good old days. Planning for the future is what’s necessary.

  6. Pragmatic Progressive March 26, 2017 8:49 pm

    I see it as a continuation of the industrial revolution. As Leia said, workers are going to need higher skills for a Jetsons future.

  7. Former Republican March 26, 2017 8:57 pm

    Or it may be a dystopian future like Terminator, where robots declare war on humanity.

  8. Rational Lefty March 27, 2017 9:08 am

    Another way technology is affecting the economy: internet shopping. Because of internet shopping, companies such as Macys, JC Pennys, Sears, Kmart, etc. are closing stores due to poor sales.

  9. Southern Liberal March 27, 2017 12:09 pm

    Democratic Party’s platform on jobs, energy, etc. 


    Party platforms factor in to which party we vote for in our two party system.

  10. Rustbelt Democrat March 27, 2017 5:32 pm

    Some of the latest things I’ve heard regarding robotics in the news:

    UPS is experimenting with drone delivery.

    A coffee shop in California, or it might have been New York, is experimenting with robotic baristas.

    Tech companies, such as Google, are experimenting with driverless cars and trucks.

    Of course, if anyone who’s shopped at Wal-Mart knows, they have those self-checkout machines, which takes away a cashier job.

    I side with Former Republican in that I fear a nightmare scenario such as Terminator or War Games.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.