US Election Exit Poll Survey

Drew_TNBD

Axe_meister said:

The problem for the average worker is that with more and more automation (and off shoring) the number of jobs is decreasing (or wages are going down).
If you think of the IQ bell curve, there was a time when there were jobs that could appeal to the majority people however has time is going on the entrance criteria is moving to the right.
Thus there is a lot of resentment of the educated and liberal middle classes, who were once trusted to work on behalf of The masses. Now they see the same educated middle class keeping their jobs whilst they are thrown on the junk heap. This is happening the world over hence the rise of the far right.

That's too simplistic. No many people found stitching buttons to shirts an appealing job, but it was the job they could do and a way for them to feed their families.

You have to remember, and this is gonna sound a tad cunty... but not everyone has the aspirational requirements to do those middle class educated jobs. Some people just wanna work a crappy 9-5 warehouse job and go get pissed at the weekend. That's the sum total of their life.

They're the people who are being squeezed the hardest. Your common man and woman.

Axe_meister

Which is what I was saying. The jobs they occupied are no longer available and unless they can get educated or improve their IQ they have few options 

eSully

This is interesting, taken from reddit {link}

Hilary didn't lose because Replican vote grew. She lost because Democrats didn't come out to vote,

english_bob

eSully said:

This is interesting, taken from reddit {link}

Hilary didn't lose because Replican vote grew. She lost because Democrats didn't come out to vote,

Interesting. I don't know how much store to set by it, but there's been a fair bit of speculation in the press about what would have happened if instead of choosing Clinton, the neoliberal "business-as-usual" candidate they'd picked Bernie Sanders, who potentially had much greater appeal to the kind of voters who picked Trump as the "burn it down and start again" option.

At the same time, Trump's apparent unpopularity with his party, and the recent high-profile criticism within the GOP doesn't seem to have translated to reduced votes.

Emp_Fab

Gassage said:

Chalky said:

Emp_Fab said:

Gassage said:

This makes incredible reading, whatever the result.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

@Gassage I don't get why you think it makes no sense.  It seems pretty clear from my perspective.  What is the issue you see with the results ?

What makes no sense is to compare people's voting decisions to their socio-economic attributes. You may as well compare it to their choice in socks or breakfast cereal or inside leg measurement.

Exactly this.

But there are obvious links between socio-economic status and voting preferences, however much you would prefer there wasn't.  The data in that link supports that fact as well.  It's a valid metric.

Drew_TNBD

Emp_Fab said:

Gassage said:

Chalky said:

Emp_Fab said:

Gassage said:

This makes incredible reading, whatever the result.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

@Gassage I don't get why you think it makes no sense.  It seems pretty clear from my perspective.  What is the issue you see with the results ?

What makes no sense is to compare people's voting decisions to their socio-economic attributes. You may as well compare it to their choice in socks or breakfast cereal or inside leg measurement.

Exactly this.

But there are obvious links between socio-economic status and voting preferences, however much you would prefer there wasn't.  The data in that link supports that fact as well.  It's a valid metric.

How do you explain all the women and hispanics that voted for Trumpatron ?

Heartfeltdawn

Chalky said:

People are multi-dimensional. You can't reduce them down to "You have this arbitrary attribute so you should vote X"!  That is what has caused the problem - politicians, pundits and pollsters thinking people are predictable.

Which is what I've said on here about the General Election, locals, and referendum. It's been a case of politics by metrics from the left-wing side especially at a time when the right-wing elements have been using more emotive means.

This is what made the Leave "£350 million - NHS" angle such a great piece of sloganeering. The NHS is pretty much the untouchable element within the public sector. Teachers can get slagged, politicians savaged, but the medical world saves people. It's the place that looks after yer sick kids and stops babies dying. Leave knew this so throws the NHS in to trigger that bit of emotion. What's more, it stays in the mind for a long time. That £350 million for the NHS gibberish has stayed around longer than any Cameron slogan, didn't get torn apart in seconds like the Milliband stone of promises farce, was more coherent than Farage farting on about Nigerians with AIDS. Take the suggestion of more cash floating around, combine that with the public sector area that the general public most connect with... et voila. As a statement of intent, it was bullshit: as a piece of emotive political propaganda, it was first fucking rate. 

Farage, Le Pen, Trump, all communicators with their electorate via emotive sloganeering. The mainstream left have lost that art. Clinton had no ability to connect with people and so was reduced to using the same celebrities as usual to connect to her audience. Milliband didn't have it. It's only the fringe left elements, Corbyn to Sanders to someone like Caroline Lucas, who do connect. It's not just the left though, we saw the same in the primaries. The chosen one in Marco Rubio was made to look one-dimensional and bland. Chris Christie savaged him, even Ted Cruz looked charismatic compared to him. 

Heartfeltdawn

Drew_TNBD said:

How do you explain all the women and hispanics that voted for Trumpatron ?

Women: I don't think it needs explaining. Watch something like the Real Housewives of Orange County or whatever that shit is. Can you see those people siding with a Democrat who embraces BLM or who is concerned with social care provision? No chance. A lot of women who like Trump voted for him. 

I would say that a fair degree of Hispanics will go with Trump over his abortion comments and for the perceived sense that the GOP are more Christian/Catholic friendly than the Democrats. This certainly is born out when you look at that CNN chart above and see where the Jewish vote went for instance.

crunchman

Drew_TNBD said:

You have to remember, and this is gonna sound a tad cunty... but not everyone has the aspirational requirements to do those middle class educated jobs. Some people just wanna work a crappy 9-5 warehouse job and go get pissed at the weekend. That's the sum total of their life.

They're the people who are being squeezed the hardest. Your common man and woman.

The other problem is that where those jobs still exist, they don't pay enough to live off of a lot of the time.

A friend of mine summed the whole thing up quite well in a Facebook post:

Disappointed Trump won.  Glad Clinton lost.

Chalky

Emp_Fab said:

Gassage said:

Chalky said:

Emp_Fab said:

Gassage said:

This makes incredible reading, whatever the result.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

@Gassage I don't get why you think it makes no sense.  It seems pretty clear from my perspective.  What is the issue you see with the results ?

What makes no sense is to compare people's voting decisions to their socio-economic attributes. You may as well compare it to their choice in socks or breakfast cereal or inside leg measurement.

Exactly this.

But there are obvious links between socio-economic status and voting preferences, however much you would prefer there wasn't.  The data in that link supports that fact as well.  It's a valid metric.

Is there a soci-economic indicator of your life that decrees your choice in elections? Or your choice in anything? No. You have free will. To think that people are little predictable systems into which input X will always cause output Y is stupid and demeaning.

Actually, you thinking that people are like that would explain why you are in the wrong so often...