XPost: alt.politics.republicans, sac.politics   
   From: rino.watch@usa.us   
      
   The criticism of Donald Trump and the actions of his administration   
   since taking office has been intense, to say the least. Trump’s   
   aggressive approach towards Volodymyr Zelensky, his repeated falsehoods   
   about who instigated the war in Ukraine, the pardoning of violent   
   criminals convicted for attacking Congress in January 2021, assertions   
   that as president he is above the law, threats directed at Denmark and   
   Canada, and the dismantling of longstanding US aid policies are among   
   the actions that have drawn sharp condemnation. This criticism, and   
   indeed more besides, is entirely justified and necessary.   
      
   Yet, there is a crucial question missing from the broader conversation:   
   What exactly has America’s liberal, democratic, and culturally engaged   
   elite done to provoke such profound anger—indeed, outright hatred—from   
   large sections of the predominantly white working class and lower-middle   
   class, driving them towards a politician like Donald Trump? It is   
   astonishing to consider that it was not long ago that Barack Obama   
   secured a second presidential term in 2012, suggesting that something   
   significant must have occurred in the intervening years to prompt this   
   dramatic reversal in American politics.   
      
   Economic inequality and hardship have frequently been cited as   
   explanations for Trump’s rise. However, this cannot fully explain his   
   appeal, as Obama secured re-election just four years after the global   
   financial crisis. Similarly, racism, though deeply embedded in American   
   society, is hardly a new phenomenon. Immigration is another often-cited   
   factor, yet the United States has always been a nation of immigrants.   
   While these elements have undoubtedly contributed, there must be another   
   critical factor that enabled Trump not only to win but to win again—even   
   after orchestrating an illegal attack on the US Congress.   
      
   To fully understand this shift, one must return to the 2016 presidential   
   election. Early in the campaign, most informed commentators did not   
   seriously consider Trump a viable Republican candidate. He lacked   
   support from the party’s leading figures, had never held political   
   office, and did not have access to the significant financial resources   
   typically required for a successful presidential bid. However, one   
   person who recognised Trump’s potential early on was Jim Clifton, then   
   head of Gallup in the United States.   
      
   As early as January 2016, eleven months before the election, Clifton   
   highlighted a deeply troubling finding from Gallup’s polls: 75 percent   
   of voters in the United States agreed with the statement that   
   “corruption is widespread throughout the government in this country”.   
   Clifton described this perception as a “big, dark cloud” hanging over   
   America’s progress, suggesting it could fuel the rise of a   
   “non-traditional” candidate like Trump. In hindsight, Clifton’s insight   
   was remarkably accurate. Allegations of corruption against Washington’s   
   political elite and other perceived “elitist” groups became central   
   themes of Trump’s successful 2016 campaign, as well as his 2024 run.   
      
   Corruption, in the public’s view, extends beyond simple bribery. Many   
   Americans have a broader definition that includes various forms of   
   favouritism, particularly within the public sector. On an everyday   
   level, this might involve leveraging personal connections to gain   
   admission for children into popular public schools or securing public   
   sector employment despite not being the most qualified applicant.   
   Americans widely hold the belief that public decisions should be   
   characterised by impartiality and equal treatment.   
      
   My argument is that the perception of corruption as undue favouritism   
   may have been crucial to Donald Trump’s election victories in both 2016   
   and 2024. This view is supported by sociologist Arlie Hochschild’s   
   highly acclaimed book Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on   
   the American Right (The New Press, 2016). Hochschild spent five years   
   with white working-class communities in the American South, discovering   
   that many of these individuals believed they had long been waiting   
   patiently in line for the “American dream”—expecting their economic   
   conditions to improve. Yet, they found themselves continually   
   disappointed, blaming this stagnation on various programmes introduced   
   by Democrats to specifically support minority groups. According to   
   Hochschild’s informants, people claiming minority status could   
   effectively “jump the queue.” Affirmative action, in their eyes,   
   represented ethnic favouritism rather than merit-based selection.   
      
   Surveys have also indicated that a majority of white Americans believe   
   discrimination against themselves is a more significant issue than   
   discrimination faced by Black Americans. Although I consider this   
   perception disconnected from reality, it nonetheless shapes voter   
   decisions, as perceptions, rather than objective realities, guide voting   
   behaviour.   
      
   How has this perception become widespread? One critical factor is the   
   Democrats’ extensive reliance, particularly from their left-wing   
   faction, on identity politics. Practically, this has meant the   
   establishment of targeted programmes designed to benefit various   
   minority groups and sometimes women. Hochschild’s research reveals that   
   such programmes are often viewed by working-class whites as unjust   
   quotas for desirable jobs and educational opportunities. In response,   
   many companies, universities, and public institutions have created   
   specialised departments dedicated to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion   
   (DEI). It is significant that one of Trump’s earliest actions upon   
   returning to office was to dismantle these DEI initiatives across the US   
   federal government.   
      
   Rather than adopting universal policies that would benefit broad   
   sections of society, Democrats have inadvertently cultivated an image   
   among white working-class voters of favouring minority groups—an   
   approach perceived by many as akin to corruption. Targeted programmes   
   frequently arouse suspicion of unfairness due to the complex and   
   subjective nature of determining eligibility—deciding who qualifies as   
   “White,” “Black,” or somewhere in between, and managing nuanced   
   decisions regarding preferential treatment.   
      
   https://www.socialeurope.eu/why-trump-keeps-winning-the-truth-no-one-admits   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)