Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe that 2016 is the first presidential election in which a full-fledged "internet culture" had developed. Of course the internet was still a big thing in 2012, but its involvement in our culture was not nearly as large back then.
The following are two of the reasons why I believe that today's right wing killed the left wing on the media front in the last campaign and will continue to:
Reddit.com's subform /r/the_donald. I think this was one of Reddit's most popular subs ever. In any case, it was gigantic and it's where a lot of the positive Donald Trump news originated. That forum made Trump into an icon.
More attractive women.Did the left-wing forget that sex sells? After the first presidential debate on CNN, when the pundits were having a roundtable discussion, I was watching and all I could think was, "Who is that beautiful woman in the red?". Surprise, surprise, it was the token right-wing pundit at the table. I'm talking about Kayleigh Mcenany. Then there's also Tomi Lahren, Ivanka Trump, etc. Skinny, blonde and pretty is now subconsciously associated with being right-wing, while looking and talking like Rachel Maddow, or possibly Megan Kelly when she cut her hair short and looked like an alien, or some feminist Youtube blogger with tattoos and buzzed hair and black lipstick, is associated with being a liberal.
Numerous bloggers, Youtube celebrities, etc. endorsed Trump. I mean, who the heck in their right mind would endorse Crooked Hillary? That's a great way to become uncool. Warren Buffet may have openly endorsed Hillary, but the most contact he has with the internet is playing Bridge, and no one thinks he's cool anyhow.
I believe that 2016 is the first presidential election in which a full-fledged "internet culture" had developed. Of course the internet was still a big thing in 2012, but its involvement in our culture was not nearly as large back then.
The following are two of the reasons why I believe that today's right wing killed the left wing on the media front in the last campaign and will continue to:
Reddit.com's subform /r/the_donald. I think this was one of Reddit's most popular subs ever. In any case, it was gigantic and it's where a lot of the positive Donald Trump news originated. That forum made Trump into an icon.
More attractive women.Did the left-wing forget that sex sells? After the first presidential debate on CNN, when the pundits were having a roundtable discussion, I was watching and all I could think was, "Who is that beautiful woman in the red?". Surprise, surprise, it was the token right-wing pundit at the table. I'm talking about Kayleigh Mcenany. Then there's also Tomi Lahren, Ivanka Trump, etc. Skinny, blonde and pretty is now subconsciously associated with being right-wing, while looking and talking like Rachel Maddow, or possibly Megan Kelly when she cut her hair short and looked like an alien, or some feminist Youtube blogger with tattoos and buzzed hair and black lipstick, is associated with being a liberal.
Numerous bloggers, Youtube celebrities, etc. endorsed Trump. I mean, who the heck in their right mind would endorse Crooked Hillary? That's a great way to become uncool. Warren Buffet may have openly endorsed Hillary, but the most contact he has with the internet is playing Bridge, and no one thinks he's cool anyhow.
Last time I looked Beyonce Knowles was really pretty and Lady Gaga is extremely cool.
The United States believes Trump knows more about the world than the rest of these idiots with no common sense. That's why Trump will be president.
I believe that 2016 is the first presidential election in which a full-fledged "internet culture" had developed. Of course the internet was still a big thing in 2012, but its involvement in our culture was not nearly as large back then.
The following are two of the reasons why I believe that today's right wing killed the left wing on the media front in the last campaign and will continue to:
Reddit.com's subform /r/the_donald. I think this was one of Reddit's most popular subs ever. In any case, it was gigantic and it's where a lot of the positive Donald Trump news originated. That forum made Trump into an icon.
More attractive women.Did the left-wing forget that sex sells? After the first presidential debate on CNN, when the pundits were having a roundtable discussion, I was watching and all I could think was, "Who is that beautiful woman in the red?". Surprise, surprise, it was the token right-wing pundit at the table. I'm talking about Kayleigh Mcenany. Then there's also Tomi Lahren, Ivanka Trump, etc. Skinny, blonde and pretty is now subconsciously associated with being right-wing, while looking and talking like Rachel Maddow, or possibly Megan Kelly when she cut her hair short and looked like an alien, or some feminist Youtube blogger with tattoos and buzzed hair and black lipstick, is associated with being a liberal.
Numerous bloggers, Youtube celebrities, etc. endorsed Trump. I mean, who the heck in their right mind would endorse Crooked Hillary? That's a great way to become uncool. Warren Buffet may have openly endorsed Hillary, but the most contact he has with the internet is playing Bridge, and no one thinks he's cool anyhow.
+1
Now THIS is an interesting thread, i'm surprised by the lack of interest/responses??
Maybe it's just bad timing (it's late), i'll check back on this on the other side/after sleep
Well, the alt-right was more a reaction to the increasingly divisive, radical, and puritanical SJW movement than something self-actuating. After years of increasingly antagonizing white people, especially white males, it eventually more or less stated that it not only didn't need to make any social accommodations for white people, it didn't want to, wasn't going to, and it took glee if that offended you.
The alt-right drew in a lot of the young white people, especially males, who felt personally slighted and alienated by this and couldn't escape it on social media. As big a role as these people who comprise the "alt right" played, though, let's also remember that the Trump campaign didn't have a problem roping in the older folks who aren't net-savvy or know what a meme is, but were never going to vote democrat anyways, and also a lot of fence-sitters who just plain didn't want Hillary Clinton to be president because of her scandal-wracked past and obsessive sense of entitlement for the presidency. America had already rejected her as president once so it should have come as no surprise that large swaths of people would do it again.
I think there was a huge miscalculation not only in that, and the electoral votes (I guess despite all that campaign money and whatnot, Soros forgot to send over a calculator and an electroal map to one of the interns to see if it made any sense), but also in how much shaming white people were willing to take before they said "enough" and voted in opposition to these forces. No matter what anyone says about Obama, at the very least, he stumped in the rust belt and assured white voters he was with them; Hillary's slogan was "I'm with her," putting the onus not on the candidate to work for the voters, but the voters to get her elected so she could smash that glass ceiling. The total lack of lip service, let alone sincerity, to these people was a grave mistake. The sense many got was that her opinion of large swaths of white people - most males, the rural, the working-class, and those not college-educated - were unimportant to her campaign and deserved nary more than a big eye-roll and sarcastic poker face.
For those in the social justice movement who sincerely put their weight behind her, thought she would win and this would be the final nail in the coffin of the cisheteronormative white patriarchy, I think the results of this election were a big, deserved smack across the face: real life isn't a safe space. You can't dogpile people with slogans and rhetoric forever, before those slogans lose meaning and the shame isn't coming as planned anymore. It hammered home that although the term "minority" is taken as a badge of pride and used as a rallying call, there is a meaning behind it, and that meaning is that there are fewer than the majority. If you want to run a successful campaign, there isn't any way you can do so without at least making a pean to that majority and convincing a significant number of them that you have their best interest at heart as well. Obama did it. Why couldn't Hillary? Also, her campaign not only failed to unite, it embraced a sort of ideological separatism that, again, said it didn't want these "deplorable" white people.
To be clear, I am generally a leftist/liberal. Peruse my comments from the last election cycle.... I'm a white male, but I am married to a woman of color, as it's termed in the US, and our daughter is mixed. I live in a nonwhite society, most of my friends here and back home are nonwhite, and many are LGBTQ to boot. I have no sympathies towards the alt-right or any neo-Nazi movements - hell, one of my quirks as a liberal is that I am pro-Israel despite not being a Jew - but I think that it's high time to reign in these divisive radical elements and work towards a better future for all Americans rather thsn pursuing an ever-changing, sadistic and vengeful ideal of "justice" which won't actually serve to help anyone.
Well, the alt-right was more a reaction to the increasingly divisive, radical, and puritanical SJW movement than something self-actuating. After years of increasingly antagonizing white people, especially white males, it eventually more or less stated that it not only didn't need to make any social accommodations for white people, it didn't want to, wasn't going to, and it took glee if that offended you.
The alt-right drew in a lot of the young white people, especially males, who felt personally slighted and alienated by this and couldn't escape it on social media. As big a role as these people who comprise the "alt right" played, though, let's also remember that the Trump campaign didn't have a problem roping in the older folks who aren't net-savvy or know what a meme is, but were never going to vote democrat anyways, and also a lot of fence-sitters who just plain didn't want Hillary Clinton to be president because of her scandal-wracked past and obsessive sense of entitlement for the presidency. America had already rejected her as president once so it should have come as no surprise that large swaths of people would do it again.
I think there was a huge miscalculation not only in that, and the electoral votes (I guess despite all that campaign money and whatnot, Soros forgot to send over a calculator and an electroal map to one of the interns to see if it made any sense), but also in how much shaming white people were willing to take before they said "enough" and voted in opposition to these forces. No matter what anyone says about Obama, at the very least, he stumped in the rust belt and assured white voters he was with them; Hillary's slogan was "I'm with her," putting the onus not on the candidate to work for the voters, but the voters to get her elected so she could smash that glass ceiling. The total lack of lip service, let alone sincerity, to these people was a grave mistake. The sense many got was that her opinion of large swaths of white people - most males, the rural, the working-class, and those not college-educated - were unimportant to her campaign and deserved nary more than a big eye-roll and sarcastic poker face.
For those in the social justice movement who sincerely put their weight behind her, thought she would win and this would be the final nail in the coffin of the cisheteronormative white patriarchy, I think the results of this election were a big, deserved smack across the face: real life isn't a safe space. You can't dogpile people with slogans and rhetoric forever, before those slogans lose meaning and the shame isn't coming as planned anymore. It hammered home that although the term "minority" is taken as a badge of pride and used as a rallying call, there is a meaning behind it, and that meaning is that there are fewer than the majority. If you want to run a successful campaign, there isn't any way you can do so without at least making a pean to that majority and convincing a significant number of them that you have their best interest at heart as well. Obama did it. Why couldn't Hillary? Also, her campaign not only failed to unite, it embraced a sort of ideological separatism that, again, said it didn't want these "deplorable" white people.
To be clear, I am generally a leftist/liberal. Peruse my comments from the last election cycle.... I'm a white male, but I am married to a woman of color, as it's termed in the US, and our daughter is mixed. I live in a nonwhite society, most of my friends here and back home are nonwhite, and many are LGBTQ to boot. I have no sympathies towards the alt-right or any neo-Nazi movements - hell, one of my quirks as a liberal is that I am pro-Israel despite not being a Jew - but I think that it's high time to reign in these divisive radical elements and work towards a better future for all Americans rather thsn pursuing an ever-changing, sadistic and vengeful ideal of "justice" which won't actually serve to help anyone.
*takes deep breath and steps off soapbox*
Wow. This sums it up perfectly. Post of the election cycle. +1 to you, sir.
Well, the alt-right was more a reaction to the increasingly divisive, radical, and puritanical SJW movement than something self-actuating. After years of increasingly antagonizing white people, especially white males, it eventually more or less stated that it not only didn't need to make any social accommodations for white people, it didn't want to, wasn't going to, and it took glee if that offended you.
The alt-right drew in a lot of the young white people, especially males, who felt personally slighted and alienated by this and couldn't escape it on social media. As big a role as these people who comprise the "alt right" played, though, let's also remember that the Trump campaign didn't have a problem roping in the older folks who aren't net-savvy or know what a meme is, but were never going to vote democrat anyways, and also a lot of fence-sitters who just plain didn't want Hillary Clinton to be president because of her scandal-wracked past and obsessive sense of entitlement for the presidency. America had already rejected her as president once so it should have come as no surprise that large swaths of people would do it again.
I think there was a huge miscalculation not only in that, and the electoral votes (I guess despite all that campaign money and whatnot, Soros forgot to send over a calculator and an electroal map to one of the interns to see if it made any sense), but also in how much shaming white people were willing to take before they said "enough" and voted in opposition to these forces. No matter what anyone says about Obama, at the very least, he stumped in the rust belt and assured white voters he was with them; Hillary's slogan was "I'm with her," putting the onus not on the candidate to work for the voters, but the voters to get her elected so she could smash that glass ceiling. The total lack of lip service, let alone sincerity, to these people was a grave mistake. The sense many got was that her opinion of large swaths of white people - most males, the rural, the working-class, and those not college-educated - were unimportant to her campaign and deserved nary more than a big eye-roll and sarcastic poker face.
For those in the social justice movement who sincerely put their weight behind her, thought she would win and this would be the final nail in the coffin of the cisheteronormative white patriarchy, I think the results of this election were a big, deserved smack across the face: real life isn't a safe space. You can't dogpile people with slogans and rhetoric forever, before those slogans lose meaning and the shame isn't coming as planned anymore. It hammered home that although the term "minority" is taken as a badge of pride and used as a rallying call, there is a meaning behind it, and that meaning is that there are fewer than the majority. If you want to run a successful campaign, there isn't any way you can do so without at least making a pean to that majority and convincing a significant number of them that you have their best interest at heart as well. Obama did it. Why couldn't Hillary? Also, her campaign not only failed to unite, it embraced a sort of ideological separatism that, again, said it didn't want these "deplorable" white people.
To be clear, I am generally a leftist/liberal. Peruse my comments from the last election cycle.... I'm a white male, but I am married to a woman of color, as it's termed in the US, and our daughter is mixed. I live in a nonwhite society, most of my friends here and back home are nonwhite, and many are LGBTQ to boot. I have no sympathies towards the alt-right or any neo-Nazi movements - hell, one of my quirks as a liberal is that I am pro-Israel despite not being a Jew - but I think that it's high time to reign in these divisive radical elements and work towards a better future for all Americans rather thsn pursuing an ever-changing, sadistic and vengeful ideal of "justice" which won't actually serve to help anyone.
Who had the big concert to pull crowds? Trump or Hillary? I got big glossy ads for dems in my mail & 10+ dems campaigners at my door but hardly any mail ads or campaigners for Trump. Every tv news channel had decided long back wit fake polls that Hillary would win. But all the marketing tactics failed badly. The biggest ad for Trump was my healthcare premium rates, grocery bill, standard of living & taxes. He convinced me to vote for him even without spending a single dollar in ads.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
