It is strange that this election night is being seen as an “anti-establishment” vote in the US, or as an “insurgency”.
The Republican establishment is wiping the floor of the Senate, the House, State governorships and state legislatures, plus they have the White House (with, at least, a nominal Republican in there). And this will lead to a marked right wing shift in the Supreme Court as well (I certainly fear for Americans on that score).
This is the Republican establishment with a stranglehold on power right across the US.
Yes, voters (particularly white male rust belters) may have thought they were voting insurgently. But the effect of their votes is that the Republican establishment will be very firmly in the driving seat of the USA.
A couple of Trump’s key lieutenants will be Rudy Giuliani and Newt Gingrich. These are not insurgents – they’ve been around in establishment circles for decades!
* Paul Walter is a Liberal Democrat activist and member of the Liberal Democrat Voice team. He blogs at Liberal Burblings.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Disneyfication of Haley Mills
Survation now put Andy Burnham 10 points ahead in Makerfield
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Ruth Bright
BigTallTim
Daniel Walker
Richard Good
Matt (Bristol)
66 Comments
Trump won by catching the male white working class vote. Exactly the segment in the UK which is deserting labour just as it has deserted the democrats. In Scotland it went to SNP. In England to UKIP, but quite where it will go next who knows. This group voted hugely for Trump, while blacks voted 10:1 against him. Other ethnicities look awfully like they were on a sliding scale depending on their colour.
This is not a traditional republican takeover. A good part of the party repudiated Trump, but I think they did so tactically, depending whether they thought he would help or hinder their personal campaigns. Former president Bush repudiated him.
Trump means Trump just as Brexit means Brexit. No one has any idea what comes next. Trump may mean Brexit, a withdrawal of the US from world affairs and free trade. Slightly at odds with a pledge to make a deal with the Uk, except that the rationale for the EU is that it is a protectionist club for similar countries. On that basis letting in the Uk and excluding China might make sense. It seems the president may have more scope on his own authority to alter trade deals than i n most areas, where he is likely to be in conflict with the republican congress.
Simultaneously, more US states voted to legalise cannabis. I suspect that is not out of joint with voting Trump to attack the establishment.
It’s the economy stupid, Hilary should have taken the advice of Bill on that. They can claim they are progressives for this progressives for that but if you don’t give people the hope of a better life you’ll lose. Most people take a better life to be having money and a secure future, not working the gig economy with rights that without security mean nothing.
The two advisors you mention are from the populist wing, all they know is too feed people populist sound bites, well now they are in power they might have to make good on the promises; unlikely to end well.
We’re now in the situation where establishment figures are painting themselves as anti-establishment, and the bigger the lies, the better they seem to do. All they need to do is shout about how people can “take back control” and encourage them to ignore experts, who are just part of the liberal elite, or urban elite, or whatever sort of elite sounds the worst to that particular audience.
If, as has been suggested, Clinton wins the popular vote, it draws attention to flaws in the electoral system. It’s not quite as bad as ours, where we can have a government with less than 30% of the vote. Or perhaps it underlines the problem that when push comes to shove, people only have a choice of two candidates.
If expert’s don’t make your life better don’t be surprised if people don’t think they are much use. For all we deplore populist s they do give hope, they’ll fail to come good on the promise but that’s for another day.
It has nothing to do with Brexit. It’s about HC’s failure to connect with enough democrats. If you look at the figures she has not got anything like the same levels of support Obama had. A lot of Democrats genuinely did not want Clinton. It turns out HC was a bad choice instead of the safe choice. I’m very shocked.
Lessons to be learnt,
1. People want security and prosperity ( or at least the hope of it)
2. All the rights in the world won’t count if you can’t provide 1
I think Trump should be forced to disclose what his policies REALLY are, and then the American people should have a second vote. In about 4 years time.
Paul,
There are lessons here deeper than “a right wing conspiracy fooling a lot of stupid Alf Garnetts” (as is pretty much the LibDem analysis of Brexit).
The class of professional politicians has failed to deliver on the promises it makes to get itself elected. They are seen as detached and dilettante and without any sort of real world experience to justify their selection to a ‘safe seat’. Cameron is the epitome of that. A well connected sharp elbowed, greasy pole climber who has left a trail of national havoc now on the threshold of civil war.
There is a lot of resentment out there and I have to observe that many contributors, on this forum, seem to have their Transmit/Receive buttons firmly welded on “Transmit”. These voices seem to believe that the moral purity and superiority of their own opinions entitles them to disrespect all others as dupes, bigots and retrogrades.
Frankie is right : for the average person ,Job security and a manageable income , a decent home and integrated community and respect are far more important than the “Human Rights” issues that obsess the Liberal Elite (and I say that as a Liberal). If you don’t address the first issues the average voter will not listen or trust.
For years those who don’t see the world from the viewpoint of this majority of voters have ignored or patronised their concerns…hence Brexit and Trump.
I still fear we have not learnt that lesson. you only have to look at the topics on this website and see that the priorities of educated privileged Liberals are not those of a huge amount of people who feel the future is far more frightening than the past
Perhaps four years of Trump may help restore faith in American politicians – when people see what happens when you elect a non-political businessman. Meanwhile people may get to see the difference between voting for “reality” TV personalities and voting for people to be responsible for helping us organise the way we live together on this planet.
It was a binary choice, the popular vote was Clinton 47.3%, Trump 47.9%…
It was clearly The Will of The People. 😉
Given what the choice was, I think it’s a good illustration of how referendums have their limitations. They do get another say in four years, though.
The result was not a complete surprise to me, in the same way that the Brexit result was not completely unexpected to me and many others who understand how unpopular the political and other establishment figures on both sides of the Atlantic are.
Both results were influenced by every establishment figure, including Barack Obama (who I normally really admire), thinking that by telling people what they should do, in fact only resulted in the exact opposite happening.
Trump has a lot to thank Hilary Clinton for, as any other person with her experience and record of public service would have probably won for the Democrats. Rather than him winning, it was she who lost the election.
Offering the people more of the same, including the return of Bill Clinton to the White House and to run the economy, along with many other mistakes, led to the Trump victory.
What is also sad but true is that the only British politician who stood side by with Donald Trump and who will now have the ear of the next US President…..is Nigel Farage.
It might be time for me to dig out my Australian passport and head down under.
Frankie and Peter – I think it is more basic than that. People who are happy vote for more of the same. People who are p*ssed off vote for something different. And there are a lot of p*ssed off people in the US right now (like here).
You can bang on all you like about how Trump isn’t really different and he is just the Republican establishment with sillier hair, but that’s not how many Americans see it.
The vote is only advisory and the electoral college can be faithless. Denialists have hope.
Only kidding, Americans usually respect votes. In all seriousness, we must congratulate Trump on his victory and the conciliatory message in his victory speech, and give the man a chance to show he can be a responsible President in contrast to his candidacy. He’s not a Republican, more an independent using the Republican colours. He’s going to regenerate cities and infrastructure, and he’s not a scary intolerant social conservative. Things could have been far worse with Rubio or Carson or Cruz. Congress will prevent excesses. Don’t judge too early.
Democrats should have gone with Bernie.
It is even more basic than that. Sadly, as we know from our own party, the invasion of women’s “personal space” is not deemed important.
I think the elephant in the room in both the Brexit vote and the U.S. election is Free Trade.
Whatever a party’s view on the EU or foreign policy, everybody (with the possible exception of Trump) always defends Free Trade.
But it’s because of Free Trade, not the EU that people in some parts of the UK struggle to get a proper reasonably paid job, because they are now competing directly with workers from countries with much lower costs of living.
The classic argument is that this benefits businesses across the world and therefore benefits the employees of those in businesses. But it seems to me that the people putting forward this argument do not understand the reality of modern businesses. There are very few British businesses (and not that many American businesses) – instead there are global businesses who benefit from Free Trade but are under no longer under any constraints to encourage them to employ people from the countries where they sell most of their goods or services. Unfortunately I don’t think politicians understand this because very few of them have recent (or any) experience of working for large international businesses.
It may be awkward and not what we want to hear but I think we will have many more Brexit-type results until politicians seriously address this issue.
Trump won by demonising immigrants…Thank goodness that would never work in the UK…
David Pearce
“Trump won by catching the male white working class vote.”
True, but he also won by getting the majority of the white female vote.
He did not win a majority amongst white women who had been to college.
Ruth Bright – your point being……?
Ruth…he may not have won amongst educated women.. but as in the UK they are not the majority and in a far better position to look after themselves.
I often wonder how many Liberals ever visit a working men’s club ( the few that are left open! ) and listen to the grievances the people constantly express.
Not everyone who expresses concerns about immigration is a racist…many are concerned that their wages and job security are undermined by companies employing these staff….many of their children are undereducated…and the elite blame them for our crowded schools and pathetic short term apprenticeships and lightweight training courses that do not equip them to compete for the underpaid jobs that exist.
Many cannot afford decent housing because of overinflated rents and the dream of home ownership which fleetingly seemed a possibility is a dream that is not even thought of by their children.
Many feel alienated by the fact the community that supported them in their poverty has been changed and those that are able too have left.
For we as Liberals to address theses people as though they are all “thickos” is a total disgrace and we do that when we say we are listening to them and then don’t!
Just the ninth child of a bricklayer reporting a fact Nick. What fascinates me is the resentment, no hatred, Hillary received from other women because she was qualified, educated and experienced.
Well…. I’m not too surprised. The big lesson is about losing trust………….. as Clinton did and as Lib Dems did during the Coalition. Something else (and it’s often something nasty) always moves in to fill a vacuum. The future prospect for dealing with climate change is truly terrifying.
Big lesson for Lib Dems – get down to some serious radical policy making and avoid being seen as an unreliable one trick pony………….. and for Tim…. have the courage of your convictions and don’t pander to yesterday’s men/women/persons.
Less seriously………………………….. for the first time, I actually feel sorry for the Queen. Any future state visit to Buck House will be an endurance test. I also feel sorry for me at my advanced age having to watch TV with Trump’s empty latter day Mussolini-like posturing for the next four years. Maybe I’ll just stick to the radio in my declining years.
@ Ruth Bright,
Maybe not Ruth.
Maybe Trump won over a majority of ”big -haired’ women that felt an affinity to those similarly coiffed women that Bill Clinton called liars whilst his ‘feminist’ wife smeared them with names like ‘trailer trash’.
The result is surreal.
Ruth Bright
“What fascinates me is the resentment, no hatred, Hillary received from other women because she was qualified, educated and experienced.”
She’s all those things and in my opinion was head and shoulders above Trump in many ways. However, she is also seen by many – including women – as a corrupt liar, it all depended which the voter thought was more important.
Ruth Bright 9th Nov ’16 – 10:09am………… What fascinates me is the resentment, no hatred, Hillary received from other women because she was qualified, educated and experienced……
Er, No! The detestation she is held in has nothing to do with that…She is viewed, with good cause, as opportunistic, greedy and untrustworthy..
Trying to turn this election into “A good woman against a bad man” is far too simplistic…
One big change for us is that we are going to have to start arguing for increased spending on Defence, the World has just become a much more dangerous place. Putin will know that if he sends tanks into Estonia in January, America will stand aside. Europe has to organise to defend itself.
Gareth Hartwell,
exactly. Globalised trade is the poison in the system. Even the rich will come to understand this eventually, but not until economic collapse reaches them. ight now trade deals are seeking to dismantle the protectionist EU for the benefit of business owners, not workers.
malc,
Women do what their men tell them. Yep, even in the US. That’s trite, but families do stick together. Trump may be a bit of a bully, but what he has promised is to do something for the white working class who have been losing out for 30 years. He is offering a different recipe to the one both established parties are offering. So they gave him a chance. Who would not? The reason these people need help is because their jobs have been exported, so the solution is obvious. Or easy to say, anyway, and the US is big enough to make a solution stick if it tries. As the EU is also, and as the Uk is not.
Glenn starts with : “It has nothing to do with Brexit.”
And then finishes with : “I’m very shocked.”
Well,.. I’m not shocked, because unlike Glenn,..I can see the obvious thread between what just happened and Brexit.
Whether what just happened is a good thing or a bad thing is yet to be seen, and to a degree irrelevant, because as with any tsunami,.. this political tsunami now under way, just doesn’t care what you or I think about it.?.
I guess the bigger question is why are so many ‘experts’, still not reading ‘the mood’.?
It goes without saying that many LD’s despise Farage, but I’ve come to realise that Farage has an almost unique and impressive talent for reading ‘the mood’, and I need to point out that,..one,.. and only one,.. British politician, stood on the platform with Trump,.. Nigel Farage.
Leavers, are not uneducated fools, and we understand very well that our British Brexit future will NOT be an easy road, and for sure it will NOT be a bed of roses. We will all need to buckle our seatbelts for what’s coming, but in the tough low growth world that is now inevitable, it will be far more navigable, and ultimately sustainable, by being a UK which is ‘nimble’, and without the need to herd the sclerotic ‘wants’ of 27 cats,.. and also with a USA president that also sees and believes in Brexit as a force for good.
It’s hard to dismiss a set of previously held beliefs, but we must try to put emotional likes and dislikes away, and learn to read ‘the mood’ as *it is*, not as how we would like it to be, or we will continue to be blindsided by events in the next rollercoaster phase of the Great Unravelling.
” because they are now competing directly with workers from countries with much lower costs of living.”
This is an oft repeated excuse for the loss of Britain’s industrial base. It’s too simplistic. Visit the BMW factory where they make the i8 and see if it’s a sweat shop full of children driven by an overseer with a whip (or full of well paid skilled people led by smart technocrats).
There are fundamentals wrong with our “UK plc” and it doesn’t need right wing savagery to fix it nor Corbynista nihilists but a sensible centre ground party with firm clear policies that spread the pain of economic regeneration without being Santa Claus.
With the overnight news perhaps we as a party should ask ourselves three serious questions:
1. are we perceived as part of the political elite?
2. are we on the right side of the argument over the next few years?
3. it seems the world is changing, are we changing with it or should we?
We are indeed seen – and largely rightly – as part of the liberal elite (of all Parties) who have: sold the pass to large corporations in failing to manage globalised capitalism such that its benefits have accrued largely to stockholders, not citizens; refuted, denied and belittled people who felt that the very fabric of their societies and communities was endangered by a rapid growth in ‘incomers’ ( a very natural and deep-seated emotion) and who allowed the key core of liberal values to be weighed down by the diversion of marginal, modish, interest-group-driven concerns that are easily attacked and drag the corpus of essential beliefs down with them.
I see some recognition of this situation in the Comments on these pages, little in the ‘leading articles’ and none among our ‘Leadership’. I am depressed, but not in the least surprised by Trump’s triumph as it follows those in the UK (BREXIT), Poland & Hungary and the growth of movements in Spain and Greece. Next up: France, next Spring.
I am intrigued by the phrase ‘The Great Unravelling’ used above by JDunn (although by the sound of things we agree on very little, and he views it with considerably more reckless relish than I do)…
I really, really hope such a thing is not happening, but if it is – the true test of it will _not_ in fact be in the UK or the US, whose voting systems never moved from a plurality-based, winner-takes-all model which is easier for .
If rage against the perceived ‘elites’ in liberal democratic states (arguably being manipulated and channelled by elements of said ‘elites’ to their own ends) across the world really is leading to the ending of the post-war and post-cold-war consensus of dialogue between nations through mutually respected institutions and overlapping alliances, then we will see it in France and Germany next year.
France’s non-proportional but consensual two-round system, and the German coalitionist system are harder nuts to crack than either the UK parliamentary elections (which you can win on 30-40% of the vote), a UK one-off, single-proposition referendum, or the US electoral college.
Democrats and particularly Liberal Democrat in the UK for years have been arguing for a system that creates a politics of consensus and dialogue, rather than one of let’s-see-who-shouts-the-loudest-and-promises-the-most-outrageous-things. Is it too late to build one here?
France is what I am most worried about – Le Pen needs only 30-40% of the vote in the first round, and a narrow win in the second round to assume executive power.
Who her opponents are could be crucial, and what the tone of the debate is.
@David Pearce – “Women do what their men tell them.”
Really ?!?!?!?!?!
Although this may change when all the results are known, it looks at the moment as if Hillary may have got more actual votes than Trump, although she has fewer Electoral College votes
Forgive me if I am going off piste here but the class aspects of this and Brexit are so interesting. Someone asked here if Liberal types like us ever talk to really cross blokes in working men’s clubs. To be a credible Liberal Democrat councillor and parliamentary candidate I had to shed my class “skin”. I would not have lasted five minutes in the party had I emulated my father’s broad accent, cross bloke working class aggression, manual job and approximate relationship with the law. But now after working hard, getting to the LSE, chalking up 30 years of party membership and living a life of OK ish jobs, reading the Guardian, married to someone who went to Cambridge etc etc I find myself and my equivalents caricatured as one of the out of touch”Liberal elite”! And of course we now favour candidates at all levels who have little or no experience because they are “authentic”. I am not moaning, just intrigued by it all.
Anyway I am off to watch a Bette Davis film and eat chocolate to cheer myself up. Love and Liberalism to all xxx
Ruth Bright
Perhaps the next Manifesto should contain a pledge to restore the University seats in Parliament to give people like us a bigger say.
Yes. It was an amazing result. However, it was just a snapshot of American opinion on a given date. Nothing obligates the Electoral College actually to vote for Trump and I hope that this result, with a vote much less than 52% can be overturned in the courts.
The one thing you must never do is trust the people. They are always so unreliable and annoying……
CassieB: These are not the latest figures. Currently Hillary Clinton has a small lead in the popular vote, with several states undeclared.
http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president
@J Dunn:
“I can see the obvious thread between what just happened and Brexit.”
We have two former imperial/colonial powers, continually losing their world position and the right to sell not-quite-top-of-the-range goods to our former captive markets at the same time as computer chips are replacing labour, skilled and unskilled. The ‘neglected middle’ in both societies have been promised all sorts of rubbish by their political leaders over the past 30 years or so and have then received all sorts of excuses for not receiving it. They do not see any obvious benefit of keeping their wage rates down with cheap foreign imported labour (legal or illegal) even if this importation is, in fact, contributing to their own jobs being saved from being exported to be performed by foreign workers in foreign lands. They do not trust the political class as far as they can throw them even before expenses scandals – and with much justification.
When a critically-large segment of the electorate think something fundamental which you think is wrong and will not solve the problems of the country (or the planet) it is not enough to simply preach at them and hope you can distract them with other agendas. In this, the clear lessons of Brexit and Trump are very similar – and are likely to be reproduced in other ‘western’ nations.
What we are dealing with today is the almost inevitable conclusion of a Catastrophic Clinton/Cameron Continual Conspiracy of Complacency.
The American election result is the sad, but inevitable conclusion of the failure of the liberal left in the US, which (and I include Barack Obama in this) has watched while the elite (i.e. seriusly rich) in the US have reaped the benefits of globalisation, while the ordinary people in many states have lost out badly. The fact that a serial non-payer of taxes, with all the other issues surrounding him, managed to win an election initially against the Republican establishment and then against the Democrats, shows clearly how bad things were allowed to get.
Likewise in the UK we allowed our leader to desert those people who voted for us because they believed in a better way of doing politics and an end to broken promises, and instead aligned us with the Conservative establishment and so called “grown up politics”. We were marched out of our traditional ground of support for the underdog, and are now often seen as an irrelevant intellectual pressure group, who are good at being local councillors.
Richmond Park will be a key test of whether we can break out of that stereotype and as a result it is essential that our best campaigners develop a campaign to undermine Zac as the rich boy who pretends to be on the side of the people, and instead portray us as the only party that can and will stop the third runway. Then we need thousands of activists to get there to make sure that message gets across.
Nothing is more important than that for the next few weeks.
Read this.
http://capx.co/its-official-western-politics-is-now-defunct/
Excerpt:
“…the wider liberal community is responsible for its own downfall. We used our hegemony to take down barriers and borders, to connect and build, to (yes) line our own pockets and smugly luxuriate in the goodness of our ideas and intentions. Meantime, we forgot about those who weren’t able to take part, who weren’t benefiting, to whom free trade and open borders meant greater hardship and uneasy cultural compromises. Or, let’s be honest, we didn’t forget – we just chose to conveniently ignore. We stopped asking for their permission, ploughed on through the warning signs, and fell off the end of the road.
In vote after vote, enough ordinary and presumably decent people are combining with the moral cave-dwellers (the racists and sexists) to form winning majorities in order to Take Their Country Back. So deeply felt is their animosity towards the system and those who run it that their calculus has become unfathomable.
Yesterday, they were willing to deliver the highest office on the planet to the most cynical and ill-suited candidate ever to run for it. Just think: after the numbing brutality of that election campaign, after all the dignity-obliterating facts that emerged about Trump, after all those things he said, how much they must hate us to have taken such a risk. How deeply they have felt their exclusion, and how bitterly they have resented it.
How do we, the liberal losers, respond? Not by carrying on regardless. Sure, our values stand. Despite the political events of this year, we used our long shift to make the world a better, more tolerant and more equal place. But we have to identify our faults, and come to terms with them. There is no other choice, if we want to win again at some point. We must make accommodation with the world we are in, a world in which we are the minority and our opponents hold power.”
@David “Read this.”
Swap “Brexit” for “Trump” and it still rings true. 🙁
David.
Interesting, but a little self flagellating. I think the truth is people are just not liberal in the way some liberals want them to be. Nearly all big political ideas fail because they tend to try to abolish the people. I often find myself musing on whether or not this is why there is always such a big push to attract the young or new people. The thinking sometimes seems to be that oldies and the lumpen masses are too resistant and that it might work with some new blood. But the thing is the young are just old people in waiting and the new people are usually just the lumpen masses from somewhere else . He muses…………..
Anyway I think what we liberals should really concentrate on is a fairer deal for citizens, nicer infra structure, and promises not snoop at folks E mails. This would work far better than telling people off about their weight or accusing them of bad thoughts or such as like. The point being that you can be progressive and acknowledge the engrained reality of nationhood etc. without turning into Richard LittleJohn or Peter Hitchens.
Glenn.
Amen to: “we liberals should really concentrate on a fairer deal for citizens, nicer infra structure, and promises not snoop at folks E mails. This would work far better than telling people off about their weight or accusing them of bad thoughts or such…”
Alas, many on this forum and in the Party are well into the last two.
As with Ruth , I too am furious that the personal issues that emerged about the nature of Trump, did not cause the victory for Hillary Clinton she deserved. I do not understand the loathing of her . No president has ever been a pauper, Kennedy , in my view one of the finest men , to be president ,brave , a war hero , a man in pain , was deeply flawed .His womanising was legendary , perhaps worsened by the prescription drugs for hid disease he was so effected by . But he was one of the richest men from one of the richest families. He was also quite brilliant , intelligent , witty , astute and friendly , the finest speaker to be president . Today he would be decried as the etablishment , centrist , out of touch , candidate , how idiotic ! Hillary would have been a very good and wise president , flaws and all !
And if I hear one more word about Trump being more for peace , the man who condones torture and plans to “bomb the sh** out of isis , I shall start my own grouping for people in this party who are not daft !
I am going to try my hand at a bit of medium term futureology…
How will the Trump election affect Europe and the EU/Brexit process?
Brexit and the Trump win shows anti-status quo (won’t say anti-establishment) is the majority position. What do we have coming down the line in the near future?
1. Italian referendum. No is in the ascendancy. Brexit/Trump sentiment shows that hopes that the satus-quo will lead to a yes vote is mis-placed. A non-vote will lead to the italian pm’s resignation and fresh elections called in an atmosphere of a large- anti EU feeling through Italy.
What happens if the 5star movement achieves something in those elections? They probably will.
2. French presidential elections. 5 Star movement makes significant gains. This could lead to a bolstering of support for Marine Le pen. I don’t know the french electorate well enough. Would they elect her? would they elect someone who will hold a referendum on French/EU membership? How would that affect the EU?
3. How dearly will Merkel pay in the elections to take in 1 million refugees/migrants? Some damage definitely. Catastrophic damage? I have no idea.
I am not sure how all this will play out, i can only foresee a weakening of the EU position though.
That then leads into how would this effect the Brexit negotiations?
@ethicsgradient – The response of European leaders to Trump’s success
was discussed on Radio 4 this afternoon (The Media Show -http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b081l854 ) . The general opinion was that it was favourable to the UK’s position.
It is noteworthy piece of coverage, because all through the Brexit debate we, as a nation and specifically the Brexit supporters, have been so inward looking that people seem to have forgotten (including Nigel Farage when he was addressing the EU after the referendum) that key to a successful Brexit negotiation is the viewpoint from Europe.
So Brexit supporters, whilst “Brexit may mean Brexit”, it will be the European leaders and not Westminster, who will largely determine what Brexit actually means, regardless of what UK politiciansmay or may not have said in the referendum campaign…
Hi Roland,
Thanks, I will listen to the link after newsnight.
Bear in mind that Hillary Clinton got more votes than Donald Trump.
But Donald Trump managed to get the votes in the right places to satisfy the slightly bonkers Electoral College system. The particular crux of his victory was getting enough votes to carry Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. This was a major achievement by him and a failure by Hillary Clinton.
But let’s not push Hillary Clinton’s face into the dust too much – she won the popular vote.
>I don’t know the french electorate well enough. Would they elect her?
When it was a face-off between Chirac and JM Le Pen in the second round of the presidential election, in 2002, Chirac won hands down because all the socialists, greens and others voted for him to keep Le Pen out.
@CassieB
It 14 years later though. That is 14 years will little economic growth and a huge rise in uncontrolled (unwanted?) migration and a more moderated, toned-down, female Le Pen How would France vote now?
J Dunn
We will all need to buckle our seatbelts for what’s coming, but in the tough low growth world that is now inevitable, it will be far more navigable, and ultimately sustainable, by being a UK which is ‘nimble’, and without the need to herd the sclerotic ‘wants’ of 27 cats,..
In what way?
Give a list of all those “nimble” things that the UK is being stopped from doing by EU membership. Do it now.
But I’ve been asking this question of people like you ever since the EU referendum was put in place, and not once have any of you been able to give a straight answer.
Isn’t it a “nimble” thing that UK companies are able to employ anyone from any EU country to do a job without having to go through bureaucratic immigration red tape, and not having to pay taxes to train them because the other EU country did that? And isn’t that just what many people voted “Leave” to oppose?
Mathew,
J. Dunn usually crops up to promote UKIP and tell liberals off.
@ Glenn,
I f you have followed Matthew’s posts over time, you will know that when he was seeking election as a councillor, he spent a great deal of time persuading BNP types that their arguments were specious, and did so with considerable success.
Don’t write John Dunn off as a lost cause.
There is an article in the “Michigan Live” website that looks at turnout in the counties that make up Detroit Metro area and also Flint. In Detroit Metro, Clinton took 55% compared with 69% by Obama in 2012. In Flint (which is 56% black) Clinton won 52-42 which is much weaker than Obama’s 63-35 against Romney.
Tellingly, in Genesee County (which is where Flint is) turnout fell from 61% in 2012 to 58% this time and the vote advantage for the Democrats fell from 55,000 to only 19,000.
Perhaps the best comment in the article came from an activist in Detroit: “What I heard way too much of was — I feel like I’m just voting for the lesser of two evils. That doesn’t give you the push to vote.”
http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/11/detroit_flint_voting_muscle_we.html
@ Ruth Bright,
Hilary Clinton did receive an inordinate amount of resentment and hatred from some women, but why are you surprised? Many women have internalised the misogynistic hatred and/or dislike, that they themselves have faced.
It’s not the full answer though. Some women feel that she betrayed their sex. She did that by her hawkish behaviour, her willingness to accept people, including women and children as ‘collateral damage’, her lies, and her slurs on the women who her husband had affairs with. Blaming and demeaning the woman rather than the person who broke his vows, ( the idea that men can’t help themselves in the face of devilish temptresses), is right out of the misogynists playbook.
I really think you need to read some of the recorded speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs. Her acceptance that a no- fly zone would lead to many Syrian deaths, her regret that America was no longer as good at covert operations, and her view that Assad could have bought off the revolutionaries when the conflict began.
There are also very large, unanswered questions about the Clinton Foundation.
There is so much that made her an unattractive candidate to many liberal leaning people.
Me to J Dunn
Give a list of all those “nimble” things that the UK is being stopped from doing by EU membership. Do it now.
He hasn’t done it, has he?
I believe it is because he can’t.
Brexit was sold to the people with claims like this, giving the impression that membership of the EU was the cause of all our problems, that it was blocking the UK from doing so many things.
Only when you ask the Brexiteers for details on exactly what, they can’t give it.
The reality is that the Brexit campaign was funded and led by extreme free marketeers who cynically persuaded people who were unhappy about what the move to extreme free market policy had led to in this country to support them. Brexit was pushed as a diversion to turn people’s attention away from what is the real source of their unhappiness: the failure of what has been the dominant theme in politics since the days of Margaret Thatcher.
This is shown when people like J Dunn and all the rest of them can’t give a simple answer to the question I asked. Traditional British culture was destroyed by Thatcherism, and Brexit won’t bring it back.
Mathew
I disagree Brexit barely had a leadership. It was really sold on popular sovereignty and soft nationalism. It’s heartlands were the suburbs and counties. Remains mistake was to drag everything back to economics.
For me as a Leaver, I asked, myself do I feel European and the answer was No. Do I believe the EU is a good organisation and the answer was No . Economics was far lower down the table than you would think. Then I talk to other Leavers and it is pretty much the same thing. In short the EU just did not feel right to my quasi-parochial brain and I just couldn’t vote for it.
Jayne – yes but the unpleasant wording of speeches to Goldman Sachs got far more attention than the unpleasant actions of Trump’s companies. In his ads Trump showed reconstructions of an angry Hillary taking an axe to computers. There were no reconstructions in Hillary’s ads of Trump’s attitude to women’s “personal space”. Misogyny ran through the election like words stamped through a stick of rock.
Give a list of all those “nimble” things that the UK is being stopped from doing by EU membership. Do it now.
He hasn’t done it, has he?
I believe it is because he can’t.
Matthew : I’ve observe your ‘debating’, style with other commenter’s, and you seem to specialise in bluster, with a mischievous mix of spurious and circular arguments that have a tendency to lock folk into endless tit-for-tat exchanges that frankly go nowhere.? No thanks Matthew.
Generally speaking…The two opposing views are,.. :
Leave ~ so that the UK is more nimble, fleet-of-foot, an agile in our ability to unblock pointless, EU inspired regulation and ‘anti dumping’ blockages, in order to make trade deals quickly, with any nation we wish to,.. and which hopefully, don’t take an average of 7 years to sign up to.
Remain ~ whereby there is strength in numbers, in that a union of 28 can command the attention and gravitas that a difficult world will listen to more readily, in their desire for access to its protectionist EU single market, but unfortunately will likely take 7+ years,.. because of the need to herd the likes & dislikes, of 27 cats.
Both are valid arguments but it was frankly settled, by a democratic vote, on the 23rd of June 2016.?
The End.
Glenn
I disagree Brexit barely had a leadership.
It was led by the right-wing newspapers in terms of gaining popular support.
I assure you, I have followed the growth of their support for this over the years, in particular the discussions of it in the right-wing intelligentsia magazine, the Spectator, and I base what I say in what I have seen there.
If Brexit could really deliver what you and others seem to think it will, I might have some sympathy for it. That is why I am asking for some real answers to my questions that might persuade me, some actual things that membership of the EU is stopping us doing that I think would lead to a better society and the sort of pleasant land that most people who voted Brexit seemed to think it would.
That is why I have asked again and again that question, and as we can see people like J Dunn cannot answer. Just a few examples of “pointless, EU inspired regulation and ‘anti dumping’ blockages” would do for a start. Then maybe a list of all those British companies just yearning to offer decently paid jobs to British workers with the details of the trade deals within the EU that are stopping them from doing so.
If what J Dunn said was not all waffle designed to trick people into voting for the extreme-right Thatcherism of those who fund and lead Brexit, who ought to be able to do that very easily. He hasn’t, has he? And he never has, despite me asking him and others like him again and again to do so.
@ Ruth Bright,
Some I agree, but I think there is something more frightening at work here.
If one espouses extreme right wing views, it doesn’t matter is one is a woman, look at some of the women leading extreme right wing movements on the continent. Look at how women can rise to the top in some of our own least lovely political groups.
A study by your old alma mater the LSE found that three- quarters of newspaper stories about Jeremy Corbyn failed to accurately report his views. I mentioned this in a post some time ago, and warned of the dangers of taking this lightly. Whether one agrees with Jeremy Corbyn’s views or not, this malicious misreporting should be challenged by all mainstream commentators. My reason for arguing this, is my belief there has been a concerted attempt to quieten, denigrate and humiliate politicians, women AND men, who stand up to, and against, rising fascist sentiment.
The Pastor Niemoller poem has never been more relevant.
Glenn,
its not that Clinton failed to connect with enough democrats. She did very well in California which is full of democrats, and even republicans voted for her there. She failed to connect with people who might be thought as natural supporters of the left, in states suffering economic decline. These are not democrats, the democratic party is not helping them so they are not helping it.
This is not about people mistakenly voting for Trump. They may be skeptical he will achieve anything, but they have voted for him in the hope that he will. If centre parties refuse to listen to all groups in the community then it is inevitable those groups will go elsewhere. That is what they are supposed to do in a democracy. The system stacks the odds against new parties arising which might suit voters better, but in so doing it builds up hidden support for change. And so we see the results.
This is the result of free market capitalism and globalisation allowed to run wild. There will always be winners and losers. California is happy, many others are not. If globalisation had maintained the economic lead which the US used to enjoy, then everyone would be content because there would be money to go around, but there is not. Society has followed the mantra of trickle down economics, that if you make millionairs they will naturally help everyone else. Nope, doesnt work. Yet neither democrat nor republican is opposing this. Allowing US companies to move abroad has a similar effect: for the US to be able to pay for such goods it has to be making something to exchange. It isnt, and the trend is for this to get worse. Politicians have lost sight of the balance of payments ball.
Nick Baird,
yes I agree there must be a further election in a few years when voters will be able to judge the parties and reverse their decision if necessary.
Did some more research on exit polls in the US and what people told them about themselves. It seems Trump in fact was pretty neutral on white support overall, but gained noticeably in coloured vote. Other factors perhaps explain the white vote. He gained traditional democrat voters, and lost traditional republican voters. He lost rich americans, and well educated ones (probably white). The groups he gained were in the under $50,000 income bracket, and those with some education, not the wholly unqualifed and not the well qualified. The unqualified stayed much the same, and the losses were from the well educated.
What I found most striking was a big chunk of support from people who believe the US as a whole is doing well. The conclusion seems to be he gained both white and coloured voters in the lower part of the income spectrum, but with some basic educational qualifications. I think this is all consistent with the idea it is people who believe the US is rich but they are not getting their fair share.
These people would have been traditional democrat voters, but they are tired of waiting. Seems exactly the same applied in the Uk, and these people were willing to believe in brexit to solve their problems. It will not.