Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
My definition of far more diverse in regard to Trump rallies is that the crowds are made up of the great "diversity" of the American public, not just the two cherry picked types that Spence noted.
|
"Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote"
And here is the research paper, with the who and why
http://www.pnas.org/content/115/19/E4330[/QUOTE]
Your link was a lengthy and difficult read. But I did plod through it. Can't say it was worth it. What is it with psycho-babblers who can only speak in jargon with labels denoting supposedly hidden underlying causes rather than using plain language to discuss the obvious?
Anyway, the article totally debunks Spence's characterization of Trump's rallies being represented by stuff like shirts with "I'd rather be a Russian than a Democrat", and QAnon being everywhere. And it supports what I said about them being attended by diverse American crowds. According to your article, Trump voters were not just uneducated, anti-immigrant, sexist, racist, bigots. Your article says that "Voters who shifted to become Trump voters between the two elections [2012 and 2016] seem to have done so because of increasing distance between their own views and those of the Democratic candidate on trade, immigration, and China as well as due to the decreasing distance between their own views and those of the Republican candidate." In addition, those who sensed a rising threat to their dominant group status, were particularly likely to shift in support of Trump. And that the Democrat position on trade became far less tenable to the
average American than the Republican position.
Trump ralliers are mostly
average Americans not fringe kooks.
As far as the dominant status threat, that seems to be an obvious motivation. What dominant group anywhere in the world would not fear a threat to their status if the obvious trend in demographics portends and end to their dominance? And the minorities that will become the future's dominant status may well fear the same threat.
Your article identifies the current dominant status as being, white, men, Christian. Well, both parties have significant voters with those identities. And they are not kooks or fringe lunatics.