Trump Voters Driven by Fear of Losing Status, Not Economic Anxiety, Study Finds

[Fort Fun Indiana]

SCOTUS’s decisions had the same effect as an amendment but instead of changing the Constitution they just ignored parts of it.

Again, not an argument, much less a compelling argument. You are merely reiterating your dislike of their decision, and cloaking it in an unsupported statement that really is more of a distraction from your actual reasons for the dislike.

I have given you the logic why it is wrong, logic you still can not refute


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Dude, you seriously need to settle down. Of course I can refute it. Anyone who can read a history book can simply recall the arguments that defeated your "logic" in actual court rooms, and then use them to refute the logic you presented. You keep forgetting that the simple argument you wield has been defeated at EVERY turn, so you might want to keep the champagne on ice.

Your argument loses when tested, precisely because equal protection is violated WITHOUT the special protections for groups. They meet the criteria (supported by all the available evidence) that, without laws explicitly protecting them, they are victims of discrimination.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

let the marketplace decide it is is abnormal or not.

In other words, replay the years -100,000 to 1985. I wonder if it will turn out different this time?

Not exactly a ground-breaking idea, there, Peabody.

 

[miketx]

Trump voters driven by fear of democrats and other liberal scum allowing rapists, murderers and terrorists to flood in. Fear of no jobs, fear of no rights, fear of becoming a third world shithole useless democrat scum are trying to bring.

 

[bendog]

Trump voters driven by fear of democrats and other liberal scum allowing rapists, murderers and terrorists to flood in. Fear of no jobs, fear of no rights, fear of becoming a third world shithole useless democrat scum are trying to bring.

I tend to hold them in slightly higher regard than your view of below avg IQ folks shitting themselves over hysterical propaganda foisted by RW media

 

[TemplarKormac]

Trump Voters Driven by Fear of Losing Status, Not Economic Anxiety, Study Finds

I found this to affirm my personal observations....A lot of Trump voters feel that they are being replaced and disenfranchised in America--after all, isn't that what MAGA really means?

Many believe it is/was about economics--This article makes the case that it's about social displacement and a fear of being moved from the top of the pecking order:

"Ever since Donald J. Trump began his improbable political rise, many pundits have credited his appeal among white, Christian and male voters to “economic anxiety.” Hobbled by unemployment and locked out of the recovery, those voters turned out in force to send Mr. Trump, and a message, to Washington.

Or so that narrative goes.

A study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences questions that explanation, the latest to suggest that Trump voters weren’t driven by anger over the past, but rather fear of what may come. White, Christian and male voters, the study suggests, turned to Mr. Trump because they felt their status was at risk.

“It’s much more of a symbolic threat that people feel,’’ said Diana C. Mutz, the author of the study and a political science and communications professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where she directs the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics. “It’s not a threat to their own economic well-being; it’s a threat to their group’s dominance in our country over all.”"

Her survey also assessed “social dominance orientation,” a common psychological measure of a person’s belief in hierarchy as necessary and inherent to a society. People who exhibited a growing belief in such group dominance were also more likely to move toward Mr. Trump, Dr. Mutz found, reflecting their hope that the status quo be protected.

“It used to be a pretty good deal to be a white, Christian male in America, but things have changed and I think they do feel threatened,” Dr. Mutz said.

The other surveys supported the cultural anxiety explanation, too.

For example, Trump support was linked to a belief that high-status groups, such as whites, Christians or men, faced more discrimination than low-status groups, like minorities, Muslims or women, according to Dr. Mutz’s analysis of the University of Chicago study.

I have no status to lose. I am unemployed and fat. That's it. I voted for Trump because hopefully one day he can make conditions favorable enough for me to gain status, not lose it.

 

[bendog]

Trump Voters Driven by Fear of Losing Status, Not Economic Anxiety, Study Finds

I found this to affirm my personal observations....A lot of Trump voters feel that they are being replaced and disenfranchised in America--after all, isn't that what MAGA really means?

Many believe it is/was about economics--This article makes the case that it's about social displacement and a fear of being moved from the top of the pecking order:

"Ever since Donald J. Trump began his improbable political rise, many pundits have credited his appeal among white, Christian and male voters to “economic anxiety.” Hobbled by unemployment and locked out of the recovery, those voters turned out in force to send Mr. Trump, and a message, to Washington.

Or so that narrative goes.

A study published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences questions that explanation, the latest to suggest that Trump voters weren’t driven by anger over the past, but rather fear of what may come. White, Christian and male voters, the study suggests, turned to Mr. Trump because they felt their status was at risk.

“It’s much more of a symbolic threat that people feel,’’ said Diana C. Mutz, the author of the study and a political science and communications professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where she directs the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics. “It’s not a threat to their own economic well-being; it’s a threat to their group’s dominance in our country over all.”"

Her survey also assessed “social dominance orientation,” a common psychological measure of a person’s belief in hierarchy as necessary and inherent to a society. People who exhibited a growing belief in such group dominance were also more likely to move toward Mr. Trump, Dr. Mutz found, reflecting their hope that the status quo be protected.

“It used to be a pretty good deal to be a white, Christian male in America, but things have changed and I think they do feel threatened,” Dr. Mutz said.

The other surveys supported the cultural anxiety explanation, too.

For example, Trump support was linked to a belief that high-status groups, such as whites, Christians or men, faced more discrimination than low-status groups, like minorities, Muslims or women, according to Dr. Mutz’s analysis of the University of Chicago study.

I have no status to lose. I am unemployed and fat. That's it. I voted for Trump because hopefully one day he can make conditions favorable enough for me to gain status, not lose it.

I think the OP was not specific enough. It's link when to white Christians, who I agree are less interested in economic power than their perception that society and government are infringing upon their ability to practice their beliefs. And, imo, that is justified in part. And, I don't criticize their support for Trump, and I don't see any hypocrisy by them. By Trump himself .... bigly. But that's another issue.

Some of the posters have focused on loss of economic status by middle aged whites. I'm over 60 and hope to work at least ten years more. If I'm cut loose, I'll have trouble finding how my skills can result in finding another job. I wouldn't like to be replaced by a cheaper worker from Asia. Trump gives lip service to that while importing workers for his resorts. HB1 vusas are down as is overall immigration. Wages may rise.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Actually there is something forbids it. The Equal Protection Clause is violated by the very concept of “protected classes”, which by their very definition get more protection...and more can never be equal.

Unfortunately, that is not correct, as already decided by the SCOTUS.

The SCOTUS ruled in error in this case. It happens.

Again, not only is that not a compelling argument....it's not even an argument.

Of course it is. "Equal" can in no way be defined by "protected".

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm over 60 and hope to work at least ten years more. If I'm cut loose, I'll have trouble finding how my skills can result in finding another job.

And if your wages had not stagnated as both the weal;th became more funneled to a very few AND your basic cost of living increased, you would likely have a nice retirement built up to free you from those worries.

Now, multiply that by 1000, light it on fire, and send it through a wood chipper... and THAT is going to be the reality for our children. It's going to get very, very bad.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"Equal" can in no way be defined by "protected".

Of course it can, when those protections are merely an effort to bring a group up to equal, in an environment where all the evidence shows they are not equal. It would seem silly for a court of law to fall victim to such a simpletion argument, which really is more of a statement

Seriously guys... you seem to be under the delusion that there are no good refutations of your very simple, fairly underinformed declarations. And yet, those same talking points have lost spectacularly at every turn. Let me guess... that's because the judges are all stupid or crazy, not because your arguments are weak and flawed... right?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"Equal" can in no way be defined by "protected".

Of course it can, when those protections are merely an effort to bring a group up to equal, in an environment where all the evidence shows they are not equal. It would seem silly for a court of law to fall victim to such a simpletion argument, which really is more of a statement

Seriously guys... you seem to be under the delusion that there are no good refutations of your very simple, fairly underinformed declarations. And yet, those same talking points have lost spectacularly at every turn. Let me guess... that's because the judges are all stupid or crazy, not because your arguments are weak and flawed... right?

Doubleplusgood, brother. Your Newspeak is coming along fine.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Doubleplusgood, brother. Your Newspeak is coming along fine.

Apparently, this is the same bit of self-soothing rhetoric used by the losing lawyers in every court case. So... uh ... good for you?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Doubleplusgood, brother. Your Newspeak is coming along fine.

Apparently, this is the same bit of self-soothing rhetoric used by the losing lawyers in every court case. So... uh ... good for you?

All is good for me. Run along now. I have adults with which to discourse.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

All is good for me.

really? because you are the one complaining about the status quo.... which we arrived at by the argument YOU wield losing at every single turn... so, maybe you're not quite as good as you think...?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Democrats are importing a more obedient people. It helps that the democrat imports are murdering the Americans scheduled for replacement.

 

[jc456]

Lying? So..prove it with some cogent rebuttal! Oh wait, you don't have those skills, do you?

So sad.

Once again, the tactics you all employ, proven thousands of times, is to ask for proof and if the poor unsuspecting person does so, you-

1. Lie more.
2. spin and deflect.
3. Attack the person.

I stopped playing games with you scum a long time ago. Now post something like "so you got nothing."

See, from my POV, I don't even think it is even about that.

See, the thread and the study starts out with an irrelevant and flawed premise, so asking us for evidence to refute it is a fools errand.

It seeks to ask us to find evidence that Trump voters are driven by a "fear of losing status."

Yet, the folks that gave him his presidency are the same folks that put Obama in office. So if that were the case, they would have never voted for Obama. That is the margin that put either man in office. There are no, "Trump" voters, there are no, "Obama" voters. There are only Americans that choose who they think is going to be best for the nation.

The person that did this study separates folks and sees them as identity blocks first, and as people second. This person would divide and conquer the nation. They would have us at each others throats, just as we are doing in this thread.

When we interact with each other IRL, Americans are courteous and friendly with each other, generally. We don't see ourselves, or our neighbors as identities/religious folks first and as people second.

It's a bullshit premise leading to a bullshit view of reality, causing hate and animosity and shutting down folks willingness to listen and compromise.


When I was at a basketball tournament this weekend with my kid, what I saw were a whole lot of parents, mostly black and white and a few Hispanic and an Asian here and there.

The there were a lot of black and white kids there too. But they were outnumbered by another type of kid. . .

I have heard the statistics about white folks in the future no longer being a majority. When I was at this tournament, I now could see with my own eyes in the younger generation of Americans who will be the majority.

It won't be the whites.

It won't be the blacks.

It won't be the Hispanics.

It won't be the Asians or Arabs.


It is going to be the mulattoes. And they are probably going to be sick to death of all of these identity politics, for the only thing they are really going to be able to identify as, are as AMERICANS.

As in most studies..its validity diminishes as the context expands.

I totally agree with the 2nd half of your post...intermarriage and inevitable mixing of all the 'races' will render this question moot, in time.

You do realize that, for some on the Right, this is their worst nightmare, though? Right?

We will all be 'mud people'.

Not when most of your children are executed in abortion clinics. You do realize that 330,000 dead babies a year, does not make a Democrat Party?

Hmmm..you do wander about topically, don't you. None of 'my babies' have been aborted--my family doesn't believe in such things for us...no child is ever unwanted..and we make sure our kids are raised with that value. We do, however, believe that women have the right to choose. Your assertion that all fetus' aborted are potential Democrats..is absurd--BTW, you do know that most people, especially young people, couldn't care less about politics.

you're right, cause the last thing a democrud would do is kill a potential voter. we know that.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

All is good for me.

really? because you are the one complaining about the status quo.... which we arrived at by the argument YOU wield losing at every single turn... so, maybe you're not quite as good as you think...?

Eh? I'm not complaining about anything.

Please make sense so that I can respond.

 

[jc456]

What does that have to with Christ?

Being replaced in the job market by Idolators?
You tell me.

Not sure what you mean...or why you would think it matters?

I honestly don’t believe religion has anything to do with realizing Corporate America is creating a slave class.

I don't remember people getting paid who were slaves? But liberals pay people tax dollars to keep them voting for those very liberals.

War on poverty cost
The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.
The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion
ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?article_id=25288

I’m in Nassau County and the American plumbers, carpenters and electricians are getting steady work for the first time in many years.

that's because of obammy don't you know. he kept em down for eight years until the next guy came around to let them free to work again, so obammy would get all the credit don't you know.

 

[jc456]

I have to agree with the OP's article. I'm not a major fan of Trump but my marginal support for him has been based on Socislnissurs, not economics.

Honestly. Economics almost never enter mu mind when it comes to politics. Social issues have always been and will always be at the forefront of my (and many other Conservative's) political agrndas.

I think that most of the people in Heartland America that voted for Trump were concerned about economics after eight years of the Obama failure that produced increased poverty, decreased family income, tremendous debt, greater income disparity and dismal economic growth.

If that's the case, then Americans are dumb and don't understand the recession.

I suspect that is not actually the case, and rather the OP is spot on

so why did people who voted for obammy vote for trump? explain it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Eh? I'm not complaining about anything.

Of course you are... you are complaining about protected groups, and trying to fool someone (yourself?) that your objection arises from some noble, literalist constitutional view, instead of from an underpinning of hard-wired bigotry that you have not yet figured out how to intellectually escape.

In a nutshell.

 

[jc456]

this generation has grown up thinking this is normal.

Wrong. This generation has grown up thinking that the bigotry entrenched in our society for hundreds of years is, itself, abnormal, and that it clearly must be ameliorated using force of law.

huh? this isn't logical.