False Narratives: There wasn’t an Awakening of the White Middle Class.

Posted on December 9, 2016 by ehurd3414

The accepted narrative that I continue to see becoming propagated during the post-election cycle is this phenomenon that Donald Trump succeeded by awakening a movement of white, rural, “less-educated voters.” This narrative is completely false. The notion that white voters – across all backgrounds and classifications – rallied behind this ideology in mass, is false.

According to Domenico Montanaro of NPR: Donald J. Trump received roughly the same voter turnout in 2016 (60.5 million) as Mitt Romney did in 2012 (60.9 million.) While black voter turnout among the national electorate was only down slightly, Hillary Clinton not winning the presidential nomination was based on her inability to overcome the lack of support from minority voters in key swing states and counties that president Barak Obama carried in both 2008 and 2012. In places like Wayne County, Michigan, home to Detroit, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Clinton was significantly off from Obama’s vote total in 2012. In fact, had she met Obama’s vote total, it would have been more than enough to make up the statewide differences in both states – which kills the notion that white, rural populations, outside of these cities turned out in mass propelling Trump to victory. Obama in 2012 received five hundred and ninety-five thousand (595,000) votes in Wayne County; Clinton in 2016 only received five hundred and seventeen thousand votes (517,000.) That’s a seventy-eight thousand (78,000) voter drop off in comparison to president Barak Obama. As exit polls continue to show: Hillary Clinton’s loss in Michigan wasn’t due to Donald J. Trump capturing newfound voter’s, the loss is due to the lack of support from minority voting base in places such as Wayne County.

The question I continue to ask myself is why does this false narrative continuing to be pushed? Why do so many well-known and reputable figures in politics, business, and media continue to use this false narrative to essentially give Donald Trump a faux-mandate, even though Hillary Clinton as of Friday, December 9, 2016, is more than 2 million votes ahead in the popular vote? This (false) narrative being pushed is tied to the re-centering of the white middle class both in political conversations and in the Democratic party. Targeting these white working class voters is simply (indirectly/directly) a path towards a more conservative Democratic Party. The white working class used to be Democrats when the Democratic Party was the party of Jim Crow in the south. As the Democratic Party shifted to be inclusive and support of minority interests, the white working class gradually left for the GOP. These working class voters simply want to “maintain America’s [white-hegimoinic] cultural values.” Two-thirds of Trump voters believed that Trump was “America’s last chance.” What this response to by these voters is a more inclusive America that has been on display for the past decade, and a two-term Black president. What’s implied by this statement is that Trump was America’s last hope to maintain the racial hierarchal system(s), that keeps white interests as the default.

Centering the white working class would be very problematic to the success the Democratic party has had this past decade. Centering the white working class would mean a more conservative Democratic Party, one that is friendly with the NRA, anti women’s rights, against same-sex marriage, “strong” on national security, crime, and against “illegal” immigration. It means placing minorities within a subservient role and negating our class, race, and gendered interest. Democrats shouldn’t be focused on recapturing the heartland – which has seemingly been gone for generations. The Democratic party should be focused on finding candidates who can recapture voter enthusiasm; who can speak to millennial and minority based voters, and proposing progressive legislation and agendas that minority based demographics can rally behind in mass. The Democratic party doesn’t need to remove itself from its supposed core values of inclusiveness and diversity in order to become the GOP-lite; while seemingly sacrificing minorities autonomy and agency to do so.

Posted in: Uncategorized

5 Responses “False Narratives: There wasn’t an Awakening of the White Middle Class.” →

chavezla

December 13, 2016

The blog was an interesting take on the white-working class voters that largely supported Trump. It is important to make the distinction between the number of voters that showed up to support Trump versus those that came out to support Clinton. The Democrats have been unable to receive large support from the white-working class voter base due to a lot of cultural and political differences. However the Democratic party has also lost support from the working class due to policies and trade-deals that have hurt working class minority communities (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/bernie-sanders-humiliated-democrats-working-class-231326). Clinton was unable to bring out as many numbers as Obama because of her inability to reach these individuals. The blog brought up important points to take into consideration when reviewing the election results.

Reply
adelisamuric96

December 13, 2016

Ever since this election ended, I have been trying to decide which path the Democrats should take and always come back to the conclusion that they should work to appeal to Obama’s base. I definitely agree with you that if the Democrats shifted their focus to the white working class, they would become more conservative, thus losing support among people of color, immigrants, and women. While Hillary had her faults as a candidate, the problem was not that she didn’t focus on the white working class. The problem was that she herself was not a candidate that minority groups and especially young people could get behind. And even with all of that, she won the popular vote decisively. This demonstrates that demographics are destiny, and even though the left lost this time, they are still the majority in the country. This is an interesting PEW study (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/03/31/10-demographic-trends-that-are-shaping-the-u-s-and-the-world/) that was conducted in March and it reaffirms for me the reasons Democrats should continue building on the Obama coalition.

Reply
ahill19

December 14, 2016

I agree that the Dems should not take the party in a more conservative white direction. That strategy would be a short-term goal that would backfire later. And yes, Clinton failed to turnout the constituencies she need to win this election electorally.

You’re right -Trump won the white vote by almost the same margin as Romney did in 2012. But I think it’s important to note that not all of those white voters from 2012 are the same as white voters from 2016. Looking at the demographics from PEW: The Dems performed better with educated voters(and even though white educated voters still preferred Trump, Republicans performed worse white educated voters) than in 2012. The GOP gained significantly from uneducated voters, while the Dems took a hit with uneducated voters – both white and all educated voters. So, white voters flipped in this regard: white educated voters swung less towards the GOP than in 2012, but white uneducated voters swung significantly to Trump.

(http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/)

The Dems maintained 2012-level support from women, while Republicans gained significant support from men. Both parties were down on young voters, although the Dems were down by a larger portion, so it’s possible that some young male voters switched to Trump, but that doesn’t explain how the GOP gained so much male support. Unless minority male voters flocked to Trump (which I think is unlikely), the gain must have been from the white male voter. Since Trump didn’t gain from educated white voters, the gain came from uneducated white voters. Trump’s solidification of this base was significant, and this demographic must account for at least part of his victory.

So no, an awakening of the white middle class cannot be the sole cause for Trump’s win, but the white vote certainly changed this year, and it certainly benefited Trump. The change wasn’t significant enough to give Trump and the Republicans a mandate from the American public, but it isn’t by any means negligible either. The dip in minority turnout for Clinton was enough to cost her the election, but the uneducated white male voter was enough to secure the election for Trump too.

Reply
tejaselection2016

December 14, 2016

Emmett, I wonder if the reason there has been so much focus on this “re-awakening” of less-educated rural white voters is because it is an easier narrative to spin. For the Democrats, Obama’s rise to fame and eventual victory was a great narrative and success story. However, explaining how the Left and the Democrats lost that momentum is a harder story to sell to the electorate, so it may be easier to externalize the reason for their defeat.

While I agree that the Democratic Party should not reverse its core values of diversity and inclusivity, I don’t think that they should be so quick to ignore the heartland. Bernie Sanders showed that that it was possible to appeal to working-class anxieties and also be a viable liberal candidate. While Bill Clinton was able to salvage the Democratic Party after its losses in the 1980s, it came at the cost of taking the party in a more conservative direction and appealing to Southern whites. I don’t see that happening again, but I do think that the economic worries of rural America were a big reason that Trump won. The Democrats need to find a way to address those anxieties if they want to be successful going forward. It will be important to see what direction the Democratic Party will now take as it reckons with how it lost this election and restructures itself for the future.

Reply
Tony Robinson

December 19, 2016

Wonderful post and commentary! This post cuts to the heart of the most important decisions facing the Democratic party in terms of heart, soul, and strategy going forward. Narratives that the Democratic party somehow “lost touch” with America and needs to abandon so-called “identity politics” in favor of a return to some sort of heartland cultural conservatism less concerned with racial justice are morally suspect, and certainly incorrect as an electoral analysis, for the reasons laid out in this post–including the fact that Dems actually won the popular vote. The Dems do need a more serious economic message for the declining working class in this country, as such message could unite lower-income people of all races and ethnicities–but they do not need to get caught up in narratives about how the party somehow lost touch with “white” America.

Reply