How did this happen?

How did this happen?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=OI-9iMrWRrw
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Smaller cities flipping red
It also happened in the states that went blue, like MN.

Russia

Pure luck. Fuh get about it next election. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Lousiana, Mississippi, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, Iowa, North Carolina, Virginia, etc all blue.

Not because Trump was great, it's because Hillary was a uniquely terrible candidate. Both of them won less votes than Obama and Romney won in both states, but people just stomached Trump more. If the Dems ran someone like Biden Trump would've gotten rekt.

The stars aligned, and for a brief moment the deep state and Jews lost.

They won't let the same thing happen again in 2020

Hillary literally did not campaign in States I like Wisconsin. Her hubris assumed white Union voters would go her way. Trump actually talked to them and told them he would help.

Democrats have been driving anyone that isn't a drooling fanatic or utterly bitter about Hillary losing out of any political discussion. Because there is no political discussion on the Left. It's 100% bitching about Trump. Want to talk shop? LOL FUCK OFF. It's 100% a shitshow of angry, bitter old maids and soy boys out with an axe to grind.

They still blame Bernie, by the way.

>How did this happen?
Russian malware.

None of the voter machines were forensically investigated.

Inept fuckhead democrats.

People on the left didnt like Hilldawg enough to turn out. And pissed off rust belters who have lost everything wanted to get back at the establishment as well as get their jobs back.
Trump promised both of these things to them so they voted for him and he won

Waking up is how.

Nigger, spics, and many women didnt have a meme lefty candidate to vote for. The demos wont make the mistake of pushing establishment nobles again.

I could be wrong if Bernie gets the nomination though. Then DNC just shot its foot once again

Unemployment.

Thisssssss
God FUCK dotards.

>Not because Trump was great, it's because Hillary was a uniquely terrible candidate.
Someone is awake.

wrong trump beat romney by 2 million votes and in Pennsylvanian he got more votes them romney by more then 200,000

Not only was HIllary shit but trump ran a great campaign

Choke on a nigger dick, shill.

Clinton and aides said lol fuck midwest and ignored it. Trump did one last run there. Only Bernie and Trump really focused on the poor out of work rust belt area.

Didn't Clinton never campaign once in WI or MI?

Dems just assumed they had those states in the bag. All their statistic models and AI consultants were flawed.

The midwest just really hates the Clintons. I wouldn't extrapolate any larger trends from this.

She didnt even bother campaigning

Everyone got together and decided they were tired of being called racist, misogynist, phobic, etc

They never went to Wisconsin. They pulled out the big guns for Michigan, sent Barry there.
And, they still couldn't get it done thankfully

Everyone hates niggers outside of our liberal containment zones here

t. Michigan

Go suck Trump's wrinkly dick, faggot

>Don't campaign in state once
>Lose
I fail to see how this is a shock to anyone.

We actually voted this time

Trump is rich but comes across as a blunt, down-to-earth blue collar guy.

The rust belt is really struggling and Obama didn't do shit to help us. Hillary was going to kill the coal industry.

In general, the media/Hollywood/TV has become more racist to white people, causing them to abandon the Democratic party.

Democrats have been getting a worse and worse reputation in Michigan. After seeing what they did to Detroit and the bitch fit they threw over the Flint water mess, a mess that is 100% the fault of Flint niggers, they have lost a lot of credibility.

Hillary was too busy siphoning off record campaign spending to care about white midwesterners

not a argument bitch

>RUSSIANS!!!!

Clearly Russia was behind it. There is no other rational explanation.

Putin literally let all of the air out of the tires of Clinton voters in those states.

It's pretty obvious if you live here.
t. Wisconsin

lol. you won't even have California after we clear out the voter fraud.

Being in the rustbelt was a great front row seat if you knew going in to it that they were never going to let Bernie get the nomination in the first place. It was just a matter waiting for all the air to get sucked out of the room.

I saw more Trump signs down 1-75 service drive than Hillary

Based Russia saving America from (((itself))).

Prussia

Trump took these rust belt states just like Reagan did, and for similar reasons. Check Bill Clinton's pollster Stanley Greenberg, who's been studying the Reagan Democrats in Macomb County, Michigan for almost 40 years now. He knew Hillary was in deep trouble long before the election. Macomb is a bellwether county, as he knew then and now. It's still Trump country, fyi. He's gonna win reelection in a landslide, as of right now.

Voter turnout in those two states were slightly lower because king nigger wasnt running to reel his monkeys into the booths.

hard-working, blue collar normies are waking up, that's how. They're not geniuses but they're not stupid either. They just usually don't understand why they think and feel what they think and feel, but their base feelings are still on point.

Wisdom of the crowds. The entire premise of democracy being a "good" or "functioning" system of governance is literally based on that phenomenon. The democrats/liberals/lefties/sjws/neolibs/neocons/republicans have been destroying this country, and the average person knows it.

They just don't know how it's happening, or who's causing it. They don't know the Source. But they could see that trump was better equipped to deal with it.

>He's gonna win reelection in a landslide, as of right now.
In that county? In Michigan? Or in the US overall?

If US overall, would you mind going over the calculus a bit? I'm not disputing you and I would love to see Trump win again. But I'm curious what the numbers say and its hard to find non-biased sources.

mich will slaughter liberals before it goes blue. lansing will be a battlefield.

Where did I say Pennsylvania in my post? Trump won 2,000 less votes than Romney in Wisconin and Hillary won 300,000 less votes than Obama.

Hillary won 300,000 less votes than Obama in Michigan and Trump held even. Hillary loss the election, Trump didn't win it. Those two states were way too close and without them he wouldn't have won.

Trump did win more votes than Romney in Pennsylvania, but Hillary also under performed Obama by 50,000 votes. If she had gotten within 30,000 votes of Obama's total she would've won the state, but no one went to vote for her.

wouldn't have have won without them or Pennsylvannia.

> this delusional

Being an incumbent and black nets you more Democrat votes, more at 11

There is no calculus since its way too early to predict.

>tfw mainstream media starts bitching about slide threads

I'm from the Detroit area, been here my whole life. After growing up hearing stories and seeing the pictures of how it was here when things were booming, looking at that city leaves a feeling of mixed nostalgia and rage at what it is now. Trump's main message was that of rebirth, building up again what was once great. I can't think of a message that would resonate more in this area. The city is a fucking wreck, I mean that sincerely. It is seriously depressing to drive down 75 and see the burnt out carcasses of where industrious working whites lived and labored. They're ruins of a better time and standard of society. That man's words touch something that is deeply rooted in the minds of the people who live here as we see the blight that emanates from that shithole: a chance to see the greatness of our forefathers once more.

Obama won less votes in his second election though.

Trump campaigned hard in those states, the old fashioned way.

And he still basically held even with Romney.

Are you a Jew or something, this caught up with numbers?

i carpetbagged and voted in wisconsin even though i only lived there 6 months. felt pretty great desu.

>poor
>rural
>low IQ
Jesus Christ dude thanks for confirming the stereotype holy shit. FUCK dotards.

Yes because that's how disastrous his presidency was, that it is not normal.

almost all of michigan other then detroit the blacks voted for trump,

ben carson and the church visit really, trump also walked through detroit slums and promised to fix flint water.

he lost detroit blakc vote by just like 10% tho

It really depends. But that's not the point regardless.

Just pointing out that Trump didn't win Michigan and Wisconsin by some prowess of campaigning. A more popular figure like Joe Biden would've won those states easily.

He won Michigan by 10,000 votes though.

Pennsylvania is a different case trump clearly pick up white blue color votes that usually go democrats and people who dont normally vote other wise the math dosent add up

The electoral map by county really shows it yes trump did win

That joke has a lot of truth to it for Pennsylvania

>Just pointing out that Trump didn't win Michigan and Wisconsin by some prowess of campaigning. A more popular figure like Joe Biden would've won those states easily.
how the fuck do we real conservatives would have just stayed home because he is suck a cuck on immigration

You remind me of that one morning I turned on the radio and the pundits were all getting mad because Trump had no "ground game" so it was impossible that he could possibly even stand a chance.

These people live in such an alternate reality.

hey dude, go for a walk through Detroit. See it with your own eyes, not some video. Get a real feel for it. Make sure you visit the hood before you bounce out though.

first hand knowledge of the area, it was decimated by years of blue union voting. something was going to give now that the last manufacturing generation sees whats in store for their children working at culvers and schlotzsky's for a living rather than working middle class manufacturing jobs because the democrats they once voted for blindly sent their jobs to mexico and imported in return tens of millions of workers from mexico to fill those jobs that no longer exist.

When your in your mid 20s and at the bar and old dude barflies are talking about how it once was, and your off on a monday because you work the weekends at a fast food chain and struggle to live a shit tier life eventually you stop voting for the blue.

Pennsylvania was different. I agree, but it was still close enough that Obama-tier numbers would flip that state again because the margin wasn't that high.

The states battleground states he won comfortably were Florida and Ohio.

But why use Occam's razor when you can just blame Russia and millions of drooling idiots will go with it

Truth kills the shill. I cannot wait till your masters hang. Each lie and falsehood you sow only amplifies the righteous fury you'll receive when the day of the rope comes.

It hasn't happened since FDR's third run, so no it really doesn't just depend.

How so? It's a fact that he barely won the state. The one without any ground game there was Hillary Clinton.

The same David Corn that you can find in the memo.

Michiganders REALLY hated clinton

It does depend on certain factors though, like how terrible your opponent is. Incumbency doesn't automatically equal more votes.

You also have to count that sum incumbents have even lost elections.

Don't worry about it. No model that doesn't take the right variables into account has a decent chance of making a good prediction.

Democrats told them for years that international free trade was a good idea, that their manufacturing jobs would grow because of new markets. Trump admitted they got fucked hard and discussed a way to fix this, however unlikely. Republicans don't like to admit what an ass rape NAFTA was because many of them make a lot of money of it too. Simply saying we need deregulation and lower taxes is not enough.

The white vote. A fractured white vote. Still enough. Hell, I know god damn well he got far more votes than got counted. The corruption was embedded everywhere. DHS fuckery with those voting machines.

Aghhhh I am former Trump sporter now

So much so they voted against her in the primary when all the polls said she was up around 20%. Seriously, fuck Clinton

>tfw the media is literally using Russia for every excuse

Rural people got tired of Urbanite shit.

The Great Lakes region has been drifting republican for some time

Chekt

You covered it perfectly. Its the reason I voted for him.
Gary is our own mini Detroit and Indy's factories have been slipping away for a long time
When you hear someone say they are going to fix what has happened, you want to see them do it

checked

Trump campaigned there like a madman. I lived in PA during the election and had to make regular trips through OH, MI, and WI and the people really liked his message as it was more or less tailor made for them.
Either Trump is just the luckiest motherfucker to ever exist or hes actually some next level of human evolution tier genius

The opportunity presented by the Final Frontier

WITNESSED

youtube.com/watch?v=OI-9iMrWRrw

I think it's cause trump got all the votes that weren't in liberal echo chambers. I know in madison wi, it was almost entirely for hillary. But outside of that, almost entirely for trump. There really wasn't a middle ground, and the imported niggers in cities got outvoted for once cause of this unity of farmers and ruralites that were fed up with the left and hillary.

This is true. After the Bush meltdown and king nigger meme of 2008, the 2012 election was actually closer in a lot of the swing states Obama won that people like to remember.
>Florida and Ohio
Obama won with less than 51%.
>Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Iowa
Obama won these with less than 52% of the vote.
Even beandip New Mexico only went ~53% for Obama and Cuck Paradise Oregon (Portland, primarily) voted 54% for Obama.

Even Minnesota is veering toward entering the red column

Ayyyy my hometown

1/4

OK so no one has answered in full yet so I guess that leaves me.

For decades the Democratic party was the party of two large groups of people:

1. The intelligentsia / academics / intellectuals / know-it-alls / overeducated, whatever you want to call them.
2. The blue-collar working class. Both the poor and the almost-poor, the "lower middle class".

The first group set a broad agenda of more or less slow social progress (you can make very good arguments that it was not actually social progress, or that it was "too fast", but that is beside the point here, which is that this was the self-understanding of the leadership of the Democratic party), and the second group voted for them in large part because that agenda included an honest concern for the hardships faced across the nation by members of the second group.

To reiterate the critical point: the Democratic agenda included for decades a deep and honest respect for the nobility of manual labor and blue-collar workers, although, and this is the most important thing to know: it was always tempered in one wing of the part by *embarrassment* at who they represented. Academics are by and large urbane and sophisticated. They will not accept the sight and the ways of the crude and poor without a constant effort to remind them of the nobility that exists alongside such crudity.

But the success of this synthesis between the interests bred a complacency in the Democratic party which ultimately manifested itself in the form of Jimmy Carter, who signified the exhaustion of FDR's party. This in turn opened the door to Ronald Reagan, who annihilated the weak and decrepit Democrats and proved to the American people that free markets, deregulation and optimism can live side by side with astonishing results.

2/4

Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to understand, though hesitantly, the importance of the Reagan free market revolution. Guided by his prudence (ultimately called "triangulation"), the Democrats became the dominant party in the US again, but at the very specific cost of: a full-throated embrace of capitalism, the priority of the stock market ticker, and most importantly free trade. Bill Clinton had fashioned the Democrats into a party for both the rich and the poor.

This was a watershed moment for the Democrats, because for the first time its platform had pushed aside the interests of the working poor, without completely jettisoning them, to make room for the rich, effectively adding a third group to the mix.

Politically this is like trying to square the circle. The rich and the poor just do not have the same day-to-day interests. Period. And it has come to the same end. Clinton inaugurated a process by which the first group, now in love with wealth and luxury (they call this "diversity" in the marketplace), agreed to pursue the interests of the third (the rich, newly accepted as Good Democrats), because they had been convinced that the interests of the third would *ultimately* benefit the interests of the second, the poor: "A rising tide raises all boats". That this decision meant that the working poor would lose their jobs was rationalized in a very particular manner: *the poor would be educated, and get better jobs*. I cannot emphasize enough the degree to which this illustrates psychological fact of the leadership of the Democratic party which has brought us to this crossroads. They earnestly thoroughly believe that 1) every problem has a solution (circles can be squares), and 2) education is the solution.

3/4

But every person who was awake in Michigan, for example, in the 90s, knows that this is an infernal lie. NAFTA was signed and Ford Motor Company bought all of its line workers free computers and email addresses in the same period of time, swearing that this was a new dawn for the working class in America. It did not matter that their jobs were leaving, because they would become e-workers, free to learn and better themselves with the power of the internet.

It is abundantly clear now that NAFTA was a mistake. Perhaps all of those blue collar workers could become like the educated leaders of their party. Perhaps they could all be retrained. But the *FACT* is that they never were. They were instead *abandoned* by the Democratic party in favor of a toxic synthesis between hyper-educated and urbane academics and the new class of super-wealthy capitalists recently freed to extend the dominion of their markets over the whole Earth.

You can see the end from here, so I will make it quick. Barack Obama never questioned this synthesis. But what he *did* do, through a very conspicuous and unchoosable fact of his own person, was make it *appear* to be possible for the Democratic party to turn away from the poor that embarrassed them and embrace everyone who did not.