SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the and-a-polite-discussion-ensued... dept.
Recently published in Journal of Social and Political Psychology by Thomas F. Pettigrew seeks to understand the psychological profile of Trump supporters:
The Trump movement is not singular within the United States (the Know Nothing movement in the 1850s, the Wallace movement in the 1960s, and the more recent Tea Party Movement). Moreover, other democracies have seen similar movements (e.g., Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Blok, France's National Front, Germany's Alternative for Germany Party (AfD), and Britain's U.K. Independence Party (UKIP).
In virtually all these cases, the tinder especially involved male nativists and populists who were less educated than the general population. But this core was joined by other types of voters as well. Five highly interrelated characteristics stand out that are central to a social psychological analysis – authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, outgroup prejudice, the absence of intergroup contact and relative deprivation.No one factor describes Trump's supporters. But an array of factors – many of them reflecting five major social psychological phenomena can help to account for this extraordinary political event: authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, prejudice, relative deprivation, and intergroup contact.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07 2017, @02:01AM (11 children)
False. NOT true. Incorrect. Obama is responsible for the Trump economy so far. Clinton's growth was better than Obama, but then he was pre-Bush Republican "fixing" of the economy. Which Trump is probably going to cause more of.
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Thursday December 07 2017, @02:18AM (10 children)
I disagree. While the rise is mostly due to the end of the Obama administration, Clinton wouldn't receive the same bounce.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07 2017, @09:06AM (9 children)
You do? How nice for you, then. Of course, you are still wrong. If you were right, I would expect some data, and some analysis? Or perhaps you prefer to stop at "I disagree"? Then you can tell everyone how the mean SJW disagreed with you on the internets.
(Score: 2) by Fishscene on Thursday December 07 2017, @02:58PM
You ask for evidence, yet provide none yourself. Go link yourself to some facts and post them before accusing someone else of not doing so.
I know I am not God, because every time I pray to Him, it's because I'm not perfect and thankful for what He's done.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 07 2017, @05:30PM (7 children)
This indicates to me that something happened around November 2016 that caused US manufacturing to sharply improve. The US presidential election is the obvious candidate for this sea change. Clinton was expected to win going into the election. When she didn't, suddenly manufacturing gets better. Funny how that works.
While manufacturing is just a part of the economy, increases in it indicate that someone is buying their stuff (and they in turn will consume more services and such from the rest of the economy), and hence other parts of the economy are growing as well.
(Score: 1) by redneckmother on Thursday December 07 2017, @06:07PM (4 children)
In other news:
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/12/06/HUD-Homeless-numbers-up-for-first-time-since-2010/2611512617086/ [upi.com]
Mas cerveza por favor.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 07 2017, @06:44PM (3 children)
Well, we'll see what comes of that. But it's not a large increase nor a large rate [wikipedia.org] (0.18% of the US population is homeless as of 2015). For example, a good portion of the EU has a higher homeless rate (Germany at 0.42%, for example).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07 2017, @07:06PM (2 children)
You are a skilled shill, very adept at using bullshit to distract from the lack of support your "message" has. Never address that facts that go against your message, just distract with more bullshit. They must have a dairy farm dedicated to you somewhere.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 07 2017, @07:31PM (1 child)
This sort of shilling is called reason, logic, and rhetoric. Up your game and you won't be a whiny little AC anymore. I have years of practice dealing with this stuff.
Here, it was quite simple. I read the link and noticed the two facts I mentioned. Namely, that the increase mentioned was small (0.7%) and that the current homeless rate (0.18%) was small even for developed world countries. An increase of merely 4,000 homeless shouldn't make the list of the top 100 things that Trump has done wrong.
In comparison, manufacturing jobs went up by a little over 150k from November, 2016 to October, 2017. That's roughly a 1.3% increase in manufacturing jobs over the same time frame. That's roughly 35-40 manufacturing jobs per homeless person.
Now, obviously this could be the start of a bad trend with respect to the homeless numbers. But we'll just have to see what happens.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 11 2017, @12:57AM
I noticed that the figure in question is through January, 2017. So not Trump's fault or credit, but still not even a weak indicator that something is going wrong.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 08 2017, @09:07AM (1 child)
The growing trend started around mid 2010 had a stagnation in 2016 (consistent with an election year) then continued at a rate no higher than before. So far, there's no correlation with Trump's administration.
Here's another hypothesis which may explains the same: Obama's programs continued to work into Trump administration because Trump didn't manage to wreck them yet.
Nothing to see here but fluctuations, with an amplitude of +/-0.5h/week, 1% or so. Noise.
Tempting candidate for an explanation, yes. Obvious no.
While here may be something, it is also possible there's nothing. Many other factors can trigger the same.
Attributing this to the Trump-factor is, at best, a hypothesis which requires validation or a simple assertion without support in reality at the worst
Correlation, causation, you know the saying.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 16 2017, @05:51PM
I missed this post earlier, but I'll note that a big reason why such stalls are "consistent" with election years is because of the uncertainty that comes from the possibility of a bad choice getting elected president. You have to consider the dynamics not merely assert that shit happens. If Clinton were a perceived as a much better choice for president, then these figures wouldn't continue to climb once Trump was elected. Manufacturers would instead be looking at ways to minimize the impact, such as reducing hiring.
Hence, the data which was supplied. That was a validation.