Sunday, April 23, 2017

Half of those 50 or older who voted for Clinton support airstrike on Syria

From Reuters-Ipsos polling (n = 2,918), support among Hillary voters aged 50 or older for the airstrikes on Syria:


Hillary voters under 30 and aged 30-49:



A similar age pattern exists among Trump voters, just depressingly shifted nearly 50 points in the direction of support:




Stripping away political orientation, then, we see that there is a substantial generational divide when it comes to policing the world:




This is Feryl's wheelhouse. Boomers hate the idea of being "isolationists".

Supporting that assessment, there are marginal differences among white and non-white Hillary voters, with the former only slightly more supportive. The modest differences we see among Hillary's coalition is accounted for by age, as older Hillary voters are of course whiter than younger ones are:



For those who want to maintain the 666-dimensional-chess analogy, the attack could be seen as trying to further split the Hillary and Bernie wings of the Democrat party by driving the wedge hard into the coalition of the fringes, while simultaneously bringing butthurt cucks and neocons back into the fold without much political downside.

That strikes me as fanciful thinking, however. And I intentionally use "fanciful" rather than "wishful" here. As Z-Man puts it:
Trump is wildly unpredictable, at least he seems unpredictable. That’s a big part of how he plays the game. He wants everyone to think the range of choices for him include some collection of unknown options that no one has yet to consider. That keeps foes on the defensive, making them tentative, even when they have the advantage. By appearing to have no clear strategy and routinely breaking old habits, Trump appears to be a wild man, who is capable of anything. Therefore, there’s no way to plan for him.
He greatly expanded the Overton Window and provided a template for hungry, aspiring politicians to follow in the future. We can hope for him to be something more than a transitional figure, but we'd be foolish to expect it.

14 comments:

Mil-Tech Bard said...

A.E.

Trump is going to ax both the North Koreans and especially Iran.

See this regards Iran --

Secretary of State Tillerson on Iran April 20, 2017:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/19/tillerson-slams-iran-nuclear-deal-as-failed-approach-vows-comprehensive-review.html


"The Trump administration has no intention of passing the buck to a future administration on Iran,” he said, claiming the deal represents the “failed approach” of the past.


Tillerson also likened Iran's behavior to that of North Korea. He said an unchecked Iran could pursue the same path as Pyongyang "and take the world along with it."


See also the Powerline comment on this:


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/04/rex-tillersons-tough-talk-on-iran.php

"It is rumored that President Trump hit the roof when he saw Tillerson’s letter to Congress (or maybe the way it was reported) and demanded that he issue today’s tough statement. According to this account, the tough statement had been drafted previously, nixed by influential soft-liners in the administration, and revived in light of the Tillerson [Iran nuclear compliance] letter.

Feryl said...

Reading about the "End of History", I'm once again reminded of how our brains freeze in time. Older generations pick a side in the ideological fight and compete to impose their vision on as many people as possible. This isn't uniformly true, but why do you suppose Pat Buchanan and his allies were chased out of the mainstream?

Asking older people, "is this really in our long-term best interests", doesn't really register because to them the mighty US always has the resources and moral authority to knock others down.

The equity of defeating fascists and commies in the 20th century, to them, has grown so high so that it's inconceivable that we've betrayed our descendants with mountains of debt, geopolitical instability, and loss of legitimacy.

Remember that in the late 60's, we started to shift from "what's in our interest?" to "what about what I want?". So of course, the biggest winners of the post-WW2 boom figured, why not try and introduce me-centered neo-liberalism to as many people and places as possible? Maybe it's not perfect, but at least the winners have fun and the losers deserve what they get.

As the wiki notes, some of the biggest objections to this "dream" came from people who thought that Islam would never bend it's knee to the West. Fuckin' A.

"Fukuyama also warned of "political decay," which he wrote could also affect established democracies like the United States, in which corruption and crony capitalism erode liberty and economic opportunity. Nevertheless, he expressed his continued belief that "the power of the democratic ideal remains immense."

Well no shit, maybe to the generations who conveniently came of age mostly insulated from the worst excesses of the corporate ass-rape of damn near the whole world. Keep in mind that I'm treating "democracy" as a code word for neo-liberal capitalism. In the name of having more "consumers" and bringing greater "freedom" to more people, younger Westerners have had to deal with the prospect of Islamic terrorism in their backyards for most or all of their lives.

There's also the depressing reality that Western whites under 40 have had to face for years at this point, that older generations of whites chose to not have kids while little was done to diminish the population of blacks and other troubling groups. Blacks have clung to much of their territory, in some cases re-taking areas (mostly in the South). Their location may change here and there, but overall their proportions are still comparable in size to what they were 50 years ago. That's why blacks don't feel much differently now than they did decades ago, though younger ones are more racially conscious. Compare that to how much healthier, upbeat, and creative whites were 30-40-50 years ago. Older whites could be cavalier about diversity since the majority of whites who went to high school before the later 80's mostly saw white faces at school and in their neighborhoods. And even when busing/integration started, it didn't really affect that many areas (MN, for example, was like 90% white in the 70's and 80's). And it's not like blacks came from overseas at the time.

We may eventually get to the point where Northern whites who grew up in less than homogenous areas will finally demonstrate the same racial consciousness as Southern whites have for eons.

Feryl said...

When an old neighborhood of Boston was destroyed in the 60's/70's, it evidently made some researchers study how residents felt. Some of them felt depressed, bereaved. Things just weren't the same anymore. The area/time wasn't perfect in the past, but it's what people were used to. I don't think diversity per se is necessarily the biggest problem; rather, it's the ever growing depth and breadth of changes that the globalists have been imposing on us since WW2 ended. Forcefully ending segregation in the 60's, making blacks and whites associate, was traumatic enough though the psychological impact was blunted a bit by the prosperity of the time.

Here we are, with mounting financial crises, and elites remain mostly committed to the principle right of mass human migration and the dilution of national identity.

Derek said...

It's difficult to think of a way to quantify just how many true alt-righters there are. We might be able to use a survey like this as a rough gauge: I'd guess that AT MOST 20% of Trump voters 18-40 qualify as alt-right/lite, whatever.

Maybe you're more optimistic than I am.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

A.E. Feryl,

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/159824817036/how-a-systems-thinking-president-can-settle-the

This seems right WRT Pres. Trump --

"We have, for the first time, a “Systems-thinking” president. You see it in everything President Trump does. His go-to system involves lots of A-B testing of ideas, lots of negotiating, strict attention to the psychology of the situation, and pushing forward in ways that increase the odds of success. For example, the first vote on healthcare looked like a failure to “goals-thinking” people. But President Trump referred to the process yesterday as a system in which the bill keeps “getting better and better” as time goes by. And he’s right. That is exactly what we see happening.

You also see a Trump system in place to deal with North Korea. Instead of creating a goal, such as “Get rid of your nukes by Tuesday,” President Trump has created a system that links China’s future trade deals, and International standing, with their progress in solving for North Korea. That’s a good system.

You can tell that President Trump is a systems-thinker by looking at what I call his Talent Stack. He amassed an impressive set of complementary skills over his lifetime that would make him successful at almost anything he did, from hosting reality TV shows, to running for president. Notice that he is a good public speaker with a strong understanding of persuasion, politics, business strategy, and more. Add all of that to his sense of humor, his energy, his ability to endure brutal criticism, and his natural intelligence, and you have super-powerful person who can succeed in a lot of different ways."

Dan said...

I mentioned how DC doesn't have excitement like Berkeley because of strong policing. Look at Jack Posobiec's twitter feed. He got a punch from a lefty. The lefty was in cuffs in under a minute. Amazing. They didn't even know cops were watching.

Audacious Epigone said...

Feryl,

The question of "in our interests?" at all is off-putting to them. It's not "who we are". That idea will die with them, but it'll be with us until they die.

Derek,

Yeah I'd guess you're about right. I'm not sure how you'd tease out the differences between alt right and paleocons in surveys, though the effective differences aren't that large anyway. It would be interesting to survey familiarity with the term and respondents' opinions on it. Several such surveys were conducted in the early 2010s wrt to the tea party.

A month ago I had one of my employees, who is in his early 20s, nervously ask if I'd ever heard of Richard Spencer. When I made it clear to him that I had and that I was sympathetic--not an O'Brien--he said he'd been watching several of his videos and found him compelling. That was the first time I'd seen it "in real life" like that. I do get a general sense that familiarity and curiosity are still growing.

Mil-Tech Bard,

Systems-thinking is a great concept wrt to Trump. He instinctively understands that life is about playing the probabilities.

Dan,

Right, the template to stop that nonsense immediately is there and it's obvious. Just like with immigration, it's a matter of will, not of logistics.

Audacious Epigone said...

Feryl,

Is that Billy/Jimmy Lee?

Feryl said...

http://www.polygon.com/2012/10/12/3495124/the-man-who-created-double-dragon

I'm not even sure there was ever consistency, but I do think that blue usually meant Billy. It turns out that the company behind the series never got big and never officially sold their license to a big company, so that's why it's one of the few bigger VG properties to not be milked to death.

Feryl said...

"I mentioned how DC doesn't have excitement like Berkeley because of strong policing. Look at Jack Posobiec's twitter feed. He got a punch from a lefty. The lefty was in cuffs in under a minute. "

Most of the hardest Lefty Boomers are on the West Coast. Now granted, the Northeast has a lot of yuppies, strivers, Europhilia (as long those countries are run by globalists), and so on. But the real toxic weirdos are concentrated Out West, which on top of everything else has more of a rootless culture that's much worse at shaming people for stupidly nihilistic behavior than what us folks back East are accustomed to.

You've got to know where to draw the line. Even in most places back East, elite shit-libs know better than to openly cheer on (or outright participate in) thuggery and anarchy. Also worth noting is that HR-wise, Cali seems to really draw the bottom of the barrel. Texas would vote Dem if it had the same kind of Mexicans that Cali has been getting for decades at this point.

Mil-Tech Bard said...


Sec State Tillerson and Sec Def Mattis will be briefing all 100 US Senators today on North Korea.

See:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/04/24/t-rex-heads-to-u-n-friday-to-discuss-north-korea-the-building-approach-the-media-ignores/#comments

Meanwhile one of the "O-M-G" class SSGN Seal Team plus Tomahawk missile converted Trident missile subs docked in South Korea yesterday.

Pres. Trump is going straight at Kim-Jong-Un's regime.

Either China deposes Un or we will and to hell with the collateral damage.

We may see as many as 30 20-kiloton, radioactive, divots in North East Asia. If Un is suicidal enough to go for a pre-emptive 1st strike of his own.

Dan said...

North Korea did not do a nuke test on the anniversary of the Dear Leader's Birthday today so that is something.

Feryl said...

"According to various studies, the real purchasing power of the average French worker’s salary went up by 170% between 1950 and 1975, while over-all private consumption increased by 174% in the period 1950-74."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trente_Glorieuses (Thirty glorious years)

This is why we're screwed. The current intellectual/political elite had their ideology forged in post-WW2 prosperity. The difficulties of the later seventies, which affected the West to varying degrees, don't really matter since a brief period of relative hardship doesn't negate several decades of high living, which subsequently resumed for a large chunk of older generations in the 80's and beyond.

Pride goeth before the fall? How 'bout growth (and high wages, generous health plans, and pensions) goeth before the fall?

It seems like American late Boomers (who sometimes accuse Silents and early Boomers of refusing to drop the title belt) gave the US election to Trump. In the French run-off, a similar thing happened. Those most stung by 40 years of decreasing opportunities and rising costs, late Boomers and early X-ers, heavily supported Le Pen. Lest anyone concern themselves about younger voters, keep in mind that it you've only been on this planet for 18-35 years, you still feel like you've got time to get ahead in the game. Unless we drastically improve things, I see no reason to think that white Millennials won't be as bitter in the ensuing decades as white late Boomers and X-ers are right now.

Back to the French run-off. Those 60-69 slightly preferred Fillon, while those over 70 greatly preferred Fillon. Those who have the most to lose picked the most anodyne candidate. When I heard that interview with Neil Howe, he talked about many Trump (or Le Pen) voters perhaps consciously wanting to torch the system that they had grown to hate. It would've been a good moment to tell the smug interviewer that vast legions of people born after 1954 rightfully feel ignored and misunderstood.

If America had had a French style round 1, it would've been interesting to see how many elderly conservative voters would park their vote with Bush or Cruz who represent the status quo that's benefited older generations the most.

Mil-Tech Bard said...

>>It seems like American late Boomers (who sometimes accuse Silents and early Boomers of refusing to drop the title belt) gave the US election to Trump

Feryl

I think I pointed this out to you when you were doing one of your early Boomber rants.

Late Boombers were screwed by early Boomers left right and center and got to see it all happen in middle school or high school as busing and white flight destroyed their old neighberhoods in the 1970's with the twin oil shocks and 21% inflation killing the economy.