Modern US politics (post Trump) is basically globalist vs protectionist, with each side allying with other vote blocs (evangelical, feminist, white supremacists, black rights) to round out their platform. Trump's base are people who are angry about getting shut out of the modern economy, for which they want somebody to blame. Since there isn't really anyone to blame--technological progress is to blame--they go for all kinds of conspiracy theories about how a secret cabal of elites is rigging everything and holding them down (deep state, q-anon). They long for the past when they think things were simpler and generally are angry enough to believe anything that pisses off "elites" is good (overturn the apple cart, burn it down). Trump voters are not too dissimilar to the black rioters who burn down their own communities because they are angry, and don't know what to do about it, so they do something destructive. But in the case of Trump voters, not out on the street. They enjoy seeing damage done to big companies, trade deals, foreign allies, Federal institutions, and just generally hate "the system", which is why it doesn't bother them that Trump is undermining courts, elections, etc, they are happy to see the destruction. Biden voters on the other hand are at their core globalists who believe "progress is inevitable" and good and are in favor of "the system" as a whole. They overlook the harm that has been done to a lot of ordinary folks and believe "progress" will fix the issues--by which they mean better trade deals, greater equality, better social programs, and reducing racism. They can't imagine a world in which "progress" could be destructive and they fundamentally have faith in "the system", which means they always just want to tweak it to improve it in various ways. As such they are astonished that anyone would question the integrity of the system, including elections, or refuse to play by "the rules", their entire view of politics revolves around "the rules", tweaking them, making new ones, etc. Because they think "the system" works they have no respect for rugged individualism and hate the idea of self defense, gun rights, or stand your ground laws. They think any issue with "the system" ought to be fixed so that no one needs a gun but instead can rely on benevolent police to stop violence and social programs to prevent it. Since they believe progress is inevitable and good they have a tendency to be dismissive of individual rights and discount the concept of personal responsibility in such areas as crime, homelessness, or addiction--individual choice is irrelevant in a world where "progress" will solve the "inequalities" that are the root of all problems. As such they don't care if, say, an affirmative action program requires destroying some people's livelihoods or undermining competitiveness, and it's OK if some men are falsely accused of sexual harassment, because changing "the dynamics" matters more than one person. A few lives destroyed is a small price for progress because it's all in the name of the greater future good. This is also why they mostly talk about people in terms of stereotypes, using stories about individuals only to the extent that they are representative of what they believe is a larger social group (identity politics). See: BLM, me too, etc.
Lol stick to programming
Said above, this post is ignorant. On your first paragraph there is a major error that technology progress is to blame. There is a lot of research from a lot of different sources that it's not just technology progress but the outsourcing to China and other 3rd world countries that fucked the middle and lower classes in the Western World. And on the biden paragraph saying that democratic voters favor the system is a gross misrepresentation and misunderstanding of democratic voters. Overall a fucking mess. Read some more about both sides and spare us this shitty analysis.
Globalism and business-elites covers outsourcing. Liberals do favor the system - their revolt against police/system was precisely because it wasn't working per their expectations.
Not sure what point you're trying to make. I'm specifically referring to outsourcing, saying that something can be done about. The OP is stating that this is a done deal and all the jobs are lost due to technology. A lot of jobs were actually lost Bec we've been sending manufacturing to China for 35 years. Moreover, manufacturing and other services could come back to the US, but you are lacking significant investment in infrastructure, Capital intensive businesses, labor, tax and liability laws, protection of IPs, education and currency manipulation (much more effective than tarrifs). So all these could be done in a country that is not in a political gridlock. So it's not impossible just really hard to happen.
It's correct. Tech advancement does not only include the internet but advances in all areas, particularly automation but also even in things like logistics and transportation, that have eliminated the need for many of the jobs that formerly dominated Trump districts, or made it possible to outsource them to lower cost areas. Saying "ignorant" without saying why is stupid.
So which one are you? Protectionist or globalist?
I mean, are you trying to rebrand liberalism vs conservatism? Left vs right. There's of course a full gradient and social policies are a multidimensional thing It's just unfortunate that individual social issues/policies can't be addressed, and everyone had to throw in with a single camp. 2 parties kind of blows for representing the true will of the people
Cluelessness: thinking everything in binary.
I don't, there are more choices out there, but that reflects the two major political movements
There are plenty of voters who are in the "mix and match" categories. Painting all of them with the same brush is ignorance, not justified by claiming that you're covering two major "movements". There are plenty of issues where people align with one major party but they align with the major other party or none of the two parties on other issues. Do not oversimplify.
Trump is nationalist ππ
Don't disagree. He's also a populist and a protectionist. All that appeals to his base, who are angry at being left out of the global economy, and insecure about their economic prospects. The rabid "America first" rhetoric appeals to both their insecurity (making the feel stronger) and their anger (somebody to blame) and the protectionism also addresses their concerns (as though the clock can be rolled back to the good old days).
Ignorant on multiple fronts.
Yet you can't say why... I get it: it described you.