Skip to main content

November 23,2016 Source

WASHINGTON, (Reuters) – Donald Trump won the U.S. presidency with less support from black and Hispanic voters than any president in at least 40 years, a Reuters review of polling data shows, highlighting deep national divisions that have fueled incidents of racial and political confrontation.

Trump was elected with 8 percent of the black vote, 28 percent of the Hispanic vote and 27 percent of the Asian-American vote, according to the Reuters/Ipsos Election Day poll.

Among black voters, his showing was comparable to the 9 percent captured by George W. Bush in 2000 and Ronald Reagan in 1984. But Bush and Reagan both did far better with Hispanic voters, capturing 35 percent and 34 percent, respectively, according to exit polling data compiled by the non-partisan Roper Center for Public Opinion Research.

And Trump’s performance among Asian-Americans was the worst of any winning presidential candidate since tracking of that demographic began in 1992.

The racial polarization behind Trump’s victory has helped set the stage for tensions that have surfaced repeatedly since the election, in white supremacist victory celebrations, in anti-Trump protests and civil rights rallies, and in hundreds of racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic hate crimes documented by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which tracks extremist movements. The SPLC reports there were 701 incidents of “hateful harassment and intimidation” between the day following the Nov. 8 election and Nov. 16, with a spike in such incidents in the immediate wake of the vote.

Signs point to an ongoing atmosphere of confrontation.

The Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, a white separatist group that vilifies African-Americans, Jews and other minorities, plans an unusual Dec. 3 rally in North Carolina to celebrate Trump’s victory. Left-wing and anarchist groups have called for organized protests to disrupt the president-elect’s Jan. 20 inauguration. And a “Women’s March on Washington,” scheduled for the following day, is expected to draw hundreds of thousands to protest Trump’s presidency.

American politics became increasingly racialized through President Barack Obama’s two terms, “but there was an attempt across the board, across the parties, to keep those tensions under the surface,” says Jamila Michener, an assistant professor of government at Cornell University.

Trump’s anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim rhetoric “brought those divisions to the fore; it activated people on the right, who felt empowered, and it activated people on the left, who saw it as a threat,” she added.

That dynamic was evident last week.

When Vice President-elect Mike Pence attended the Broadway musical “Hamilton” in New York on Friday, the multi-ethnic cast closed with a statement expressing fears of a Trump presidency. A far different view was on display the next day as a crowd of about 275 people cheered Trump’s election at a Washington conference of the National Policy Institute, a white nationalist group with a strong anti-Semitic beliefs.

“We willed Donald Trump into office; we made this dream our reality,” NPI President Richard Spencer said. After outlining a vision of America as “a white country designed for ourselves and our posterity,” he closed with, “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory!”

DIVISION BREEDS CONFRONTATION

Though Trump’s election victory was driven by white voters, his performance even among that group was not as strong as some of his predecessors. Reagan and George H.W. Bush both won the presidency with higher shares of the white vote than the 55 percent that Trump achieved.

The historical voting patterns reflect decades of polarization in American politics, but the division surrounding Trump appears more profound, says Cas Mudde, an associate professor specializing in political extremism at the University of Georgia. These days, he adds, “people say they don’t want their children even to date someone from the other party.”

Indeed, voters’ opinions of those on the opposite side of the partisan divide have reached historic lows. Surveys by the Pew Research Center showed this year that majorities of both parties held “very unfavorable” views of the other party – a first since the center first measured such sentiment in 1992.

And the lion’s share of those people believe the opposing party’s policies “are so misguided that they threaten the nation’s well-being,” the center found.

That level of division has spurred activists on both sides of the political divide to take their activism in a more confrontational direction.

In the wake of Trump’s victory, protesters on the left took to the streets by the thousands in cities across the country, in some cases causing property damage.

Much of the agitation was motivated by a belief that Trump’s administration will foster racism and push the courts and other political institutions to disenfranchise minority voters, says James Anderson, editor of ItsGoingDown.Org, an anarchist website that has promoted mass demonstrations against Trump’s presidency, including a call to disrupt his inauguration.

Many on the left have come to distrust government institutions, embracing a breed of activism aimed at directly confronting what they see as condemnable political forces, Anderson says. “The answer now is to organize, build power and autonomy and fight back.”

On the opposite end of the political spectrum, Trump’s election is bringing new hope for right-wing activists who felt abandoned by the major parties.

John Roberts, a top officer in the Ku Klux Klan affiliate planning the December rally to celebrate Trump’s election, says the group is committed to non-violent demonstrations, but he sees Trump’s election as likely to bring a new era of political conflict. And much of the strife, he says, will be centered around racial divisions.

“Once Trump officially takes office, there is going to be a boiling over at some point in time,” Roberts says. “Who knows when that’s going to be, but it’s not going to be pretty.”

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Yo Django,

I know these kinds of headlines gets you off.. because I don't see you posting any in Trump's favor. Like Chief, DG, Kari and others, this is an old argument that goes back more recently to the Bush-Gore election when Gore got more of the popular votes. This is simply a way for people to argue that Trump did not gain the popular vote and therefore does not have the mandate to govern. But, in case you did not know, in the US, the winner of the national elections is the one that gets 270 of the electoral votes. Trump did get it. 

As much as we do not like Trump, nor did I vote for him, I take some small comfort in his changing position on some key issues (not prosecuting Clinton, Obamacare, hiring Haley, meeting with Democrats, etc). I hope he continues in this trend. We have to see what he does in office. I am know a lot of what he says will come down to negotiating and compromise to win over the other side. Unlike you, I am not yet in panic mode.

Regarding the low minority turnout and support for him...so what. During the campaign, he was predicted to have less that what he got (1% African Americans for example). He has a chance to build on this coalition.

Speaking of coalition, the PNC/AFC has a 1% lead...does that give Granger the mandate (even now we know that the AFC is "dead meat")? Surely, if Granger can attract a multiracial support we will give him the credit...but we are not so confident will all of this change taking place...with all the military people running the government.

So you bannas need to chill and wait and see...and stop with the hysteria. I could be totally wrong here but we cant let hatred overcome rationality. We all want the best for America

 

V

Vish,i am not in panic mode,for all the years i reside in the ole USA starting from Clinton second term,my family and i work and pay our bills with out gov't handouts, still holding on to few real estate assets [2 residental and 1 commercial] with reduced income from my small business starting from Bush term,regardless of which party rules i still have to do what i got to do.I am not alone many small business owners that i had conversation with, have faced some tough times and the banks are not assisting,hopefully we will see some change.

My concern was some of his drastic ideas,i have noticed he has mellowed and that is good for the Nation.

Django

For all the lies told against Trump, it's surprising he got that much.

Trump spoke to his middle White working class and to Blacks and Hispanics.  The White working class supported him in droves and he won.  Others now need to come on board.  Trump will do something for special Blacks.

If Black chose to throw their lot behind those who just want their votes, them they can have fun!

FM

Vish Maha bir

TRUMP made some very very wild and threatening  statements during the campaign .  As you correctly stated  he has now acted differently from what he was screaming . 

As of now I am yet to see that he made any overture to HIspanics and Muslims, two groups he relentlessly  targeted with unwanted attacks. in the same breath I must say since the elections I did not hear him uttering the term "I slamic Terrorist:

I am not sure about the statement " Panic Mode" , but trust me folks has many reasons to be concerned.

Chief
Prashad posted:

African Americans are being used by the Democratic party. It is time that they come home to their party. The party of Lincoln.

And poor whites are being used by the GOP.  Look at the South. So faithfully loyal to the GOP and yet so poor.

Now the GOP attempts to win elections by running against blacks, attempt to suppress their votes, and demonizing them as welfare scroungers and criminals.

So why then should blacks support the GOP.  Did you suggest that Indians support Forbes Burnham?

FM
caribny posted:
Prashad posted:

African Americans are being used by the Democratic party. It is time that they come home to their party. The party of Lincoln.

And poor whites are being used by the GOP.  Look at the South. So faithfully loyal to the GOP and yet so poor.

Now the GOP attempts to win elections by running against blacks, attempt to suppress their votes, and demonizing them as welfare scroungers and criminals.

So why then should blacks support the GOP.  Did you suggest that Indians support Forbes Burnham?

This is why we got Trump.  Now he will address the issues of the Inner City and the forgotten people of the USA!

Forbes Burnham piloted an Apartheid regime against Indians however, some of the initiatives by LFSB (eg FCH) did benefit Indian farmers and I always admitted this.  Had the regime not been so racist anti-Indian, who knows!

FM
ba$eman posted:
 
 

This is why we got Trump.  Now he will address the issues of the Inner City and the forgotten people of the USA!

Forbes Burnham piloted an Apartheid regime against Indians however, some of the initiatives by LFSB (eg FCH) did benefit Indian farmers and I always admitted this.  Had the regime not been so racist anti-Indian, who knows!

You conveniently left out that most of Burnham's socialism was approved unconditionally by Cheddi. Was it not Cheddi who insisted that Burnham should nationalize Bookers?

It was Cheddi's Communism that caused many Indians to start moving their wealth overseas. Burnham's socialism came afterwards and gave it some momentum plus the brain drain. Anyway, many Indians became very rich under Burnham's regime. No?

 

Mitwah

Boys, pack up alyuh tents and go home, party over, Hillary lost, Trump won.

Most of the popular lead has to do with California, stop wasting your time.

Ms Stein is on a crusade to fatten her coffers and on a guilt trip as the swing states where Hillary lost, her party pulled away crucial votes.  However, baseman is very thankful to Ms Stein for participating in the elections!

HAIL TRUMP!

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×