Much of the analysis after the presidential election focused on the role of economics in the decision to vote for Mr. Trump, despite the plain bigotry and religious hostility on display by both the candidate and his supporters throughout the campaign .
That narrative— economic hardship, and what has been charitably described as Trump’s ‘populist’ message— was repeated for months after the election, even as evidence mounted that it never was really the case:
Our analysis shows Trump accelerated a realignment in the electorate around racism, across several different measures of racial animus—and that it helped him win. By contrast, we found little evidence to suggest individual economic distress benefited Trump. The American political system is sorting so that racial progressivism and economic progressivism are aligned in the Democratic Party and racial conservatism and economic conservatism are aligned in the Republican Party.
Today, the Washington Post produced the results of a survey conducted with the Kaiser Family Foundation that expose the ‘economic anxiety’ narrative as the explanation for why voters pulled the lever for Trump as mostly a comforting myth:
… popular explanations of the rural-urban divide appear to overstate the influence of declining economic outcomes in driving rural America’s support for Trump. The survey responses, along with follow-up interviews and focus groups in rural Ohio, bring into view a portrait of a split that is tied more to social identity than to economic experience…
… when asked about their personal situations, rural residents described financial experiences that largely mirror those of urban respondents. The share of people who report experiencing severe economic hardship is roughly equal in urban and rural America: About 1 in 5 say there was a time in the past year when they couldn’t pay their bills. Similarly, about 1 in 5 in both areas say they rely on the federal government at least a fair amount to get by.
The alternative explanation for the decision of adults to cast their vote for Trump is that they were well-informed, well-aware of his statements, and they simply share his worldview:
Alongside a strong rural social identity, the survey shows that disagreements between rural and urban America ultimately center on fairness: Who wins and loses in the new American economy, who deserves the most help in society and whether the federal government shows preferential treatment to certain types of people. President Trump’s contentious, anti-immigrant rhetoric, for example, touched on many of the frustrations felt most acutely by rural Americans.
To overlook the rampant bigotry, and the appeals to xenophobia of trump’s campaign, and instead hold onto the assumption that ‘economic populism’ was the basis of his support among the GOP rank and file, requires skipping the most straightforward account, and setting aside some gaping logical flaw— like constructing convoluted rationales for why an obviously corrupt and depraved billionaire might appeal to the struggling masses of the heartland with their proud traditional values:
We, as a culture, have to stop infantilizing and deifying rural and white working-class Americans. Their experience is not more of a real American experience than anyone else’s, but when we say that it is, we give people a pass from seeing and understanding more of their country. More Americans need to see more of the United States. They need to shake hands with a Muslim, or talk soccer with a middle aged lesbian, or attend a lecture by a female business executive.
We must start asking all Americans to be their better selves. We must all understand that America is a melting pot and that none of us has a more authentic American experience.
If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man accused of violating the Fair Housing Act by refusing to rent apartments to black people. If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man who called Mexicans rapists, drug dealers and criminals. If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man who called for a complete ban on Muslim immigration. (emphasis added)
To contend that Trump’s voters didn’t share his views, or celebrate his rhetoric, not only ignores the clearest evidence of the campaign and their vote, in fact treats them as myopic children, lacking in the same capacity to evaluate what was said, form judgments, and make choices as adults, with all the moral responsibilities that connotes.
But Trump voters do make these judgments, whether we care to take them seriously as adults, and all that implies, or not:
“Being from a rural area, everyone looks out for each other,” said Ryan Lawson, who grew up in northern Wisconsin. “People, in my experience, in cities are not as compassionate toward their neighbor as people in rural parts.”
*****
Rural residents are nearly three times as likely (42 percent) as people in cities (16 percent) to say that immigrants are a burden on the country.
“They’re not paying taxes like Americans are. They’re getting stuff handed to them,” said Larry E. Redding, a retired canning factory employee in Arendtsville, Pa. “Free rent, and they’re driving better vehicles than I’m driving and everything else.”
The unsettling reality is that Mr. Trump was not some aberration in white American culture, any more than he is an outlier among the GOP. Bigotry and xenophobia are at the heart of ‘traditional white culture’.