The 2016 Election (Part One): What happened and what didn’t

By now (2+ weeks after the cataclysm) every political tendency to the left of the tea-party has had a go at explaining what happened, or perhaps more accurately, who or what is to blame. From the diehard Hillary supporters (it was the Bernie bros) to the establishment media and many of the liberal Democrats, they pontificate, but often without paying much attention to what actually happened. So it might be a good idea to start by clarifying what did and what didn’t happen.

The Republicans did not win this election. Their candidate (I have a hard time even mentioning his name) lost the popular vote by approximately 2 million votes. I know, I know – that’s not what counts, but it goes a long way to indicate that there is NO mandate. Further, the Republicans lost seats in both the US House and Senate and several top offices in their tea-party model state government (North Carolina). That’s not what is supposed to happen when you “win” a Presidential election.

The Democrats lost the election. They failed to capitalize on the legacy of a fairly popular President and the restoration of economic prosperity (at least for some), certainly when compared to the last year of the Bush II Presidency. They failed to win back the Senate, despite very favorable conditions and strong candidates. And they continued to cede control of state governments to the Republicans. It’s a fact that not since 1928 has the Democratic Party been shut out of power to the extent it will be in 2017.

The election did not result from a right-wing tsunami or significant rise in racism. Trump’s candidacy simply brought out the reactionary right in large numbers just as Clinton’s candidacy did not bring out the Democratic Party’s constituencies, despite a truly massive ground game. Her candidacy simply didn’t inspire many voters; his did. It is hard to attribute the vote for Trump to a rise in white racism, when he carried many areas that voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012. Yes, Trump (along with Faux News, Breitbart and others) brought the overt racists out of the closet and they are deplorable (thanks, Hillary), but they hardly represent the majority of Trump’s voters.

The election did reveal that the US is essentially two countries – the Northeast and West Coast (including several urban centers in between) and the rest of the country. Clinton won the first, Trump the other. This should come as no surprise, but apparently the media and the liberal establishment have been wearing azure-colored glasses. What is it that differentiates these two countries that might account both for the political divergence and for the failure of liberals to see clearly what was right in front of their eyes? Maybe this is where we need to look to find answers to "our Brexit".