The media elite, who have proven themselves to be hilariously wrong about everything in this election, are scrambling to come up with an explanation for how Donald Trump was elected to become the 45th President of the United States.  Everything about this carefully crafted election narrative has since fallen apart in the wake of what was an unimaginable Trump victory just weeks ago.
Journalists, politicians, and social media warriors everywhere are trying to make sense of such a spectacular failure on the part of the ruling class to control the outcome of this election, which was considered an easy victory for Clinton.  I, too, must admit that I never expected Trump to stand a chance against such a broad coalition of the 4th estate united for the singular purpose of denying Trump the presidency.
So how did we get here?
First, we must analyze the election narrative that existed PRIOR to Clinton’s stunning defeat at the hands of the most reviled character in modern American politics.¬† Indeed, many are still conforming to this narrative of “racism,” “bigotry,” and “misogyny” and “3rd parties” as an explanation for Trump’s victory.¬† Countless articles were written to this effect by journalists on both¬†the left¬†and¬†the right.¬† That Trump was anti-woman and therefore would do terrible among women was a foregone conclusion.¬† And yet, 42% of American women (including a¬†majority of white women), voted for Donald Trump. ¬† That amounts to 25 million women who were not convinced by the¬†media narrative that Trump hates women.¬† Do these women also hate women?¬† Are they less intelligent than the rest of us?¬† What could possibly explain how¬†25 million women¬†would vote for a woman-hating “misogynist?” ¬†If Sarah Palin or Barbara Bush were the Republican nominees, does anyone here seriously believe that Republicans would have stayed home and not voted Republican because they are all “sexist bigots?”
‚ÄúI‚Äôve never felt this way before, but it‚Äôs a scary time to be a woman” one¬†Democratic ad stated. ¬†‚ÄúWhat does this say about your party that this is your standard bearer?‚ÄĚ President¬†Obama asked Republicans. ‚ÄúThis isn’t a situation where you have an episodic gaffe. There has to be a point in which you say, ‚ÄėThis is not somebody I can support for president of the United States.‚Äô”
Biden said “They‚Äôre going to put y‚Äôall back in chains.‚ÄĚ
“He is der Fuhrer”¬†according to Bill Maher.
Who were they referring to?¬† Why of course, the misogynist, sexist, racist bigot, MITT ROMNEY.¬† You see, this same election narrative has already been sold twice before during the previous 2 election cycles. ¬†Racist,¬†bigoted,¬†anti-woman,¬†anti-immigrant, same plot, different cast of characters.¬† Republican voters, including millions of women, simply tuned this out as election noise —¬†more lies from the obviously biased media.¬† If the hyperbole and scaremongering were not true about McCain or Romney, why would it be true for Trump?¬† You can only¬†cry wolf so many times¬†before people stop believing in what you say — even if it is true.
Donald Trump won slightly more votes than Mitt Romney, but WHERE he won them tells the real story of this election. ¬†Take a look at this election map, and explain to me how millions of Obama voters magically became racist bigots in just 4 years.¬† Trump’s percentages, when compared side by side with Obama,¬†look about the same.¬† While Romney may have turned out the wealthier, educated, metropolitan elite Republican voters (Romney actually did better among whites than Trump) who have shunned the Donald, Trump won over the Obama demographic of working class whites which propelled him to victory in both 2008 and 2012.¬† Surprisingly,¬†Donald Trump did better with People of Color than Mitt Romney. Also, a¬†clear majority of American voters oppose building a wall, and 1/3 of Trump voters favor giving amnesty to illegal immigrants. This can’t be explained by racism and bigotry.¬† While that narrative might explain SOME Trump votes, it cannot possibly explain a Trump VICTORY.
And who, of all people, did the Democratic Party conspire to run against the populist demagogue?¬† Of course, the face of the¬†Washington DC political insider¬†establishment.¬† The globalist,¬†warmongering,¬†status quo, Wall Street “safe pick,” Hillary Rodham Clinton.¬† She represents everything that is wrong with American politics, from the¬†primary shenanigans¬†against her Democratic opponent (who would have easily beat Trump by the way) to her callous disregard and contempt for half of the US population who she wrote off as “a basket of deplorables‘.” ¬†Hillary Clinton made no serious attempt to reach out to disaffected voters turned off by her¬†smug and pretentious¬†expectation of their votes, and instead opted to¬†shame and ridicule anyone who did not toe the party line.
Indeed, the campaign felt ENTITLED to these women, minority,¬†3rd party, and working class votes by virtue of not being Trump.¬† Instead of doing something substantive (rather than meaningless and symbolic changes¬†to the Democratic Party platform) to counter this perception of¬†corruption,¬†dishonesty, and¬†elitism, her political machine felt safe and secure upon their politically correct¬†high moral perch¬†looking down upon the proles who they expected to fall in line for Clinton’s inevitable victory.¬† Instead, the opposite happened.¬† Her message of “Trump is evil, therefore you MUST vote for me, or else…” failed to resonate with¬†8 million Democratic voters¬†who turned out for President Obama on election day, but chose not to show up for Clinton’s “historic election.” ¬†They said the same thing that the Democratic Party and Washington DC elite insiders have been saying to them for decades now.¬† They said “NO!”
I have a bold suggestion which might seem shocking to most: ¬†the election narrative was simply wrong.¬† Empty rhetoric and politically correct speech were not the deciding issues in this election.¬† Hillary was not the “obvious choice” to millions of Americans in this election.¬† Many were unable to perceive what exactly it was that¬†Hillary had to offer them as an alternative.¬† Indeed, her own campaign¬†struggled to define¬†what her message was, aside from being “not Trump.” ¬†The “I’m not Trump” message didn’t fully resonate with latinos (an increasingly large share of the population), as¬†25% of them voted for Trump, and huge numbers flocked to 3rd parties.¬† Hillary also failed to turn out black voters and millennials (now the largest demographic) who also flocked to 3rd parties or stayed home on election day.¬† Perhaps most strikingly,¬†income was not a factor in Trump votes, which casts some doubt upon the theory of class voting. ¬†All of this suggests that the problem isn’t that Americans are becoming more racist or more sexist, it’s that the election narratives are simply wrong.¬† Republicans voted Republican, Democrats voted Democrat, and everyone else stayed home or voted 3rd party, disgusted by the choices presented to them in this election.
The one obvious explanation which every journalist seems to ignore is that Trump won this election because he was running against Hillary Clinton.  THAT is the cold, hard, truth that many are simply unwilling to accept.  Hillary Clinton was not the better candidate and the evidence speaks for itself.  President Obama would not have lost to Donald Trump.  Bernie Sanders would not have lost to Donald Trump.  Tulsi Gabbard would not have lost to Donald Trump.  This election was a referendum on the countries elites and the lapdog media, and their pompous privilege of telling us who we must vote for.  Which is sad, because, like Obama, Trump seems to be welcoming DC insiders into his administration with open arms.
The real questions remain: will the Democratic Party learn from their mistakes or keep repeating them?  More importantly, will the establishment media, tasked with reporting the facts and keeping the electorate informed, ever be able to recover their credibility with the American people, or will they continue to blame others for their failures?  Only time will tell.