It goes without saying how frequently pundits claimed Trump’s rhetoric would lessen his share of the minority vote while boosting his support among whites, particularly those without a college degree.
Many believed at the time that if Trump lost, it was because he dug a grave with minority voters that was too deep to climb out of — something any candidate for national office should avoid. And if he somehow won, it would be due to a mass outpouring of “hidden” white Trump voters whom the pollsters failed to pick up on beforehand.
Trump won, surprisingly, and the pollsters were wrong (more so in their Electoral College predictions than in the popular vote). However, the current exit poll data does not indicate that Trump’s victory is due to white voters coming out of the woodwork. It turns out that the president-elect was aided by minority support.
Despite Trump’s victory being dubbed a “white-lash,” exit polls show that Trump performed slightly worse among white voters than Romney did in 2012. He also did better than Romney among blacks, Latinos, and Asian Americans by 7, 8 and 11 points, respectively:
If Trump is such a racist as we have often been led to believe, especially by the millennial leftists, then how can this be?
If demographic voting data is any representation of a candidate’s connection to particular ethnic groups, what does that make Mitt Romney? Where’s the outrage directed toward him for performing even worse with minorities than Trump? Why is there no cyber-mob of Twitter warriors beating down the door of John McCain, who underperformed with blacks by 11 points to Trump? And what about George W. Bush in 2000? He must be about equally as racist as Trump, judging by the data above.
In regards to gender, exit polls show Trump won 42% of women, whereas John McCain won 43% eight years ago. Based on the massive uproar over Trump’s treatment and attitude towards women, one would think he would not do as well as he did. However, he edged out Clinton among white women. A mere one percentage point difference with women separates Trump and McCain, who had a female running mate. The numbers must reflect poorly on the Senator from Arizona, then right?
Apparently not. When confronted with this evidence of Trump’s performance among these key demographics in comparison to prior Republican nominees, critics have no comeback. This is what happens when people practice the art of manufactured outrage in the name of identity politics. Their measuring stick used to judge candidates is arbitrary. Their critiques are selected without regard to context.
For those who still claim that Trump is bad for minorities and women, how do you explain that in light of the data above? You must either drag Romney, McCain, and Bush in the conversation or else refrain from the sensationalism and hyperbole of identity-oriented political dialogue. I would prefer the latter to be the norm moving forward.