There are many reasons to be good, arguably it can be stated that it is the most important reason we are on this planet. Really, what does it cost us? A smile here, an acknowledgement there, we create a fragile bond of goodness that uplifts us all. When we work in a field of service and we also are good we are wonderful beings. But really, no matter what the job, if we perform it well and we share with others and we smile and exhibit joy – it’s just about being good.
Politicians on the other hand, have decided the only way to be is very bad. Scoff at your opponent, not study not present policy in a heartfelt debate. Really, all this Trump and Clinton – it is not about making promises to break, but being good. That is why someone like Bernie can zoom to so much positive name recognition because he is being good. Bernie discussed policy and didn’t make false promises. That is why in a few months he was able to go from nearly no name recognition to highly regarded.
“Clinton famously didn’t campaign in Wisconsin at all, and Michigan only at the last minute. When she did, Grossmann notes, her campaign didn’t put out a Michigan-specific ad, and instead used the same ads they were running nationally. This was a departure from Obama, who deployed ads in the state touting his rescue of the automotive industry, and slamming Romney as an out-of-touch rich guy who would let Detroit go under.
In a highly polarized environment, and an election between two of the most widely detested candidates in history, it’s debatable how many votes Clinton might have swung with a policy emphasis. But given the margins, likely enough.
Research shows overwhelming evidence that the Trump vote was more highly correlated with racial attitudes than economic issues, to a degree not seen in recent elections. That may be because the electorate itself has become more racially polarized, or it could be the race-baiting campaign Trump ran.
But it could also be that in past elections, this racial polarization was counteracted by economics. Democrats once gave white working class voters, who may be otherwise receptive to Build the Wall rhetoric, other reasons to vote Democrat: support for unions, support for strong social safety nets, suspicion of big business.
Maybe Clinton, being a rich person who gave paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, wasn’t a plausible messenger for this. But as Axelrod would say, it’s hard to look less plausible than a man who lives in a gold plated Manhattan penthouse. Clinton managed to do so, by giving voters numerous reasons not to vote for him, but few reasons to vote for her.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/08/dissecting-2016-us-election-missing-key-lessons