A Daily Mail editorial from the Charleston Gazette-Mail
CHARLESTON, W.Va. — There’s been much said about the differences between the people who voted for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and those who voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton.
To a general extent, but not exclusively, more populous and more diverse areas of the country went for Clinton, while more rural areas with less diverse populations voted for Trump.
Pundits like to generalize. Better-educated and white-collar people voted for Clinton, while less-educated and blue-collar workers generally voted for Trump. Forward-thinking people voted for Clinton. Angry people voted for Trump, they theorize.
But few seem to be considering another factor that’s both cultural and economic: Call it the producers versus the consumers.
Looking at the map of which states went for which candidate, it is clear that, generally speaking (with some exceptions), more populous areas went with Clinton. The populations of those states, it could be argued, are mostly consumers who have little connection or understanding to where the food they eat or the energy they burn comes from.
Yet the people in the red states are more likely to be the farmers, the ranchers, the growers — or to be connected with someone who is — and have better understanding of the time, the effort, the care, the expense, the danger and the reward of producing food.
The same can be said for energy. The people in the red states are more likely to be coal miners, oil and gas field workers, tanker truck drivers, pipeline workers, and others who toil and sweat in producing and delivering mass volumes of energy the consuming states need to power their iPhones, air conditioners and vehicles.
They feel the burdens of new regulation and higher costs imposed by nonconnected government bureaucrats and well-intentioned Democratic officials.
While many of this consuming class don’t understand why so many Americans would vote for the highly flawed and controversial Trump, so many of the producing class don’t understand why the Democratic Party wants to keep growing government and keep adding rules to their work.
The chasm of understanding between the producers and the consumers won’t lessen on its own. To promote understanding among nations, many schools and universities exchange students. It’s are a great way to increase communication and build understanding among different cultures.
Perhaps its time to consider cultural and economic exchange programs in our own country — sending city folk to the country and vice versa — to help us all better understand the challenges and issues differing people face.
