splitting hairs wrote:
PS: T probably got way more than 47%. Way more.
There's simply no reason to think this: There's no evidence to support it. In fact, by some measures he did very well--significantly better than expected--to hit even this percentage.
People aren't that dumb to vote against their best interests. 50 cent got it.
People vote against (what *we* perceive as) their best interests quite frequently. In fact at the beginning of this millennium a book explored that concept in depth: "What's the Matter with Kansas?"
Voting against one's best interests is sometimes called voting on principle. When an elite votes for a candidate or policy that will hurt him-/herself economically, that's generally lauded as noble; when a working-class or middle class person votes that way (in the process, likely causing more real pain for oneself than when the elite does so), that's generally derided as dumb.
Maybe we should give *everyone* credit for
a) potentially having different ideas about what is *truly* in their best interests than we have, and
b) being principled and honorable enough to try to do what they perceive as the right thing, even if it seems to be be against (what we see as) their best interests.