> You're lumping one group of people (people who's earing ability is diminishing over time) in with a different one (non-Clinton voters) and making the two a 1:1 correlation. That's incorrect.
No, because the damage I'm referring to has been done over decades, due to support for the Republican policies, foreign and domestic, and at the state and federal level.
>Also, flip it around and it works equally on the other side: 'it is very difficult to be sympathetic to the very people who's intellectualism and morality policing have caused so much damage to rural areas and the working classes'.
Except that makes no sense at all - it's dissembly.
Intellectualism has not hurt the rural demographic, while their refutation of it certainly has.
And, it's laughable to suggest that they have been hurt by morality policing. Moreover, the bulk of the actual, legislated morality policing has come from the right, and is being driven by the hate and intolerance of, you guessed it, those same voters.