> Democrats? They remain obsessed with cultural issues. I fully understand why transgender bathrooms are important, but I also understand why progressives’ obsession with prioritizing cultural issues infuriates many Americans whose chief concerns are economic.

I'm sorry, but this cuts both ways.

The Republican primary issues are social as well. Is the author forgetting that GWB won in 2004 on the back of marriage discrimination amendments in key battleground states like Ohio to entice Republican voter turnout?

I don't believe the shrewd Republican politicians at the top care about social issues anymore than the top Democrats care about reigning in Wall Street. But that is definitely how they energize their base for voter turnout. Meaning, it's what the voters care about.

And this was the nastiest election I've seen in my lifetime by far for baiting with all those buzzwords the left is being derided for using now. But if the shoe fits. No, I don't believe all Trump voters are racists, bigots, or xenophobes. But I do believe there is a line in the sand when it comes to respect and dignity for all Americans, and Trump didn't just step over it, he flew his private jet across it. I don't even believe Trump really meant all of what he siad, but he played his base like a fiddle.

If social issues aren't what's really important, and it's economic issues that won, then they could have had a sweeping landslide victory by adopting a more inclusive platform that didn't promise to stack the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v Wade and Obergefell v Hodges. One that didn't promise to undo all transgender protection executive orders. One that didn't suggest a registry for all Muslims and to ban refugees. One that didn't run on building a wall to keep out immigrants. He could have nominated a VP that didn't believe in conversion therapy for gay teens, one that didn't enact the gay version of Jim Crow laws in Indiana.

If they had stuck to the economic issues: oppose trade agreements that only benefit the rich, give tax cuts primarily to the working class, provide good-paying infrastructure jobs, etc ... they would have won 'bigly.' I would have loved to vote against Clinton for such an economy-first party. As would most of the disenfranchised Bernie Sanders voters.

But I can't do that when these social wedge issues directly affect my own life (he's talking about overturning my marriage) and that of my friends in the transgender community. Basic fairness and equality is much more important to me than my paycheck size.

I'm sorry to play this card, but I think it's really easy when white, middle and upper class, cisgendered heterosexuals call for inclusivity and finding common ground with these social regressives. They have no basic rights to fear losing. The worst they're going to suffer is increased pollution (won't affect them in their lifetime anyway); but hey, those tax breaks sound nice, right? I'm not saying their economic concerns are unimportant. But don't ask the victims having their rights stripped away and peeled back to reach out and find common ground with the people trying to take them away. We're essentially being told now, "look, I know the Klan has some bad ideas around African Americans and gays, but what's really important to them are blue collar jobs. So can you please stop calling them racists and bridge the divide, LGBTs and people of color?" -- and my answer is no, sorry. I can't do that.