Virginia Study Finds Increased School Bullying in Areas That Voted for Trump


From NPR: “After the 2016 presidential election, teachers across the country reported they were seeing increased name-calling and bullying in their classrooms. Now, research shows that those stories—at least in one state—are confirmed by student surveys.

Francis Huang of the University of Missouri and Dewey Cornell of the University of Virginia used data from a school climate survey taken by over 150,000 students across Virginia. They looked at student responses to questions about bullying and teasing from 2015 and 2017. […]

Seventh- and eighth-graders in areas that favored Trump reported bullying rates in spring 2017 that were 18 percent higher than students living in areas that went for Clinton. They were also 9 percent more likely to report that kids at their schools were teased because of their race or ethnicity.

In the 2015 data, there were ‘no meaningful differences’ in those findings across communities, the researchers wrote. […]

‘Anybody that’s in the schools is picking up on this,’ [University of Florida psychology professor Dorothy Espelage] says. ‘You don’t have to be a psychologist or a sociologist to understand that if these conversations are happening on the TV and at the dinner table that these kids will take this perspective and they’re going to play out in the schools.’

nationally representative survey conducted in the fall of 2017 showed that just 14 percent of 9- to 11-year-olds believe that the country’s leaders model how to treat others with kindness—and 70 percent said it would help kids their age to be kinder if adults in charge of the country set a better example.”

Article →


  1. All corporate news has always been fake, so the whole “fake news” meme is beside the point. To me this is just more liberals in denial about why their deceptive and corrupt agenda was rejected. They need a scapegoat for when the Russia hoax finally falls flat.

    This doesn’t mean that I “support” Trump any more than I do the rest, but I do see him as less dangerous. Partially because so far he’s killed far less people than Bush/Obama/ Clinton(s). But I think also he’s a decent wrench in the neoliberal/neoconservative works, partially by being so blatant when they want him to whisper and use buzzwords. But he’s a rogue billionaire from what I can see, not one of the old boy network, and without as much power as the more corporate billionaires and their politicians despite his bluster and the “progressive” hysteria about him being the antichrist or whatever. It helps us when we can play them off against one another, but so far no one seems to realize that this is the time for truly “progressive” people to make a move beyond the hypocritical posturings of liberal Democrats and other corporate flunkies, i.e. when they’re semi-paralyzed by all the craziness. But since “progressives” generally don’t have a revolutionary bone in their bodies, this never seems to cross their minds.

    Report comment

  2. Sounds like this guy cherrypicked literature looking for proof of his theory, but no doubt, all the “adults in charge of the country” should “set a better example.” I’m pretty certain many people, of all ages, were rather appalled by the filth and divisiveness on both sides of the 2016 elections.

    Report comment