You replied to a comment about how Tom Brokaw literally said on national TV that Trump voters were uneducated racist rednecks that watch Duck Dynasty. In that reply, you defended his position. That's where I'm getting it from.

Was there more to his quote than what you wrote above?

I've seen both shows, and it seems to me like he's saying this election was more about rural/middle America that it was about urban/coastal America, just based on the typical viewers of the shows.

To me, being from a rural area doesn't mean you're racist, or uneducated - even if you don't have a degree, there are plenty of other ways to learn, and also plenty of useful things to learn that aren't taught in any college.

But - I'm Canada, not the U.S., so although I get a ton of exposure to U.S. media up here, it's definitely possible I'm lacking some important bits of context that would help me understand better.

Well, as a liberal, educated white chick who lives in an urban area, if I said someone was more into Duck Dynasty than SNL, it would absolutely be an insult. It would imply they are hick rednecks, and in a bad way.

Did he actually call them rednecks? Do you have a link to that? That sounds like an unprofessional thing for a journalist to say. Level of education is a straightforward fact in the makeup of Trump's voters, and that his views are racist is demonstrable. But if Brokaw really used a slur, he shouldn't have.

I think you're misusing the term "literally".