作者：Renn
鏈接：https://www.zhihu.com/question/52496216/answer/130789544
來源：知乎
著作權歸作者所有。商業轉載請聯係作者獲得授權，非商業轉載請注明出處。
可以直接登錄Quora閱讀，不需要翻牆。翻譯持續放出ing
How did Donald Trump win the 2016 US Presidential Election?
正文:
Trump won thanks to the Democrats. So if that was your party, you have them to blame.
特朗普大獲全勝，得多虧民主黨的助攻。
如果你是民主黨人，這鍋得你們的黨背。
As a preface, I am writing this from a neutral, objective standpoint.
開頭申明，我的這篇文字立場相當理客中的。
(感謝李雲卿 - 知乎同誌的提醒，譯者特此申明: 我的譯文是相對不理客中的，如果有意見.................................................自己憋著，就醬紫，哈哈)
Let’s start with the key factor here. It’s summed up in one slogan:
先提一個關鍵點。
下麵這張圖，一圖可以蔽之
"The silent majority stands with Trump."
“支持特朗普的是沉默多數”
Remember this quote on those signs being held by his supporters? It served as both a slogan, and, as we have found out…
特朗普支持者手舉的這張牌子上，引用了一句話，還記得嗎？
這既是一句口號，也是這個問題的答案。
It was a warning.
它是一聲警鍾
A warning that went completely unheeded by every major news outlet. They laughed it off.
可在主流媒體上，這句警告卻全無蹤影，對這些(底層呼聲)，他們隻會放聲嘲笑。
“That’s great kids, but Clinton has the vocal majority, good game.”
”不錯喲。可是克林頓掌握了能發出聲音的大多數，躺贏!”
(因為有評論在批評“good game"的翻譯，這裏解釋下。"GOOD GAME"有形勢一片大好，比賽局麵優勢明顯的意思。套用一下網絡流行語，就是“躺贏”啦)
And yet the election results prove that the slogan was indeed true. A huge silent majority overwhelmed the predicted polling outcome.
選舉結果卻確鑿地證明，那句標語所反映的情況，其實是無可辯駁的事實。沉默的大多數，最終用選票壓倒了先前一個個民意調查。
Why was this the key factor?
And why were the polls so radically off?
原來這才是本次選舉的關鍵因素?
原來這些民意調查其實已偏離事實，錯得如此離譜?
為什麽?
For starters, the Democrats made a terrible assumption, one that hadn’t caused them any trouble up until now:
首先，民主黨人先入為主，預設了立場。
這個假設立場變成了隱形地雷，一直拖到現在，終於爆發了
They assumed that states that historically voted blue would continue to do so.
他們自以為是，覺得隻要是傳統意義上的藍州，就會一如既往地把票投給民主黨。
And this is where it all goes down. Every polling prediction used this assumption as a starting point, taking them for granted. They focused heavily on battleground states, ignoring the possibility that their home base was susceptible to attack. They ignored the warning of a silent majority.
而這一點，成了他們栽倒的主要原因。所有的民意調查，都把這個預設立場當成理所當然。民主黨人也因此將注意力集中在搖擺州上。他們壓根沒有意識到，在共和黨的攻勢下，自己的大本營最後都會不堪一擊。“沉默大多數” 先前發出的警告，被他們直接無視了。
Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan have been blue 3for the past two decades. This election, each one flipped red, undermining the core of pundit predictions. It was precisely when this flip happened that everyone started panicking and Clinton’s odds of winning plummeted. The silent majority struck, and it struck hard.
過去二十年裏，威斯康辛州、賓尼法尼亞州和密西根州(三個藍州)一直把票投給民主黨，但本次選舉，他們卻打破了先前各種權威預測，全部反水，轉成一片通紅。正是從這三個州的跳反開始，所有人都跌破了眼鏡，克林頓的勝算也隨之渺茫。沉默的大多數完成了他們的反擊，一個耳光打得民主黨人金星亂閃。
But why were they silent up until now?
可是，那些人為什麽(不得不)沉默到此刻才爆發出來呢?
The Clinton campaign made it acceptable, trendy, and cool to hate Trump supporters
克林頓的競選宣傳，讓許多人以為，對特朗普支持者抱惡感，是一件炫酷、時髦、可以接受的事情。
The Clinton campaign colluded with major media news outlets (as evidenced from Wikileaks) and constantly pumped out negative videos of Trump while largely ignoring the constant scandals Hillary found herself in.
克林頓的競選團隊跟主流媒體串通在一起，源源不斷地翻出黑特朗普的各種視頻，而克林頓各種麻煩纏身的醜聞，很大程度上卻被忽視了。
In his speeches, Trump often made remarks of certain minority groups. These remarks usually included praise along side criticism, and he usually made sure to add that he didn’t mean to say that a minority group as a whole was to blame.
特朗普在他的演講中，經常對少數族裔評頭論足，有誇讚，也不乏批評。可是，他並非一概而論，每次講話提到這個話題時，他總要加上不偏不頗的幾句話，避免留下以偏概全、打倒一片的印象。
The news outlets pounced on this. It wasn’t hard, they just had to edit out or not show the parts where Trump explained himself. As a result, the people who actually attended his rallies saw perfectly reasonable statements, and those who didn’t only saw edited footage that showed him making racist and outlandish remarks with no clarification. On top of that, the edited footage was often spliced with cheering from his audience. Any reasonable person seeing a clip like that, without knowing it was edited, would rightly be horrified by both Trump and his supporters.
但媒體卻一股腦兒撲上去，對著特朗普大肆鞭撻。他們的手法其實也沒多複雜，隻需將特朗普自我辯解的部分剪去，或者幹脆不放出來。結果，參加特朗普集會的群眾，聽到的是理性的政治主張，而另些人隻看過經過刪減的視頻片段，他們就會覺得特朗普思維紊亂、出言不遜、種族歧視。剪輯者甚至添火加油地在視頻裏加上了集會群眾的喝彩聲，一個人但凡有些理性，接觸了這種視頻，自然而然會被特朗普和他的支持者駭破膽子。
And so a divide was created.
幾次三番，幾次三番，社會裂痕便被撕開了。
“Trump is racist and his supporters are racist” became the justification for hating Trump supporters. From that point on, any person who outed themselves as a Trump supporter while in a liberal circle could expect to get shamed. The better option was to stay silent.
“特朗普這個種族主義者，他的支持者也都是一丘之貉” ，痛恨特朗普支持者，於是便有了正當理由。從此以後，自由派圈子裏膽敢發聲支持特朗普的人，都會被羞辱一番。稍識時務的，唯有保持沉默。
The Clinton campaign didn’t stop there. They paid celebrities large sums of money to endorse Hillary, in an effort to reach a millennial base. They even paid many prominent YouTubers to endorse her, videos of which can be found right now (along with videos by YouTubers who called out that kind of play and refused).
克林頓的競選團隊卻並沒有就此收手。他們給名人大把大把塞錢，買通他們出麵支持希拉裏，以此攫取千禧一代的票源。甚至許多youtube博主也被收買，相關(證據)的視頻流傳出來，早已不再是秘密。
They made it seem like all the “cool kids” were supporting Hillary, and against the evil that was Trump. How does a Trump supporter argue against a pop culture icon telling everyone they are evil? Should probably stay silent instead.
他們玩弄這種伎倆，搞得似乎所有的“酷小孩”都在支持希拉裏，都在挺身反對“惡魔”特朗普。 流行文化的標簽人物紛紛給大眾灌輸一個概念: “特朗普就是惡魔的化身”。特朗普的支持者，如何還能與之相抗，自我分辨? 他們隻能保持沉默。
With the mainstream media calling out Trump supporters as evil, celebrities saying the same, and even many universities deeming pro-Trump comments as “hate speech”, it’s not hard to see why the silent majority formed and became as potent as it was.
主流媒體將特朗普支持者抹黑成“惡魔”，社會名流則充當他們的傳聲筒，甚至許多大學也將親特朗普的言論稱之為“仇恨言論”。不難看出，沉默的大多數為什麽會沉默，但爆發出的潛力又是如此驚人!
The Democrats tried to show that passing judgment on groups of people as a whole was bigoted. And yet that’s exactly what they did by lumping all Trump supporters into a “basket of deplorables”.
民主黨人試圖傳遞這種理念: 將一個群體打上一個整體標簽的行為，是一種偏執的成見。可是對待特朗普支持者，他們卻把這些人全部丟入“basket of deplorables”(可鄙者聯盟?)的範疇裏，這難道不是在挖坑把自己埋了嗎?
That irony was not lost on the silent majority.
“沉默的多數”身上，一再地被上演這種十足反諷的行徑。
The DNC collusion against Bernie Sanders created “Bernie bros”
沆瀣一氣的民主黨人，為反對伯尼·桑德斯，創造出“伯尼兄弟會”這樣的詞匯。
It’s well known now that the Democratic primary was not fairly fought. Bernie Sanders was backstabbed by the very party he was representing, due to its higher financial and political interest in a Clinton presidency. Yet Bernie’s message touched the hearts of many who sought to overthrow the establishment and the system that Clinton represented. When he was betrayed by the DNC, many of his supporters refused to back Clinton, the one who unfairly robbed the man they put their faith in of a fair fight.They saw in Bernie an outsider who would bring change to the system, and who else was a populist icon who also wanted to bring down the establishment?
民主黨初選中的種種不公，現在已不是什麽秘密。民主黨的政治利益和經濟利益被捆綁在希拉裏·克林頓總統選舉的戰車上，結果伯尼·桑德斯被自己的政黨在背後捅了刀子。伯尼在大選中的政治主張，打動了很多人，尤其那些希望推翻建製派統治的人。 當桑德斯遭受民主黨背叛時，許多信仰桑德斯政治主張的支持者，親眼見證了他被剝奪公平競爭的機會，自然不會再去支持希拉裏·克林頓。桑德斯這樣的局外人，曾被視作改變體製的希望。聯想一下是不是有另一個誰，也被大眾視作扳倒建製派的標誌性人物?
You guessed it.
猜到了吧?
Well… you can’t really announce out loud that you were for Bernie and now for Trump. See the point above.
當然……你不可能當眾宣布，稱自己從前支持桑德斯，現在轉投特朗普。讀讀上文就明白為什麽。
The silent majority grew even more.
結果，沉默的人數又增多了。
Legitimate issues went unaddressed by Clinton
大眾如此合理的訴求，克林頓卻一直漠視
Trump wanted to “Make America Great Again”. How was he going to do this? We still don’t know, but it does involve a lot of winning apparently.
特朗普希望“美國偉大複興”。怎麽做? 誰心裏都沒譜。但是很明顯，這句口號給他贏得很多支持。
But note the starting point. “Making it great again” recognizes that it currently is not. His platform was based around acknowledging that America had problems while under eight years of Democrat rule.
記得文章開頭嗎? “美國的偉大複興”這句口號，其實暗中包含著”美國當下現狀令人相當不滿意”的含義。他的種種政治主張，都有一個前提，即美國這八年，在民主黨的治理下，各種問題是層出不窮。
America is suffering. Unemployment is high, and worse, the government is trying to distort statistics to show otherwise, in the hopes of winning another election cycle. Trump identified areas where it was affecting the core bulk of Americans, such as job outsourcing. Did it even matter if he didn’t have a concrete plan? Just saying the problem exists alone let those infuriated by the current system feel that their voices were being heard. “Make America Great Again”, while vague in its means, was nevertheless inspirational in its promised end.
What did the Democrats do to counter this? Remember this attempt?
美國國內形勢每況愈下。失業率高企不下，且有愈演愈惡化的趨勢。本屆政府卻扭曲數據,試圖用這些伎倆掩蓋現狀，贏得本輪選舉。但本屆大選中，特朗普成功鎖定了包括了工作外包在內的多項議題，這些議題涉及麵之廣，直接到影響到美國人中的核心主體。就算特朗普提不出一個具體的方案去解決問題，那又有什麽關係？他隻需戳破真相，將問題原原本本地攤出來，對製度體係早就憤懣不滿的群眾們，當然就覺得特朗普說到了他們的心坎裏，把他們的心聲給講了出來。“美國的偉大複興”，也許沒有什麽具體含義，卻至少可以鼓舞人心！
What did the Democrats do to counter this? Remember this attempt?
在這滔滔民意麵前，民主黨人卻硬要去觸逆鱗。 記得下麵這玩意嘛？
(圖片) 標語："美國已經很棒噠"
“MAGA” was reaching out to those who felt their concerns were being ignored by the party that had ruled for the past two terms. It showed that their problems were being acknowledged, at the very least. And what voters saw in this attempted rebuttal, was the Democratic party once again sweeping their concerns under the rug, telling disillusioned members who had voted for them before that the country was already great and that no change was necessary.
民主黨已經執政兩屆。民眾的一些訴求卻一直被忽視， 而這時，“MAGA”運動（譯者注：Make America Great Again “美國的偉大複興” 特朗普的競選口號）卻給他們救場來了。在特朗普的競選運動中，這些人的訴求至少得到了正麵承認與回應。相比之下， 民主黨卻一直在掩耳盜鈴，給選民灌輸“美國已經足夠優秀，變革沒有必要”。結果，曾給民主黨投過票的選民，對他們也不敢再抱有任何幻想。
“Make America Great Again” resonated with those who wanted solutions.
對那些迫切希望解決問題的人，“美國偉大複興”的口號切實地契合了他們的訴求
Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign struggled for a while to come up with a good slogan. At first, they resorted to simple statements on her website, such as
“We cannot afford a Donald Trump presidency.”
於此同時，希拉裏·克林頓的競選團隊也在構思自己的競選口號，憋了好半天，才在她的網站上放出一個大招：
“特朗普當總統？咱玩不起！”
Not too inspirational. Who’s the one running the fear campaign now?
勵誌嗎？ 嗬嗬。要真說誰在煽動恐懼的話，希拉裏：
“我不是針對誰，我是說在座的各位，都是垃圾”
Then they shopped around some more, and ultimately settled on “I’m With Her”. This was used all the way through Election Day.
然後他們又兜兜兜轉半天，終於把標語定了下來：
“我與‘她’同在.”
這條標語一直用到了最後。
Not only did their indecisiveness on a catchy slogan hurt their marketplace exposure time (and people who work in branding will know this all too well) but the slogan itself was hardly inspirational to those with legitimate concerns. It simply oozed selfishness.
挑個朗朗上口的宣傳標語，他們也遲疑不決，這使得公關時間和媒體曝光度不足，推廣效果便大打折扣（品牌行業工作的人對此應該熟之甚稔)。對那些需要渠道發出合理訴求的選民來說，這樣的標語有啥子積極意義可言? 它流露的，隻有“人人為我”的自私觀念。
Voters saw Trump as: “MAGA, we have problems but I will fix them for you”
在選民眼裏，特朗普的形象：
“美國偉大複興：為了美國人民，雖然困難重重，也要一往無前”
While they saw Hillary as: “Be with me and help me become president. At least I’m not Trump. He’s racist. Me me me, it’s my turn.”
而希拉裏的形象：
“投票給我撒，讓我當總統呀！至少我沒特朗普那麽銼，他就是個種族主義者。投給我投給我投給我，（總統輪流做），今年輪到我”
[插一句：特朗普的群眾集會上，喊得最多的是“U.S.A”(也有Lock Her Up; Trump the Bitch)；
希拉裏的群眾集會上，喊得最多的，是“Hillary”]
One slogan was a rallying cry for all of America.
The other slogan was all about Hillary Clinton.
特朗普的口號，是美國公民的呼聲；
克林頓的口號，是在為自己的加冕之路鼓勁。
(高下立判)
And then we go to the debates.
下一個，到了辯論階段。
What did Trump keep on doing in the debates? He kept on highlighting the struggles of the blue-collar workers, even in blue states. Even during questions that had nothing to do with them, he kept on bringing the topic back to why jobs were becoming scarce, and what he would do (albeit vaguely) to fix it. Clinton’s platform was largely focused on still attacking his flaws and defending herself against her own baggage rather than acknowledging the suffering voters in the blue states that she thought were hers from the start.
三場辯論期間，特朗普在幹什麽？他一再地指出美國藍領工人此刻的掙紮困境，即使身處藍州（民主黨州）時，他也不停地在強調這一點。正式辯論中，即使是在不相幹的議題下，特朗普也屢屢向主持人和觀眾提起，為什麽工作崗位在流失，如何（雖然闡述得語焉不詳）將這些工作崗位帶回來。克林頓呢？她卯足了勁，一邊人身攻擊特朗普的個人缺點，一邊為自己的曆史汙點洗地。許多選民，甚至是藍州的選民，他們正苦苦掙紮的事實，希拉裏壓根沒打算去回應。
The silent majority of those states had other plans.
“沉默的多數”，他們心裏，自然另有想法。
The Emails + Wikileaks郵件+維基解密
I really wonder how Hillary will feel from now every time she opens an email browser and realize what her past actions cost her. The email scandal could have gone away had she told the truth about what it was that she deleted. But she didn’t.
我很好奇，現在希拉裏每次打開郵件瀏覽器時是啥表情？她有沒有意識到，因為這個錯誤的決定【國務卿任上，私設郵件服務器處理國務院事務（美國國務卿相當於中國外交部長）】，自己付出了多大代價？如果她當初就講出實情，將被刪除郵件的內容告知（國會與公眾），這件醜聞很快就會被人遺忘，但她卻沒有，她選擇了隱瞞和撒謊。
Supporters tried to say that they were insignificant. But if the contents were insignificant, why was she trying so desperately to hide them?
他的支持者試圖狡辯，稱這些都是小事，無足輕重。可要是真的無足輕重，她為什麽又要拚了老命掩藏呢？
（譯者注：
希拉裏刪除了39000件郵件，其中包括涉密郵件。在收到國會傳票後，她指示手下，以暴力方式，物理粉碎自己的私人通訊設備。
她的國會證詞，已被FBI局長證實，其中有偽證成分。
在美國，在法庭或國會裏，宣誓後作偽證是重罪。
當年時任總統比爾·克林頓在法庭上宣誓後，卻稱自己跟萊溫斯基沒有發生性關係。後來醜聞捅出時，因為做偽證(不是因為通奸)差點被國會彈劾）
And then there were the Wikileaks, every day pumping out more and more evidence about Clinton’s media collusion, her receiving debate questions ahead of time, proof of the DNC sabotaging Bernie, the questionable use of charity money, and basically verifying that accusations dismissed by the Clinton campaign as conspiracies were indeed true.
接下來，又來了維基泄密登場。維基泄密組織，每天都在網絡上發布海量信息和證據：克林頓跟媒體竄通、在辯論前私相授受辯論議題搞作弊、DNC暗中給桑德斯下絆子、(克林頓)慈善基金賬款的不當使用，以及克林頓拚命想撇清最終卻坐實的各種陰謀論。
While the mainstream media outlets refused to cover this, the silent majority were already committed to learning what they needed to further their conviction.
主流媒體雖然不肯報道這些消息，但“沉默的多數”卻決心挖出這些黑材料，這下，更證實了他們先前的推斷。
Liberals who were still with her tried to blow off the whole thing; there was no reason to think that she had committed anything sketchy.
自由派依舊想把這件事大事化小、小事化了，希望將這些醜聞輕描淡寫地處理掉；沒有理由相信她幹了什麽見不得光的事，他們如是說
The silent majority had all the reasons they needed.
但“沉默的大多數”，卻已有了充足的理由做出自己的決定。
Vote Wars: Episode III
Revenge of the Si - lent Majority
沉默選民的複仇
And then they struck. On Election Day, the silent majority flipped the predictions (by five thirty eight, the supposed gold standard) by turning crucial historically blue states red, and then continuing the rampage. As the map started bleeding red in parts it shouldn’t have, the media outlets panicked. It was easy enough before the election to claim that there was no way for Trump to win, in hopes of discouraging voters. But they were powerless when the actual election was underway.
沉默的選民開始反擊了。選舉當天，這些原本不出聲的選民，紛紛出來投票，徹底逆轉了民意調查的預測結果。關鍵藍州，曆史性地被逆轉成紅州，顏色還越來越深。選舉局勢分布圖上，隨著紅色在不該出現的地方出現地越來越多，媒體開始慌神了。選舉前，他們可以趾高氣昂地宣布特朗普沒有一丁點可能獲勝，借此打擊親特朗普選民們的士氣。但是等選舉正式拉開帷幕後，他們再也無能為力了。
The above graphic shows how every mainstream media prediction was wildly inaccurate. Many who gambled on the election and lost money can thank the mainstream media for influencing them.
上麵的圖線顯示出，所有媒體的預測，都錯得離譜。按照媒體預測去下注賭錢，輸得底褲都當掉的人，這下可以找媒體討個說法了。
This is a historic election that will go down in the books. Trump fought against a ridiculously large gauntlet of contenders in the primaries, and won. He fought against his own party refusing to back him. He recovered from his own party betraying him after his leaked comments about grabbing women. He fought against every underhanded tactic the DNC threw at him, media collusion, every mainstream media outlet being against him, his supporters being silenced, and won.
這是一場曆史性選舉，注定將載入史冊。在初選中，特朗普遭到黨內一眾對手令人窒息的圍攻，最終卻艱難取勝，收獲提名；之後，他的政黨不願意為他背書，在性騷擾言論泄露出來後，本黨同僚紛紛跳船，但他又挺住了，慢慢回血，原地複活；DNC（民主黨全國委員會）一直用下三濫的陰招招呼他，跟媒體勾結在一塊兒抹黑他；主流媒體一次又一次地發聲反對他；他的支持者被迫匿聲，不敢支持他——可他還是笑到了最後。
Has there ever been another moment in history when a billionaire was the underdog?
曆史上何曾有過這麽奇葩一幕：一個億萬富翁，落水狗般被人喊打？
Academics, from now and possibly centuries later (if we as a species make it) will study and analyze this election. And I hope that right now, despite almost every liberal crying about how racism and bigotry are what drove these results, that they realize there were many factors at play here.
學術界，接下來幾個世紀都有活兒幹了，他們得把這場選舉裏裏外外分析研究。雖然學術界現在叫著歡，哭喊著這次的選舉結果被種族主義和冥頑不靈的舊思想“操縱”了，我還是希望他們能好好研究，看清楚決定這場選舉結果隱藏著的諸多因素。
Racism? This was the same country that elected Obama. Twice. And some states that gave their votes to him now gave them to Trump.
說什麽種族主義啊？這個國家當初可是把奧巴馬選上了總統，而且是兩次！而那些投票給特朗普的州，當初也曾是奧巴馬的真愛粉。
Bigotry? The definition of bigotry is the refusal to acknowledge other viewpoints. And by nonstop claiming it was the fault of a racist country, the losing side is fulfilling this requirement.
說啥子冥頑不靈嘞？冥頑不靈的意思，是拒絕承認別人的（不同）觀點。不停地叫囂指責這場選舉之所以出現這樣的結果，是因為這個國家已經墮落成種族主義國度，這種行徑才稱得上一句“冥頑不靈”吧！
Rather, this whole mess was the fault of the DNC, who not only screwed themselves over, in which they deserve the loss, but who also unfairly screwed the members of their own party over, who did not deserve this.
不過，現在一團混亂的局麵，民主黨全國委員會要負很大的責任。他們自己坑了自己，算自作自受；但其他很多人，其實是被這些廢材拖累到現在這般田地。
If your side lost in this election, recognize where the blame truly lies. Demonize the other side all you want, but recognize that the very ones who tried to lead you to victory performed selfish actions without your consent, used underhanded tactics, undermined democracy, divided the country by promoting intolerance to different political beliefs, withheld crucial information about your candidate’s shady dealings, and ultimately lost it for you.
在本屆大選中，如果你是屬於失利的一方，你們就得好好反省，這口大鍋到底該誰來背。你們盡可以汙蔑對手一方，但最後也必須認識清楚，正是那群打算領導你們走向勝利的人，未經你們的許可，肆意妄為，中飽私囊，謀一己之私；是他們，使用下三濫的手段，踐踏民主製度，排斥異己，撕裂國家；是他們，明知克林頓種種幕後交易的內幕，卻私自隱瞞了消息。是他們，該負起全部的責任。
You did your part. Your party didn’t.
你盡了自己的一份力量，你的黨呢?
譯者後記：
關於版權的問題，我已經跟原作者取得聯係，獲得授權。
知友在評論區指出的技術性問題，已經修改更新過。
關於翻譯風格問題，
一來這篇文章太長，文字處理得如果比較呆板，寫得很累，讀得也很累。翻譯時腦洞開一開其實很有意思，像是在自己跟自己玩文字遊戲。
二來是我個人的偏向問題，我覺得翻譯應該是麵對讀者的，讀者倘有能力，大可以自行閱讀原文；如果隻讀中文，又何必讀洋縐縐的古怪文章?
過去老一輩的翻譯家比如魯迅先生，強調“硬譯”，要保留原文的行文特點，這是出於學習外國語言的長處，改造舊文學、發展白話文的目的。現在已經沒有這個必要，讀者已經是以接受信息為主要目的了。
至於政治傾向性、詞語選擇情緒化的問題，大家盡可以批評，但是我也不會專門去改了，那麽做，又得把文章改到傷筋動骨。
其實處理正式公文時，我還是規規矩矩，按照公文風格處理的。參見之前的回答中，我翻譯的FBI 局長(重啟郵件門調查前)通知國會的信函：
如何看待 FBI 在 2016 年 10 月 29 日重啟調查希拉裏的「郵件門」？
謝謝各位點讚。
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”
