Support NeoGAF

[Karsticles]

Florida is 65% white, with a whiter voter base. A huge proportion of Hispanic voters in Florida (~40%) lean Republican.



I'd honestly rather that the banks be fully expropriated, to limit the power of profiteers in our political landscape. But I admit that I don't know as much about finance as I should. Why would a return to Glass-Steagall be bad?

0.65 * 0.4 = 26% of the vote.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'd honestly rather that the banks be fully expropriated, to limit the power of profiteers in our political landscape. But I admit that I don't know as much about finance as I should. Why would a return to Glass-Steagall be bad?

It wouldn't necessarily be bad per se; ring-fencing of the two activities has happened to a degree in other places, there's also limited ability to do so already in the US. But it wasn't the major reason for the financial crisis and Great Recession, it and the general idea of "breaking up the banks" may be impractical in terms of implementation, and it doesn't really address problems with non-bank financial institutions which lack oversight.

 

[Cerium]

Articles say all sorts of things. Trump is not winning more than 20% with any sizable minority group. No way in hell does he win the presidency. The only concerning factor in 2016 is how strong the "anti-establishment" appeal will be because Trump isn't winning the presidency on the white nationalism angle, but he can use his Washington outsider status effectively against Hillary.

Spoiler

An issue we could subvert by backing Bernie, but I digress.

20% of the black vote would be enough to win.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

No, but you and others in this and other threads are incredibly smug at times.

This post is full of generalizations. I've been a voter for over 20 years. I've participated in every election (and primary) since I have been eligible to vote. I'm all too familiar with America's political system which is precisely why I support Bernie over Hillary right now. You claim folks lack experience and don't want to settle when they have been doing precisely that for their entire lives. As a matter of fact, some of them have been settling for longer than you've been drawing breath on this Earth. For them, Bernie is the first person they have seen where they feel like they don't have to settle.

So yeah, I can understand why they would be upset when folks such as yourself are backing someone they see as corrupt and dishonest because you believe she is more electable (especially since they've been around long enough to remember plenty of other 'electable' people go on to tank in the general). I don't share their view that voting for Trump is the best course of action...but I can certainly understand their wanting to lash out because they finally see a chance for someone who they feel is genuine/decent to be elected to the highest office in the land and it is slipping away. "Let it all burn" is their knee jerk reaction. Give them time and they will cool off.

Or you can keep calling them spoiled brats and don't be surprised if they stay home or follow through with their threats later. Hillary isn't nearly as electable as you think she is. She is the single most divisive political figure in this country over the past 25 years. Trust me, if you want her to win you are going to need their support. She's going to need every vote she can get.

You projected an awful lot into the post you quoted

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

20% of the black vote would be enough to win.

What makes you think he's going to more than double Romney's support among black voters? He's not cracking 10% there.

 

[Leona Lewis]

You projected an awful lot into the post you quoted

Yeah, royalan has been nothing but fair and reasonable.

In any case, there won't be much more to discuss on the Dem side for much longer. Might as well enjoy the banter before these threads devolve into increasingly improbable scenarios toward a Trump path to victory.

 

[Aaronology]

No, but you and others in this and other threads are incredibly smug at times.

Case in point....



This post is full of generalizations. I've been a voter for over 20 years. I've participated in every election (and primary) since I have been eligible to vote. I'm all too familiar with America's political system which is precisely why I support Bernie over Hillary right now. You claim folks lack experience and don't want to settle when they have been doing precisely that for their entire lives. As a matter of fact, some of them have been settling for longer than you've been drawing breath on this Earth. For them, Bernie is the first person they have seen where they feel like they don't have to settle.

So yeah, I can understand why they would be upset when folks such as yourself are backing someone they see as corrupt and dishonest because you believe she is more electable (especially since they've been around long enough to remember plenty of other 'electable' people go on to tank in the general). I don't share their view that voting for Trump is the best course of action...but I can certainly understand their wanting to lash out because they finally see a chance for someone who they feel is genuine/decent to be elected to the highest office in the land and it is slipping away. "Let it all burn" is their knee jerk reaction. Give them time and they will cool off.

Or you can keep calling them spoiled brats and don't be surprised if they stay home or follow through with their threats later. Hillary isn't nearly as electable as you think she is. She is the single most divisive political figure in this country over the past 25 years. Trust me, if you want her to win you are going to need their support. She's going to need every vote she can get.

Generalized? I was very specifically calling out the "Bernie or Bust" type on this board who are numerous and vocal and who have repeatedly pledged to support Trump in Sanders' place. "Please don't talk down to them or they'll stay home!" Yeah ok. I don't really care about those sort of people's feelings at this point. They're not my ally, and there are times to call spades spades. You aren't one of those people, Baron? Great. Then that post was not directed at you.

And sorry, no. You are not going to convince me that someone who has been politically active for decades would segue from Bernie to Donald while still calling themselves Progressive, or ever thought Sanders had a good chance in the GE to begin with. There is a reason the older vote skews starkly in Clinton's favor, after all.

 

[royalan]

This post is full of generalizations. I've been a voter for over 20 years. I've participated in every election (and primary) since I have been eligible to vote. I'm all too familiar with America's political system which is precisely why I support Bernie over Hillary right now. You claim folks lack experience and don't want to settle when they have been doing precisely that for their entire lives. As a matter of fact, some of them have been settling for longer than you've been drawing breath on this Earth. For them, Bernie is the first person they have seen where they feel like they don't have to settle.

You haven't paid attention to any of my posts if you think my point is that Bernie supporters "should just settle." My point in this discussion has been that Bernie supporters should vote for Bernie, and if he doesn't get the nomination they should KEEP VOTING, and not throw their hands up and sit out the process, because in effect that IS settling.

You may not get your perfect candidate, but vote in the interests of the people, the common good, and the party that best represents the policies your perfect candidate embodied.

You projected an awful lot into the post you quoted

THANK YOU

 

[Valhelm]

It wouldn't necessarily be bad per se; ring-fencing of the two activities has happened to a degree in other places, there's also limited ability to do so already in the US. But it wasn't the major reason for the financial crisis and Great Recession, it and the general idea of "breaking up the banks" may be impractical in terms of implementation, and it doesn't really address problems with non-bank financial institutions which lack oversight.

How would you prefer these other institutions be regulated? Wouldn't the Sanders plan be an important stepping-stone?

Trump can use his Washington outsider status effectively against Hillary. An issue we could subvert by backing Bernie, but I digress.

This is why I'm unsure that Clinton is a stronger candidate against Trump. The left-leaning groups that Clinton cannot appeal to (young voters and independents) might actually vote for Trump, while the groups that Sanders cannot appeal to (black and Hispanic voters) would not jump ship.

 

[Cerium]

What makes you think he's going to more than double Romney's support among black voters? He's not cracking 10% there.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/how-donald-trump-defeats-hillary-clinton-217868

I think Trump will blame black unemployment on illegal immigrants. He could easily retool his message about Mexico and the wall for a black audience.

 

[Joel Was Right]

Is that he doesn't convince many with his Conservative facade - we all know he's a secular, lavish New Yorker. But his views are common enough, and his language simple enough to understand that he has the ability to do better than Romney in attacking non-Republican voters.

I genuinely believe he could beat Clinton in a General Election, so long as he moderates his views by that time.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

There is a reason the older vote skews starkly in Clinton's favor, after all..

I'd argue a lot of that has to do with having lived through the cold war and thus having different feelings about "socialism" more than anything else.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/how-donald-trump-defeats-hillary-clinton-217868

I think Trump will blame black unemployment on illegal immigrants. He could easily retool his message about Mexico and the wall for a black audience.

Those polls were trash.

 

[Valhelm]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/how-donald-trump-defeats-hillary-clinton-217868

I think Trump will blame black unemployment on illegal immigrants. He could easily retool his message about Mexico and the wall for a black audience.

Funnily enough, the three Trump supporters I've met have all been black. Two of them were Haitian immigrants who believed Mexican immigrants have it "too easy".

But that's obviously not indicative of any real trend. While Trump might have some appeal among African Americans, his ties to white identity politics will seriously disturb most black voters.

I'd argue a lot of that has to do with having lived through the cold war and thus having different feelings about "socialism" more than anything else.

Even if Sanders didn't identify as a socialist, it's unlikely older voters would appreciate his ideology. Sanders constant comments against "the establishment" don't appeal to those who benefit from the institutions and structures he seeks to change, and older voters are almost never more left-wing than their children or grandchildren.

 

[Cerium]

Those polls were trash.

I'm not saying that he'll succeed, but I'm pretty sure this will be his strategy. Keep in mind that Obama isn't running this time.

He'll go hard after the black vote and he'll say some kind things about gay people.

 

[The Lamonster]

Is that he doesn't convince many with his Conservative facade - we all know he's a secular, lavish New Yorker. But his views are common enough, and his language simple enough to understand that he has the ability to do better than Romney in attacking non-Republican voters.

I genuinely believe he could beat Clinton in a General Election, so long as he moderates his views by that time.

I don't think he can recover from the damage he's done to himself in the primary. No one debates whether or not this guy is a racist. You can't win the office of the presidency as a racist.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/how-donald-trump-defeats-hillary-clinton-217868

I think Trump will blame black unemployment on illegal immigrants. He could easily retool his message about Mexico and the wall for a black audience.

Let's use the closing of that article to make a point about how out of touch with reality it is:

Nunberg asked women in Connecticut who opposed marijuana legalization who they respected more: a politician who is also charitable and a world-renowned businessman, father and grandfather or an “Elderly woman who not only openly allows her husband to have affairs but tries to silence the women.” The figure with the favorable abstract framing of Trump beat the figure with the negative abstract framing of Clinton by more than 20 points, according to Nunberg.

The limited sample, tilted framing and withholding of candidate names all qualify the finding, but it does suggest that if Trump can somehow shed his baggage and impose his preferred narrative on the match-up with Clinton, he can appeal to female voters. “He’s a masculine figure and that will attract women to him,” said Nunberg. “It’s their dirty little secret. They like Donald Trump.”

In a follow-up conversation, Lewandowski took a more expansive view of Trump’s general election prospects, suggesting the businessman could expand the electoral map to include California, Illinois and New York. Several Republican strategists and pollsters laughed off the suggestion. But 2015’s lesson for 2016 may be this: Never say never.

No way in hell is any white, 70 year old republican winning more of the black vote than Romney against a Clinton with an endorsement from Barack Obama.

 

[Prodigal Son]

I don't think he can recover from the damage he's done to himself in the primary. No one debates whether or not this guy is a racist. You can't win the office of the presidency as a racist.

Maybe in 2016 this is the case, but it sure hasn't been before.

 

[Christine]

Is that he doesn't convince many with his Conservative facade - we all know he's a secular, lavish New Yorker. But his views are common enough, and his language simple enough to understand that he has the ability to do better than Romney in attacking non-Republican voters.

I genuinely believe he could beat Clinton in a General Election, so long as he moderates his views by that time.

He's pulled himself too far to the right for this to happen. Political memories are short, but this is literally the same campaign. The worst part about Donald getting the Republican nod is that Hilary's safest route to beat him is to position herself to the right of the electoral median, but not as far right as he is. There's a lot of room.

 

[royalan]

I think Trump will blame black unemployment on illegal immigrants. He could easily retool his message about Mexico and the wall for a black audience.

I dunno. Putting on my "I don't speak for all black people" hat but, I don't see Trump being able to successfully pit African Americans against immigrants.

Not to mention, most of his early efforts to endear himself to black voters have largely backfired. http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/28/politics/black-religious-leaders-donald-trump-endorsement/

All the DNC would have to do is remind everyone of that sole Black Lives Matter protester being harassed at a Trump rally along with a sound bite of Trump saying "Maybe he deserved to be roughed up," and question some of his "Cops are Amazing" responses to questions about innocent black people being shot dead, and he's done.

 

[shinra-bansho]

How would you prefer these other institutions be regulated? Wouldn't the Sanders plan be an important stepping-stone?

His plan is relatively light on actual policy prescriptions that would have an impact, so far as I can tell (Clinton's is basically 5,000 word essay full of minutiae more suited to the modern financial industry). Although, as that article notes, there are some good ideas, but ymmv, and for instance here, it's argued that neither is addressing the real problems.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Even if Sanders didn't identify as a socialist, it's unlikely older voters would appreciate his ideology. Sanders constant comments against "the establishment" don't appeal to those who benefit from the institutions and structures he seeks to change, and older voters are almost never more left-wing than their children or grandchildren.

This is true, older voters are maybe just not as liberal as Bernie. I wish voting results would include more detailed results than just "voters 65+". It seems silly that votes are broken down into things like 18-24 and 25-29 age groups but then everyone from 65 to 100+ is lumped together. That's two whole generations of people! That's parents and their children lumped into the same voting block. I'd be curious to see what those voters who remember FDR and the democratic party at the time think of Bernie's platform.

 

[gutter_trash]

Trump on Saturday gave a big pro-police speech and in favor of militarizing the cops equipment wise even more

so ...

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Not sure why everyone is afraid of Donald, really. He doesn't have any secret sauce. He's just capitalized on the one aspect of american politics that has dominated it for at least a century (race) and is appealing to a party with a rather monolithic view of the issue. Why didn't attacking the Iraq war hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't attacking John McCain hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't his fairly liberal statements on health care hurt him? You get the idea. It's easy to win a republican nomination. Be racist and don't apologize for it. The party's existence is predicated upon white people maintaining a hegemony of political influence in the country. There's no secret to it. The "trick" is that Donald has done it with no consideration about how to pivot back for the general, but this is also what's going to fuck him over.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Good grief. It's not anyone's duty to vote for Hillary. You know there are Bernie/Trump supporters, right? And people who were only engaged in the primary because of Bernie's "revolution" speaking to them. Why would Hillary be entitled to those votes?

Those people aren't worth even a minute's thought.

 

[Valhelm]

His plan is relatively light on actual policy prescriptions that would have an impact, so far as I can tell (Clinton's is basically 5,000 word essay full of minutiae more suited to the modern financial industry). Although, as that article notes, there are some good ideas, but ymmv, and for instance here, it's argued that neither is addressing the real problems.

Interesting, thanks. Although I'm not a huge fan of judging the specifics of pie-in-the-sky legislative goals as early as the primary. Obama had several of these lofty goals, closing the Guantanamo facilities being a major one. The most we can do is try to understand what a candidate wants politically, and what they hope to achieve.

Those people aren't worth even a minute's thought.

I hope you're correct.

 

[Alcibiades]

It's more likely that he causes moderate to somewhat moderate Republicans just not to vote because he's so off putting and his unfavorables are so high.

If anything, he'll overperform with moderate/liberal Republicans, Independents, and cross-over Democrats, but conservatives will stay home. He seems like a NY moderate/liberal with conservative platform on a few key issues (immigration, muslims, police, etc...). Whether he is a true conservative or not (like he says he is) is irrelevant, since the vast majority of Republicans aren't buying it.

Part of the reason he performed so well in the last two primaries is that they were open so Democrats and Independents could cross over and vote. He won't have that advantage in every primary.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Not sure why everyone is afraid of Donald, really. He doesn't have any secret sauce. He's just capitalized on the one aspect of american politics that has dominated it for at least a century (race) and is appealing to a party with a rather monolithic view of the issue. Why didn't attacking the Iraq war hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't attacking John McCain hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't his fairly liberal statements on health care hurt him? You get the idea. It's easy to win a republican nomination. Be racist and don't apologize for it. The party's existence is predicated upon white people maintaining a hegemony of political influence in the country. There's no secret to it. The "trick" is that Donald has done it with no consideration about how to pivot back for the general, but this is also what's going to fuck him over.

Yup. So, Trump has between 30-40% in the GOP Primaries. Let's say 40% of people self-identify as Republican's or are GOP-leaning enough to respond in a poll. So, that's between 12 to 16% of the population.

I have no problem believing 12 to 15% of the American people are straight up racist and not even hiding it and that actually matches up close to what far-right anti-immigrant parties get in European countries.

 

[King Tubby]

If you don't think the Democrats will hammer those Trump soundbites into the ground during the general, I don't think you really are thinking that hard about this. Romney's campaign was torpedoed by the 47% comments, Trump already has like a dozen equivalents. It only works in the Republican primaries because Republicans are largely straight white men.

 

[MotherFan]

Interesting, thanks. Although I'm not a huge fan of judging the specifics of pie-in-the-sky legislative goals as early as the primary. Obama had several of these lofty goals, closing the Guantanamo facilities being a major one. The most we can do is try to understand what a candidate wants politically, and what they hope to achieve.



I hope you're correct.

He is because historically the majority gets on board. If hillary loses after getting the nom it's going to be due to other issues and not to bernie supporters.

 

[Baron Aloha]

You projected an awful lot into the post you quoted

I can see why folks might feel that way. Truth be told, I was replying to more than just that post. A few have caught my eye in some threads and I haven't said anything until now.

Generalized? I was very specifically calling out the "Bernie or Bust" type on this board who are numerous and vocal and who have repeatedly pledged to support Trump in Sanders' place. "Please don't talk down to them or they'll stay home!" Yeah ok. I don't really care about those sort of people's feelings at this point. They're not my ally, and there are times to call spades spades. You aren't one of those people, Baron? Great. Then that post was not directed at you.

And sorry, no. You are not going to convince me that someone who has been politically active for decades would segue from Bernie to Donald while still calling themselves Progressive, or ever thought Sanders had a good chance in the GE to begin with. There is a reason the older vote skews starkly in Clinton's favor, after all.

Saying that the Bernie or bust people lack experience or are unfamiliar with the American political system is a generalization. Unless you are a psychic or a mind reader you don't know what their backgrounds are. They are just blowing smoke and lashing out. People do that when they lose from time to time. It's human nature. That's all it is. There are more constructive ways of dealing with them. Be the better person. You say that you don't care about their feelings but you might feel differently if November comes along and we have another Florida on our hands.

 

[Cipherr]

Not sure why everyone is afraid of Donald, really. He doesn't have any secret sauce. He's just capitalized on the one aspect of american politics that has dominated it for at least a century (race) and is appealing to a party with a rather monolithic view of the issue. Why didn't attacking the Iraq war hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't attacking John McCain hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't his fairly liberal statements on health care hurt him? You get the idea. It's easy to win a republican nomination. Be racist and don't apologize for it. The party's existence is predicated upon white people maintaining a hegemony of political influence in the country. There's no secret to it. The "trick" is that Donald has done it with no consideration about how to pivot back for the general, but this is also what's going to fuck him over.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel, about Donald anyway. He has pulled off the ol' Gattaca "I never left anything for the swim back" maneuver in politics. He just went absolutely crazy without regard for how he is going to return closer to the center to get the votes needed. It has absolutely worked in outpacing everyone else on the right, but the second half of the event has yet to come.

He is cooked there. He has given enough soundbites, statements and tweets for the Dems to BURY his ass in the general. And they will, and he will lose the GE massively while everyone scratches their head wondering why it wasn't closer.

 

[kirblar]

This is pretty much exactly how I feel, about Donald anyway. He has pulled off the ol' Gattaca "I never left anything for the swim back" maneuver in politics. He just went absolutely crazy without regard for how he is going to return closer to the center to get the votes needed. It has absolutely worked in outpacing everyone else on the right, but the second half of the event has yet to come.

He is cooked there. He has given enough soundbites, statements and tweets for the Dems to BURY his ass in the general. And they will, and he will lose the GE massively while everyone scratches their head wondering why it wasn't closer.

Caught Fox News at the gym on accident, and the two commentators they had on were noting that Trump's chances of winning Virginia are pretty much nonexistent, and its a must-win state for the GOP due to the Dems having the electoral natural college advantage now.

The polls over on RCP appear to back up their assertion.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

This is pretty much exactly how I feel, about Donald anyway. He has pulled off the ol' Gattaca "I never left anything for the swim back" maneuver in politics. He just went absolutely crazy without regard for how he is going to return closer to the center to get the votes needed. It has absolutely worked in outpacing everyone else on the right, but the second half of the event has yet to come.

He is cooked there. He has given enough soundbites, statements and tweets for the Dems to BURY his ass in the general. And they will, and he will lose the GE massively while everyone scratches their head wondering why it wasn't closer.

Yup. You don't say the things he has said within a year of the election and recover from it. Anyone who thinks the rules don't apply to him because he's rebounded from other gaffes are forgetting the trick to the GOP primary: racism trumps all else. As long as he's still the most racist candidate, nothing else matters. That isn't the case in a general election and is why we'll very shortly discover that "teflon" don is anything but.

 

[2AdEPT]

Vote Cruz. A Trump candidacy is too dangerous.

You've got to be kidding. Cruz is the worst of the whole lot followed closely by Rubio. Hillary and Trump (especially if he ditches the GOP) are a toss-up cause they are just into for their own interests, but at least arent dangerous, (Trump is hot air he cant and wont build a wall etc, its not even possible) and Bernie sits alone as the only guy with an ounce of integrity to vote for. You so-called democrats best be all voting for Hillary as a last resort and trying to get Bernie in at all costs. Bernie as it stands is more electable than HIllary on one to one battles vs. all GOP candidates. I fyou people that are complaining about Bernie voters abstaining if he doesn't get in the only choice you have is to vote Bernie as a priority...the overall chances for a GOP victory are higher vs. HIllary than Bernie...its not even close.despite the bs idea that its the opposite.

You've got to ask yourself if you want a quack Christian at the helm in charge of nuclear weapons etc.Rubio just put his Christian commercial out but you can tell he cares less about God and is a simple two faced liar. Cruz really believes he is the second coming or something close...feeding that ego could be lights out for the world, let alone America. He really wants to start carpet bombing...what if he gets some "information" that Iran is going to send a nuclear bomb our way? Pre-emptive strike would be sent in a heart beat, even on bad info...you could see it happen.

 

[kirblar]

Yup. You don't say the things he has said within a year of the election and recover from it. Anyone who thinks the rules don't apply to him because he's rebounded from other gaffes are forgetting the trick to the GOP primary: racism trumps all else. As long as he's still the most racist candidate, nothing else matters. That isn't the case in a general election and is why we'll very shortly discover that "teflon" don is anything but.

2012 showed that the rules have changed. You cannot "pivot to the center" because everyone can play your primary positions back to you on the internet. Romney learned this the hard way.

This is why Hillary has actually moved to the center in response to some of Bernie's policy positions, as opposed to the traditional line of thinking, where she'd pivot left.

 

[Box]

Those people aren't worth even a minute's thought.

I mean, I don't know the numbers, but if they're a significant subset at all then it represents something interesting. My interpretation of Sanders/Trump is that there's a lot of anti-establishment fervor in the country and that those people don't have a firm ideological grounding and could end up going either way depending on who has the stronger message.

It also represents that the idea of "socialism" is becoming more acceptable if people outside of the mega-liberal intellectuals are able to consider supporting it. More accurately, they're willing to scapegoat Wall Street, which over time, if they continue to develop politically, I believe would lead them to develop progressive opinions on the economy.

 

[Armaros]

2012 showed that the rules have changed. You cannot "pivot to the center" because everyone can play your primary positions back to you on the internet. Romney learned this the hard way.

This is why Hillary has actually moved to the center in response to some of Bernie's policy positions, as opposed to the traditional line of thinking, where she'd pivot left.

Its also why Obama wasted no time painting Romney on his own terms the moment he won the nomination, instead of letting Romney time to engender himself to the non-republican population.

I Imagine Hillary is saving money to do something similar to whoever wins this year.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

I think any movement to the left should be a gradual process and not a revolutionary one. Bernie's kick-starting the process but it's too much of a risk to go all in right now with neither Senate nor House in the Democrat domain.

Get the ideals going to energize democratic voters even outside of GE's, regain control of House, Senate, SCOTUS and (correct me if I'm wrong) pave the way to eliminate the gerrymandering that expires in 2020.

Only then can we consider moving away from the lobbyist system.

 

[soundscream]

I think Trump will actually pivot in the general and go after black voters and gay voters. I've read articles that suggest he could have some success there.

Yeah.....as long as he keeps referring us as "the blacks" he doesn't stand a chance.

 

[Big Baybee]

Must be nice to just go "fuck it I won't vote then", knowing nothing will change for you. Really fucking weird to me.

 

[Abinash117]

2012 showed that the rules have changed. You cannot "pivot to the center" because everyone can play your primary positions back to you on the internet. Romney learned this the hard way.

This is why Hillary has actually moved to the center in response to some of Bernie's policy positions, as opposed to the traditional line of thinking, where she'd pivot left.

Hillary positions aren't center they are nearly the same as Bernie's. It just that how she wants to achieve those positions is more to do of how she see's things as she thinks as they currently are or basically what is the most realistic chance of achieving the progressive goal in the current political environment, so they are seemingly moderate in comparison to Bernie.

Hillary will look like a liberal with some moderate ideals to achieve something and Donald Trump will look like an extreme right-wing( depending which positions get highlighted) with a mixture of liberal( seemingly) and populist talking points that don't have tons of specifics. His positions will probably seem all over the place which can mean he can get a lot of support or much more hate. Hillary may look unpopular, but she will look ten times for desirable than Trump depending how the parties do their strategies. Closer to election, ideally she should have overwhelming support among minorities, women, young voters( specifically millennial minority voters), and moderates.

I think Trump will actually pivot in the general and go after black voters and gay voters. I've read articles that suggest he could have some success there.

He'll fall flat on his ass, but I can see him bring up stuff fro the 90s. I doubt that will work for a bit he as absolutely no relationship with them and very little reason for them to vote for Trump.

I bet he'll have talking points and then discreetly or overtly blame Hillary/Obama for their failings on for their support of AAs. If Bernie has a difficult time with Blacks than it would be acquire a herculean effort plus divine intervention on Donald's part.

 

[Clefargle]

No, but you and others in this and other threads are incredibly smug at times.

Case in point....



This post is full of generalizations. I've been a voter for over 20 years. I've participated in every election (and primary) since I have been eligible to vote. I'm all too familiar with America's political system which is precisely why I support Bernie over Hillary right now. You claim folks lack experience and don't want to settle when they have been doing precisely that for their entire lives. As a matter of fact, some of them have been settling for longer than you've been drawing breath on this Earth. For them, Bernie is the first person they have seen where they feel like they don't have to settle.

So yeah, I can understand why they would be upset when folks such as yourself are backing someone they see as corrupt and dishonest because you believe she is more electable (especially since they've been around long enough to remember plenty of other 'electable' people go on to tank in the general). I don't share their view that voting for Trump is the best course of action...but I can certainly understand their wanting to lash out because they finally see a chance for someone who they feel is genuine/decent to be elected to the highest office in the land and it is slipping away. "Let it all burn" is their knee jerk reaction. Give them time and they will cool off.

Or you can keep calling them spoiled brats and don't be surprised if they stay home or follow through with their threats later. Hillary isn't nearly as electable as you think she is. She is the single most divisive political figure in this country over the past 25 years. Trust me, if you want her to win you are going to need their support. She's going to need every vote she can get.

Oh yeah, Clinton is more divisive than Trump. LOL

 

[Abinash117]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/how-donald-trump-defeats-hillary-clinton-217868

I think Trump will blame black unemployment on illegal immigrants. He could easily retool his message about Mexico and the wall for a black audience.

Hahaha, if black people wanted a scapegoat then it would be them blaming white people. Quite frankly a quite a few do, but that doesn't stop them constantly voting for white Americans.

Actually I think quite a few conservatives brought this up.

 

[Prototype Viktor]

i got a handful of close friends that are voting for the greater of 2 evils (Cruz) in the Texas Primary guess their race!

Spoiler

non of them are white but they can pass as white

 

[Cerium]

Al Sharpton: Trump is the white Don King

“The best way I can describe Donald Trump to friends is to say if Don King had been born white he’d be Donald Trump,” says Sharpton with a broadening smile. “Both of them are great self-promoters and great at just continuing to talk even if you’re not talking back at ‘em.”

...

When I ask Sharpton if he actually likes Trump, he shrugs. “I mean, I don’t like what he’s doing. But I don’t dislike him. He’s the kind of personality that is hard to dislike – he’s entertaining, let's put it that way… You’d have to be a New Yorker to understand him.”

...

And that’s when he gets to his keenest observation – the best assessment of Trump’s deepest motivations I’ve yet heard, and one that Beltway pundits who don’t understand the tangled psychological geography of the five boroughs miss: Trump may have been born with millions, and erected huge buildings that bear his name, but he still feels the resentment of a gaudy, new-money outsider who has decided to burn down a Yankee establishment that always viewed him as a garish, grasping joke.

“Donald Trump was a Queens guy,” says Sharpton, who hails from Brooklyn’s Brownsville, the city’s toughest neighborhood, a collection of housing projects jammed hard between Queens and the Jamaica Bay swamps – and the scene of all-out crack war in the 1980s and 1990s.

“His father was a successful real estate guy but they were Queens guys. They were outer borough [and] had to break in the big Manhattan aristocracy. He was an outsider, rich, but outsider. He was not part of the Manhattan elite. So, he always had this outsider feeling – us against them. So, in many ways, when I read people talk about, ‘Well, do you have a billionaire as a populist?’ He does feel like he’s one of the guys who was shut out.”

Then, a hint of a kindred spirit: “On the other side of the coin, but I was shut out because of race. He was shut out because of geography and a number of other things. [It’s an] unforgiving environment and a city that could easily swallow you up. Easily.”

 

[Baron Aloha]

Oh yeah, Clinton is more divisive than Trump. LOL

When you consider how long it's been going on (25 years)? Yeah. She probably is.

 

[Joni]

There's a reason every GOP post-mortem of 2012 screamed they had to stop alienating women, minorities, the LGBT community and the young, and it wasn't because they doubted they had the ability to go any more regressive in four years.

The post-mortems simply didn't take into account the typical votership for the Republican Party. Those analysts can say all they want, but the Republican voters simply don't want that in their politicians seeing as they are voting for Trump, Rubio and Cruz.

 

[Trurl]

Not sure why everyone is afraid of Donald, really. He doesn't have any secret sauce. He's just capitalized on the one aspect of american politics that has dominated it for at least a century (race) and is appealing to a party with a rather monolithic view of the issue. Why didn't attacking the Iraq war hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't attacking John McCain hurt him? Because republicans care about white supremacy more. Why didn't his fairly liberal statements on health care hurt him? You get the idea. It's easy to win a republican nomination. Be racist and don't apologize for it. The party's existence is predicated upon white people maintaining a hegemony of political influence in the country. There's no secret to it. The "trick" is that Donald has done it with no consideration about how to pivot back for the general, but this is also what's going to fuck him over.

I suspect that for many Trump supporters it's not that his racism is more important than his views about health care, it's that socialized health care is OK when it's not designed to help the undesirables.

 

[danm999]

The post-mortems simply didn't take into account the typical votership for the Republican Party. Those analysts can say all they want, but the Republican voters simply don't want that in their politicians seeing as they are voting for Trump, Rubio and Cruz.

A big problem yeah. So you're caught between needing to appeal to more voters, but also pleasing your increasingly shrinking existing voter base.


The best answer they came up with was keep existing policies, but attempt to gussy up the messenger;

"To be clear, our principles our sound, our principles are not old rusty thoughts in some book," Priebus said, but the "report notes the way we communicate our principles isn't resonating widely enough."

Priebus added: "I think our policies are sound, but I think in many ways the way we communicate can be a real problem."

And this keep the same old policies, but pretty up the delivery is epitomized in their establishment favorite Marco Rubio.