New Study: Why Obama voters flipped to Trump...The Economy

So these people will clearly turn on Trump now that he has repeatedly sucked up to the 1%, right?

...
 
Hell, you don't even need to do that. Just watch one of the following...

Daily Show, Full Frontal, Last Week Tonight, Steven Colbert, or Seth Meyers...

And you'll have all the information you need to stay informed of what the GOP stand for.

Why would any smart blue collar american listen to the biased fake news media?
 
I'm sorry, but no.

If Bernie Sanders was the type of populist the party needed, he would have won. Point blank. Trump was the populist his party needed, and he won. Obama was the type of populist 2008 Dems needed, and he won.

Maybe Hillary Clinton wasn't the right candidate for the time, but then neither was the guy whose ass she thoroughly whooped in the primaries.

The next great Democratic leader has not made themselves known yet, but I'm sure we've seen their face.

Meh I don't know about this anymore. Hillary got more votes than Obama did in 2008 actually, but does anyone think she would've had the historic margin of victory he did over McCain?
 
Let's not over-complicate things. The thinking (for those who can be swayed) can be summed up as:

1. Obama has been president for 8 years, and my life hasn't gotten appreciably better.
2. I'm not voting D next time

That's it.

People are hurting. Wages stagnant in real terms. Housing and schooling costs going up a ton. Some areas of the US seeing basically no gains. It's not hard to see why people opted out of a continuation, even if the new option is batshit crazy.
 
Let's not over-complicate things. The thinking (for those who can be swayed) can be summed up as:

1. Obama has been president for 8 years, and my life hasn't gotten appreciably better.
2. I'm not voting D next time

That's it.
Honestly, this is probably it.
 
So these people will clearly turn on Trump now that he has repeatedly sucked up to the 1%, right?

...

Katy Tur‏Verified account
@KatyTurNBC

Joe Walsh: "As a Trump supporter I do my best not to listen to what he says." Me: Then why are you a supporter?

This speaks for itself. This is what the supporters of his do.
 
And this is the reason these people will continue to get fucked.

img_5526hhanr.gif
 
So these people will clearly turn on Trump now that he has repeatedly sucked up to the 1%, right?

...

Well, if their situation doesn't improve? Probably.

If people are fickle enough to go from voting for Obama to voting for Trump, I would assume anything is possible.

Even on GAF I see people celebrating the repeal of the estate tax and I'm like ....wtf

I talked to my dad, a staunch conservative, about this a few weeks ago... He had no idea. After he found out what it was, even he was mystified. People really have no clue. And he's well-informed and can't stand Trump. It's just something conservatives never discuss.
 
It can be both!

It was both!

Any time Donald brought up the economy the entire DNC laughed at him and tried to show his true face, whether that was bankruptcies, stiffing contract workers, inheriting a 15 million loan which doesn't take into account today's inflation, using chinese steel, failing to disclose his tax returns, and lying about every single one of those topics. This was in addition to yes, providing her own economic policies. And it didn't fucking work. Because people. Are. Dumb.
 
People are hurting. Wages stagnant in real terms. Housing and schooling costs going up a ton. Some areas of the US seeing basically no gains. It's not hard to see why people opted out of a continuation, even if the new option is batshit crazy.
And Dems could do almost nothing because these same people (the american electorate in general) voted in the Tea Party in '10.
 
I mean, and during the debates, and exposing how Trump is an economic fraud and con man.

Anyone who looked at Trump and believed he was looking out for working class interests ever is a dumbass, full stop.

Yep, but she played his game and made her message about Trump. She didn't offer enough of her own solutions at the end of the day, beyond the fact that she wasn't Trump.
 
Yeah, because of responses just like this one.

It's worth discussing, since there are post-mortems coming out that pin a large percentage of the deflection based on the economy.

One person ran on only that, one didn't.

It's so worth discussing, apparently, we haven't stopped discussing it since the primaries. If you really didn't want to 'bring it up from the dead,' you should have just omitted the Bernie stuff and focused on the flaws of the Clinton campaign in this regard.
 
Looks like the Republicans' plan of accusing the Democrats of everything that they (the GOP) actually stand for, while simultaneously yelling "freedom" every 30 seconds, is working pretty well.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to apply for a job, voting needs similar regulations.
 
And Dems could do almost nothing because these same people voted in the Tea Party in '10.

They didn't, because this article is discussing people who voted people for Obama in 2012, and I think the fraction of people who went Tea Party '10 -> Obama '12 -> Trump '16 is probably only slightly more than the collective IQ of the Tea Party, but you've never been one to let a good fact get in your way.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to get hired for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

That's how you end up with "literacy tests" and suppressing the shit out of voting rights for minorities in this country.
 
The ones that went for Trump who were Obama supporters were the white working class who the Dems didn't have any answers for.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to apply for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

Take this and include becoming a parent. The world would become a lot better place in a few decades. Of course the counter argument and rightfully so is literacy tests that were used as voter suppression.

FML the entire voter suppression thing really gets me pisssed.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to apply for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

Yeah, as nice as that sounds in fantasy land, that would be terrible on almost every level in reality.
 
This shit better mean that whatever candidates they are getting is very, very pro labor. But this:

I genuinely hope Democrats bring something to the table in 2020 other than "return dignity to the White House!"

Is the message they'll probably run with. The idiots.

I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to get hired for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

Fuck no, then it'll be used as a tool to disenfranchise even more minority groups. It's already happen, and less than a century ago.
 
They didn't, because this article is discussing people who voted people for Obama in 2012, and I think the fraction of people who went Tea Party '10 -> Obama '12 -> Trump '16 is probably only slightly more than the collective IQ of the Tea Party, but you've never been one to let a good fact get in your way.
I edited to make it clear I meant the electorate in general w/ that statement, I'm aware of the difference.

The american electorate being reactionary is nothing new.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to get hired for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

I hear you, but no. Republicans are already trying their hardest to make/keep the general voting public as dumb as possible. Don't help them accelerate their efforts.
 
It's so worth discussing, apparently, we haven't stopped discussing it since the primaries. If you really didn't want to 'bring it up from the dead,' you should have just omitted the Bernie stuff and focused on the flaws of the Clinton campaign in this regard.

Yes, yes... Why would I compare the failed democratic nominee to her opponent, who ran solely on the struggles of working class Americans and co-opted the outcry against the '1%'?

You're right. Totally nonsensical.
 
There is the sobering reminder that some people and families really are desperate enough to think literally anything than the status quo looked appealling to them.

Of course, Trump isn't exactly going help.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to apply for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

Kind of like voter ID to stop all that rampant fraudulent voting? Be careful what you wish for, I'd abstain from giving the government a power you wouldn't want someone on the opposite side of the political aisle from having.
 
Yes, yes... Why would I compare the failed democratic nominee to her opponent, who ran solely on the struggles of working class Americans and co-opted the outcry against the '1%'?

You're right. Totally nonsensical.

Co-opted, and turned the fervor against a fellow Democrat.
Then stayed in the race for weeks (months?) after it was impossible for him to win, still pushing the SAME MESSAGE.

Oh wait, is he a Democrat?
 
Fuck no, then it'll be used as a tool to disenfranchise even more minority groups. It's already happen, and less than a century ago.

Why does it have to target minorities? I think a test that determines whether you're a sensible adult would do more good to weed out the stupid & hateful people.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to apply for a job, voting needs similar regulations.

Our politicians would only use this to discriminate against people.
 
I seriously believe Democracy needs a set of standards when it comes to voting.

It's always been too dangerous when you let people vote for any reason or refuse to do any fact checking before hand.

Just like how you have to pass a test or meet a certain requirement to apply for a job, voting needs similar regulations.
Absolutely not. It's immoral to disenfranchise people from voting.

If you want people to be better educated before voting, focus on public education.
 
Co-opted, and turned the fervor against a fellow Democrat.
Then stayed in the race for weeks (months?) after it was impossible for him to win, still pushing the SAME MESSAGE.

Oh wait, is he a Democrat?

Hillary's loss - still Bernie's fault. Sure guy.
 
Like the better Clinton campaign says: It's the economy, stupid.

Hey fellow Dems. Next time let's not run a candidate with alltime deplorable ratings + has the FBI on her ass until the very end of a campaign. Let's vote for someone that will work at least half as hard/smart as Obama did in the battleground states, instead of flying home every night like Sec. Clinton. Would've and should've won against the goddamn billionaire birther/rookie

Trump's message was "I'll help the economy."

Clinton's message was "Donald Trump is a bad person and you are too if you vote for him."

Yeah, her policies are better for the economy. But her campaign never made the argument. Or at lease didn't push it a quarter as much as Trump's did. And yes, the media was complicit in letting Trump lie about this stuff. But Clinton's messaging was the worst I've seen since Martha Coakley lost to Scott Brown.

And on top of that Trump actually showed up on the trail (rallies) and like you said dominated all forms of media. Hillary and Dems were no-shows and even gave up on traditional campaign advertising for moneyball bullshit, they made history for the wrong reasons like skipping WI. Dems got mixed messaging and no presence, bad mix
 
Yes, yes... Why would I compare the failed democratic nominee to her opponent, who ran solely on the struggles of working class Americans and co-opted the outcry against the '1%'?

You're right. Totally nonsensical.

It is when it's not what the topic is really about, and it's obviously just a way to start up the tired old primary discussion to pound your chest for Bernie, but most didn't take your bait thankfully, so just go on about your business
 
Yes, yes... Why would I compare the failed democratic nominee to her opponent, who ran solely on the struggles of working class Americans and co-opted the outcry against the '1%'?

You're right. Totally nonsensical.
Maybe because if you're trying to reach the white working class nominating an old, jewish, self-described socialist from the Northeast isn't the best way to do it, especially if he can't even win his own party over?
I'm aware, I watched it. But that was a very small part of her message overall. Everything else was largely based on Trump.
I wasn't referring to a single speech, there are plenty of links in there.

And still, if your argument is "hey these guy's economicpolicies are fucking awful because x and y, instead I'm going to do z to help the economy" that's still focusing on economics.
 
There is the sobering reminder that some people and families really are desperate enough to think literally anything than the status quo looked appealling to them.

Of course, Trump isn't exactly going help.

Some people wanted to send a message by not supporting the status quo, I just hope others hear it over the sound of their superior intellects.
 
These voters have a disdain for the coastal elite. The professional class is generally full of people who think they're smarter than them because they have a fancy degree. However, they are infatuated with people who hold most of the capital. Those owners are all self-made.

tldr:

Labor that receives high-income - elite, arrogant, snobs

Owners that profit off of capital rather than labor - smart, self-made, the american dream.

Sports are a microcosm of the same dynamic. Overpaid, greedy athlete and the gracious, publicly subsidized, owner.
 
Top Bottom