Mammoth Jones
Member
Gotta cosign this.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
1 In 10 Sanders Primary Voters Ended Up Supporting Trump
- Thread starter QuantumBro
- Start date
- Status
Gotta cosign this.
Muppet of a Man
Member
It's not really though if you think about it. It's all the white blue collar workers in the rust belt who traditionally voted democratic due to their historic support for unions. They are by nature more economically liberal than socially liberal, which is a kind of anomaly not found most places with large liberal/progressive constituencies.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
6% of all votes in 2016 were Trump -> Obama, which is about 12% of Obama's total vote.
Angelus Errare
Banned
They're both "anti-establishment" and for those 1 in 10 that's more important than their platforms themselves that or they never cared about the platforms (most likely) or they really hated Clinton, or they just didn't care and did it for the "lulz".
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Fuck every single one of them.
Tinfoilhatsron
Banned
Jesus Christ that number is too high even for Dems. God damn even in a survey people would truthfully out themselves to be as racist as fuck.Yet despite his "falling on his face"
Except if people don't learn from this, the same things will happen again and again. It's going to be pretty important to keep hammering all of those points you listed again and again for the next 4 years so people are fucking alert next time around.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
I think that would be a slightly different issue, as there would be more time for an individual's political outlook to change in 4 years. Here, we're talking about a period of only a few months between Hillary winning the nomination and the general election.
Additionally, in some states, only registered Democrats/Republicans can vote in the primaries. So some of these Bernie voters were likely registered Democrats, yet still ended up voting for Trump in the general election.
SenorArdilla
Member
Probably the same people who thought Ron Paul was a good candidate.
Yet despite his "falling on his face"
This chart might be more revelatory if it contained intensity markers.
For example, maybe Bernie attracted lots of progressives and also a small percentage of racists. You might see a chart like this. But on a graph by intensity, you'd see a two-humped distribution.
Koomaster and Googleplex are by far gaf's biggest Bernie haters. Bernie could cure cancer and they'd find a way to hold it against him.
Bernie isn't perfect and the election wasn't perfect but I can't imagine what he did to earn that kind of vitriol. And topics like this show that almost all Bernie supporters in the end did the right thing.
Hell who's to say if Bernie didn't run those Trump voters wouldn't have voted for Trump or stayed at home anyway?
Father_Brain
Banned
The vast majority of the intra-party primary polarization was, and still is, concentrated mainly in a handful of small but disproportionately vocal bubbles (Twitter, left-of-center media and think tanks, etc). Most Clinton primary voters would have been fine with Sanders as the nominee, just as the reverse was true in reality.
minor effort
Banned
People want easy answers for why this election went the way it did as a shortcut to prevent the same thing from happening in 2020. The reality is so complex that no one reason completely answers why she lost.
Ultimately, Clinton and her campaign are the most direct sources to blame. The Comey letter likely did negatively impact her campaign, but it could be argued that her numbers never should have been so close to Trump's that this one thing could be The Blame. It's likely wayward Democratic primary did negatively impact her vote totals in crucial swing states, but it could be argued that her numbers never should have been so close to Trump's that this one thing could be The Blame. And so on.
Looking for one single answer to why Democrats lost in 2016 is going to leave a whole lot of other unresolved issues still sitting on the table going into 2020.
I agree, we need to be cognizant of all of the factors that led to a sexual predator, racist, bigot being elected POTUS. My point is those who did the right thing and voted for Hillary should not be yelling at others who voted for Hillary about who to blame. It's completely ineffectual and pointless.
We also need to recognize that all of those factors mentioned were really a perfect storm of shit. Take away any ONE of those things and we would probably have Hillary as POTUS right now. We need to recognize this so we can minimize possible shit storms in the future.
This is how I feel about the Hillary-hating posters on this board.
I assume, in the end, they just genuinely believe that their nemesis directly caused Donald Trump to get elected. If I believed that about somebody I would be pretty angry at them too!
DeviantBoi
Member
Clinton was just as flawed as any other candidate that has run for the presidency. She lost because there was a perfect storm of events that affected her negatively:
1. Bernie painted her as being in the pocket of Wallstreet. Republicans took that characterization and ran with it.
2. Years of Republican gerrymandering and the Democrats not doing anything about it.
3. Voter laws that disenfranchised many Clinton voters and Democrats that didn't fight them until it was too late.
4. The media obsession with every little Clinton flaw and blowing it out of proportion.
5. Russia and fake news.
And despite everything, she won the popular vote.
1. Bernie painted her as being in the pocket of Wallstreet. Republicans took that characterization and ran with it.
2. Years of Republican gerrymandering and the Democrats not doing anything about it.
3. Voter laws that disenfranchised many Clinton voters and Democrats that didn't fight them until it was too late.
4. The media obsession with every little Clinton flaw and blowing it out of proportion.
5. Russia and fake news.
And despite everything, she won the popular vote.
Amibguous Cad
Member
This makes me believe slightly more in the "Clinton was a weaker candidate than anyone expected" hypothesis. She was hobbled by three decades of baseless scandalmongering and lies by the right, and apparently that managed to turn at least a small part of the coalition into Never Clinton-ers, and enough to swing a close race.
It does mean these 12% are probably winnable in the next election. While Sanders wasn't as forceful on racism as I would have liked, the fact that they were willing to vote for him probably indicates it isn't a dislike of social justice as such. But obviously, voting from trump means they don't care that much about it either. To the extent that these voters are motivated by policy concerns, they don't care much one way or the other about it, so I remain suspicious of people who think we have to run away from our SJ positions to win them back.
If your first reaction to this is that Sanders supporters are racists, you're more interested in scoring points in fruitless infighting than in taking back the white house.
It does mean these 12% are probably winnable in the next election. While Sanders wasn't as forceful on racism as I would have liked, the fact that they were willing to vote for him probably indicates it isn't a dislike of social justice as such. But obviously, voting from trump means they don't care that much about it either. To the extent that these voters are motivated by policy concerns, they don't care much one way or the other about it, so I remain suspicious of people who think we have to run away from our SJ positions to win them back.
If your first reaction to this is that Sanders supporters are racists, you're more interested in scoring points in fruitless infighting than in taking back the white house.
theinternetman
Member
That is pretty wild, it's too bad we don't have a good nickname to throw at these voters. These two statistics mostly show that really not that many democrats were swayed to go red by the time the general rolled around. Hard to see how to reasonably to use this data to assign blame to Sanders for the election.
I agree with this, but I'm not sure everybody on the board does. I've seen some Bernie supporters insinuate quite the reverse.
Muppet of a Man
Member
Interestingly, Sanders supporters overall have the least racist views on black people going by those charts.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
So you're telling that they were much more likely to stick to the program and vote for the Democrat in the general than Clinton voters in 2008?
But okay, let's keep shitting on the base without any hint of self awareness.
But okay, let's keep shitting on the base without any hint of self awareness.
In 2016, 9% of Democrats voted for Trump.
In 2012, 7% of Democrats voted for Romney.
In 2008, 10% of Democrats voted for McCain.
In 2004, 11% of Democrats voted for Bush.
In 2000, 11% of Democrats voted for Bush
2016 is within the normal range of elections in the last 5 elections. I didn't look any earlier than that. But regardless, it's seems roughly normal that about 10% of people registered As Democrats vote for republican Presidents each election.
I know some people will say that many or some of Bernies voters are independents and not Democrats, but for the purposes of this, I'm assuming that the number of people that registered as Democrats to vote for Bernieand then unregistered as Democrats between the primary and general is pretty small, because it's sort of a meaningless gesture.
Well you're not wrong there, shit.
But I'm one of those people that like both Bernie and Hillary equally.
Honestly at this point I think both views are tiring. Time to move on.
I strongly agree. The question is simply not relevant to what we do in the future.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
as someone who personally knows several people who did the "hillary's better than trump but not as good as sanders so i won't vote for her if she wins the nomination," this is why people are bitter about this shit. now that we have even more quantifiable data showing this is the truth, there will still be people coming in and going "not all sander's voters tho." yeah of course, but 12% is a huge chunk especially not just not voting, but voting for trump.
"but but but sanders vilifying hillary didn't damage the democrats chance at all!" it did. it didn't hurt sanders though because he's not a democrat and is living in his "cut off your nose to spite your face" fantasy where perfect truly is the enemy of good.
-hey we're 95% similar! let's unite against evil/hate/regression/bigotry/etc!
- yeah but what's up with that 5% tho? something something hawkish (as trump threatens nuclear holocaust in the present)
"but but but sanders vilifying hillary didn't damage the democrats chance at all!" it did. it didn't hurt sanders though because he's not a democrat and is living in his "cut off your nose to spite your face" fantasy where perfect truly is the enemy of good.
-hey we're 95% similar! let's unite against evil/hate/regression/bigotry/etc!
- yeah but what's up with that 5% tho? something something hawkish (as trump threatens nuclear holocaust in the present)
Father_Brain
Banned
I think I've been pretty consistent and clear that the people who loudly and vitriolically blame Sanders and his supporters for undermining HRC (and who, yes, I absolutely believe would have been one of Bloomberg's main bases of support had Sanders won the nomination) don't represent the vast majority of HRC primary voters, but fine, I'll say it again if that makes you happy.
Single issue voters. If they couldn't get Bernie, they didn't care if they got Trump. I would imagine almost all of these voters were probably white men and women who wouldn't stand to lose under Trump.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
I remember the thread when this data first came out, it was quite the surprise to a lot of folk.
Yes, even among so-called progressives, a decent chunk have attitudes that help them look the other way at white supremacists. America's dirty little secret.
B-b-b-but racist Berniebros?
ShironRedshift
Member
Probably mostly just due to utterly despising Clinton mostly but there were commonalities between Trump and Sanders' platforms:
-Both very anti-free trade, wanting to rip up trade deals like TPP and NAFTA.
-Very strong focus on creating jobs/improving the economy in their platforms.
-Both were perceived as doves/non-interventionist, while Clinton was perceived as a hawk (of course, yeah, it was ridiculous that someone would think that Clinton would be more of a war-hawk than Trump, but this was definitely a thing during the election because of how thoroughly Clinton had been portrayed that way).
Like I said though, that's probably not the primary reason these people swapped (unless you consider being anti-Clinton in of itself part of Sanders' platform) and still ridiculous regardless, but there were commonalities between the two, both actual and perceived.
Yup, it's all the 'never Clinton' folks who basically provided the lay up for Trump to slam dunk the election. He already had a fervent base and these people gave them the keys to the castle. Mind boggling.
BotoxAgent
Member
Yup!! Too many fucked up factors brought her down--including her own hubris and incompetence and the media basically giving Trump unlimited air time.
Darryl M R
Member
I expected the number to be higher mainly because I don't see all Bernie voters being the same as a Bernie supporter. A good amount of people wanted to be anti-establishment without defining the establishment.
That's among all supporters. Not the defector group!
One of my associates made several facebook posts at around the time when primary results were finished, and bitter that Sanders lost, he remarked that Hillary was akin to a wolf in sheep's clothing, and he'd rather have an openly vile man like Trump win rather than Hillary, because it'd be some sort of galvanizing force for the political left for 2018 onward.
I keenly remember this, because this came shortly after he liked some article about how it's not white privilege that people choose to throw their weight behind Hillary in order to oppose Trump.
And now, the worst has come to pass. You have ICE dragging off immigrants, tearing apart families, DREAMers living in limbo, Muslim ban implemented, and the KKK and Nazis elevated to those that oppose them. Whenever I run into him some part of me wants to hassle him about his stake in the presidency compared to the rest of us.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
The relevant question here is how many of those registered Dems also voted for an opponent of the Dem presidential candidate in those years. Of the 10% of Dems who voted for McCain in '08, I'd bet a really small portion were Hillary primary voters.
Patrick Bateman
Member
I mean it's all theoretical, but I still wonder how the elections would have turned out with Sanders vs. Trump.
You can't just calculate that those Democrats who didn't vote for Clinton would've voted 100% for Sanders, but it would still have been quite interesting.
Especially that Trump attacked her on her work in foreign affairs, that she was from the political establishment of Washington and "her mails".
What would he have attacked Sanders with? That he's
left and did protests in the 60s?
You can't just calculate that those Democrats who didn't vote for Clinton would've voted 100% for Sanders, but it would still have been quite interesting.
Especially that Trump attacked her on her work in foreign affairs, that she was from the political establishment of Washington and "her mails".
What would he have attacked Sanders with? That he's
left and did protests in the 60s?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think she carries sole responsibility, but outside of Donald Trump himself, Clinton had the most influence of any given person over Donald Trump's election. If one single person could change their actions to try and avert Trump's election, she'd be the first place you'd start after Trump. That does make me pretty angry, sure.
Well, the caucus vs popular vote in states that had both was pretty obvious. Caucuses generally favor white voters. General elections have more of a spread of the population. In multiple states, Bernie won the caucus, but Hillary won the popular vote comfortably, like Nebraska, even in college towns, and this was with the popular vote not mattering and with higher turnout.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
uhhhhh this is quantifiable evidence showing this being a factor. are we not allowed to discuss it according to you because there are other factors?
who claimed this was the only factor?
you're really going to bring in the huge burlap sack of shit labeled "whataboutism" into this thread? if you really reach you can apply that shtick to almost any topic on earth as a means to shut down discussion. it's useless and has zero constructive traits to a discussion
Euphoria14
Member
Yup. This info goes right in the face of months and months worth of bashing Bernie supporters endured on GAF. Blamed for this, blamed for that, meanwhile we see they were more loyal than the supporters who bashed them.
Some self reflection is in order it seems.
I'd probably start with James Comey.
But, again, I think the discussion is mostly a tedious waste of energy.
methane47
Member
Yes. This is not a graph of the defector group.Did you not see this graph:
I don't know whether to laugh at the absurdity or plan a lifestyle to die before I'm 30 if this is what we have to deal with.
Holy shit.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked