NYCmetsfan
Banned
Why would you presume people all view these things the same?
-
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.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT| Ask us about our performance with Latinos in Nevada
- Thread starter Makai
- Start date
- Status
That is what they are asking. That's why Sanders is where he is today. You got anything else?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Have you read the Federalist papers? Seriously. Read them if you haven't.
Spoiler: that's the point.
The system was intentially designed to do what you describe
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
No. If anything it pushes them away, because most Americans think that wealth inequality is a problem but most Americans do not support legal abortion. The move towards post-materialism is frequently cited as part of the reason for the decline of traditional leftwing parties in the late 90s/early 00s.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
?
There has been no change basically in abortion opinions since the 70s and 80% of Americans think abortion should be legal it at least some instances.
This is why Rubio and Cruz could end up being poison in a general election.
This is the best ad I've seen this cycle so far.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
?
There has been no change basically in abortion opinions since the 70s and 80% of Americans think abortion should be legal it at least some instances.
I'm not saying their opinions have changed, I'm saying that more Americans agree with the statement that 'wealth inequality is a problem' than they do 'abortion should be available for any reason within the first 24 weeks of conception', and that they have changed the importance with which they weigh these two opinions relative to one another. Gallup's tracker doesn't show this, but a large proportion who think 'legal under some circumstances' would have those circumstances be limited to rape and serious medical risk. You would expect a party that campaigns along wealthy inequality and pro-abortion lines to perform better when people prioritize economic issues than it would when they prioritise abortion - hence why post-materialism is often cited as bad for traditionally leftist parties.
...what? I really hope you're not implying what I think you are.
I just want to say, with your avatar every time you open a post with a quote I feel like Hillary is looking on with a "Get a load of what this guys saying" smile. I keep expecting an aside glace and an eye roll.
?
There has been no change basically in abortion opinions since the 70s and 80% of Americans think abortion should be legal it at least some instances.
One might equally well say that 70% of Americans think abortion should be illegal in some circumstances.
Abortion is a topic on which the mainstream view is actually nuanced, but nuance doesn't poll that easily.
I've always read that that abundance of "left-wing" parties in Europe is proof that we're becoming more post-materialist.
America operates slightly differently because of our ingrained religious aspects.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I'm implying that more people of color are identifying as white which will slow down the growth of the percentage of voters that are non-white.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
There's not an abundance of leftwing parties, though. Almost no socially leftwing party in Europe is performing well. The ones that have been on the rise are the ones who have returned to economic issues.
Inglehart specifically states that in times of financial turmoil humans gravitate back towards the bottom level of Maslows hierarchy of needs (survival). And compared to The US there are a ton of left-wing parties across the world. Didn't some poster on GAF describe the 3? left parties Spain has alone? Forget what may or may not be "working" the fact they exists is a step in the right direction for humanity. We're still figuring out how to co-exist with each other and earth.
shinra-bansho
Member
I'm only half paying attention, but I'm curious if the implication being made is that the Democrats should really be abandoning social planks, or I suppose at minimum de-emphasising them, like support for reproductive rights in order to gain favour with those that may oppose those rights?
I, uh, I don't think it quite works like that.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
It can. Jews, Irish, Mormons, and Italians were all viewed as non-white in the past.
http://trib.com/news/state-and-regi...cle_9ecdf303-27b8-561b-91d2-b3a570cb7731.html
Sanders isn't even trying to secure superdelegate support, like I thought. These people want to be courted and want all the attention they can get. I can guarantee Obama's campaign pushed heavily for superdelegate support early and often. Very doubtful they switch this year from Clinton to Sanders, especially after everything he's said.
Sanders isn't even trying to secure superdelegate support, like I thought. These people want to be courted and want all the attention they can get. I can guarantee Obama's campaign pushed heavily for superdelegate support early and often. Very doubtful they switch this year from Clinton to Sanders, especially after everything he's said.
There dose seem to be some rumblings along those lines, yes. I think it comes from those within the party most focused on economic issues. The thought process seems to be that since quite a few left leaning policy positions poll well in isolation that if the Democrats dropped "Identity Politics" we could scoop up some of the Dixiecrats that maintain populist economic positions.
I'm not fond of it as a plan because it seems to minimize the issues faced by the groups accused of playing "Identity Politics". To my ears it sounds like people saying that only the economic issues are important and everything else is a sideshow or not actually an issue. Basically it ignores intersectionality.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
If I recall, a big part of Sanders' strategy early on was to downplay social issues in order to bring blue collar democrats back into the fold. It doesn't seem to have stuck, though, and I'm personally glad. I think the social planks of the democratic party are as important as ever.
Here's a great student thesis on the subject if you'd like more insight
If you had to choose among the following things, which are the two that seem the most desirable to you?
1. Maintaining order in the nation.
2. Giving people more say in important political decisions.
3. Fighting rising prices.
4. Protecting freedom of speech.
If you chose 2+4 you'd be considered post-materialist. 1+3 sounds like the GOP. Dems should really just focus on getting people involved and telling them to speak up. The social planks will create themselves.
Elaborate some more.
PRAISE OBAMA!
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
Good news!
shinra-bansho
Member
It's dumb. She's a former First Lady, NY Senator and Secretary of State. She's a Clinton. She's "establishment."
There's a modestly valid point in that there have been something like 40 women elected to the Senate, third female Sec State and really the only viable female Presidential candidate ever. I.e. there have been and are significant barriers that preserve a male-dominated political status quo. But it's a horrible way to try and make that point.
The problem for her is that "establishment" has become a catch-all slur to a segment of the party, so I don't really know what response she can give.
There's a modestly valid point in that there have been something like 40 women elected to the Senate, third female Sec State and really the only viable female Presidential candidate ever. I.e. there have been and are significant barriers that preserve a male-dominated political status quo. But it's a horrible way to try and make that point.
The problem for her is that "establishment" has become a catch-all slur to a segment of the party, so I don't really know what response she can give.
campfireweekend
Member
I really really love that this issue is going our way in the courts.
Hell fucking yes!
This is one step forward. After they are taking a step back. Some counties want to represent themselves against the federal government and the gay marriage ruling, saying that NC's AG is not fit enough to represent them.
I have no idea how it's an "affront to feminism", but it's bullshit.
Aaron Strife
Banned
WHAT
It would be amazing if they could get a new one set up in time for this year's elections, but either way, good news. Democrats would easily gain 2-3 seats under a fair map here.
campfireweekend
Member
I thought this was hilarious btw
HanShotFirst
Member
Good news! Is it getting redrawn by this year's election? What about Virginia and Florida are those definitely being redrawn and will they be done by this years elections?
QuiteWhittle
Member
Rust Belt states next pls
Aaron Strife
Banned
VA and FL have already been redrawn and will be in effect for this year's elections.
VA gets another safely blue district. FL gets two but at the expense of Gwen Graham's seat which is now safely Republican.
However both have a couple seats that would have been competitive regardless, so Democrats could net gain like five seats just from those two states.
That majority is tantalizingly close...
I think being from the same area (Europe) and the actual same skin color would help - look at non caucasian Jews in the US for further evidence on that one.
Also - remember that the rail system in this country was built off of enslaved East Asians. There's already a pretty strong backlash towards East Asians due to the economic rivalry with China. I think any comment about East Asians becoming "white" is lacking in understanding of how those earlier groups "became" white, and the reasoning as to why.
Basically correlation != causation.
Except NC's antigay bigotry!
http://www.13newsnow.com/story/news...nt-to-defend-gay-marriage-exemption/79890108/
Coriolanus
Banned
Respect for maddow increased considerably.
The incompetent or the most likely murderous. Hrm.
But then they'd elect no one, and delusional fools with websites fulla lies and half-truths such as every single candidate running would hold no position.
Are you proposing anarchism?
I do believe that it is somewhat safe to say by now that the anti-establishment sentiment has a significant degree of cross-party appeal (or, at the very least, exists on both sides of the aisle). Thus, segment of the electorate.
Abinash117
Member
There was an article and a thread that many multiracial kids are identifying themselves as white, a lot happened to be Asian or Hispanic and white mix.
That's significantly different then "East Asians will start being considered white".
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa
The millionaires and the billionaires must have put up this ad with their SuperPAC.
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa
I love how once Iowa lost the tables are finally able to turn.
If she comes within striking distance in NH, Sanders just needs to pack it up.
Dude is so in over his head its depressing
shinra-bansho
Member
I think that was supposed to be a quote of me not damisa.
I'm going to add to that quote though that, no, I don't think the same thing is happening across both parties. Democrats still overwhelmingly adore Obummer. They don't revile their congressional leadership as much, so far as I recall. They still hold the likes of HRC (the organisation), the NAACP, and so on in high esteem. There's a portion of the disaffected in this primary, the accelerationists, the liberal equivalent of the Tea Party, the sky is falling, but I don't think it mirrors the GOP.
Also, I'm going to throw this out there, somewhat in relation to Maddow's comment, although I think it will likely get pushback:
America is the world's policeman. It will continue to be the world's policeman. Because no one else can do it. And, really, Western society wouldn't have it any other way.
I'm going to add to that quote though that, no, I don't think the same thing is happening across both parties. Democrats still overwhelmingly adore Obummer. They don't revile their congressional leadership as much, so far as I recall. They still hold the likes of HRC (the organisation), the NAACP, and so on in high esteem. There's a portion of the disaffected in this primary, the accelerationists, the liberal equivalent of the Tea Party, the sky is falling, but I don't think it mirrors the GOP.
Also, I'm going to throw this out there, somewhat in relation to Maddow's comment, although I think it will likely get pushback:
America is the world's policeman. It will continue to be the world's policeman. Because no one else can do it. And, really, Western society wouldn't have it any other way.
How many euopean governments clapped when we announced we are increasing our military spending in Euorpe
I can imagine many many.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked