Support NeoGAF

[Cesare Borgia]

I'm not sure what you're referring to in the last sentence. Bernie Sanders?

No not Sanders. The DNC is going to pick someone early and start pushing buttons and making calls, as a trial balloon/gauging potential national support. Maybe that person becomes the nom, maybe they don't. The point is that I'd hope people here recognize it and instead look to candidates who are making inroads with organizations and communities. Not "hey I'm here at a NAACP dinner in 2019" inroads.

I'd also hope that nominees take a clear lesson from Sanders: you cannot win the nomination without a decent percentage of the black vote. You have to make those inroads early, you can't just show up one day with Killer Mike and Cornell West and expect black people to give a fuck. If Sanders had put in the work with that community he could have beaten Hillary IMO.

 

[Plinko]

LOL at the Warren suggestions. Unless Trump is a disaster (I honestly don't think he will be because of Pence, who you can argue with on beliefs but is actually a good politician for the most part), a celebrity and/or outsider is the best bet. Nominating another lifelong politician would be wasting another election cycle.

My guess is that the 2020 nominee is from the Midwest.

So that gives us Kander or Franken.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Some info on progressive referendums nationwide:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/9/13572368/marijuana-guns-minimum-wage-election-2016



This obviously flies in the face of the narrative from the echo-chamber here that "populist progressivism lost" simply because some progressive candidates lost (especially if people are voting straight ticket).

Looking like maybe this really was just people not liking Hillary and there isn't a real hard shift to the right

 

[Grexeno]

My guess is that the 2020 nominee is from the Midwest.

Kander time!

 

[BreezyLimbo]

How can anyone be certain warren would win? Another old ne liberal with little charisma.

Obama and bill clinton where immensely charismatic in an election during a recession!

What evidence do we have that warren or biden or sanders would have made a difference? Maybe they would have won. I wish we can go back and rerun it to see. But we can't.

I don't know the answer. No one does. There no evidence one way or the other.

The sad thing now is that

We're always going to need an Obama or Bill Clinton in order to win. The landscape has changed too much for any other type of candidate. It doesn't matter if your candidate is the most damn qualified, it matters how much charisma they can output and get people off their asses to vote.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

My guess is that the 2020 nominee is from the Midwest.

Mark Dayton, Sherrod Brown (if he keeps his seat), Al Franken

I think one of those are our best shot.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Problem is, Democrats likely will nuke the filibuster too once it benefits them. They've been burned too badly by the abuse of it. If they don't nuke it, then republicans might be seeing a level of obstruction they've never seen before, as just deserts.

It's not like voters punish politicians for breaking procedural norms. The can of worms is already open.

Yeah, but the fear of what happens next will always stick around. I never bought that a Dem senate would go scorched earth on the Filibuster.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

That might be necessary but be be aware that will be taking a big shit on all PoC and a step back for intersetionality. Minority turnout could/will be affected.

Yeah, I dunno, this shit sucks. I just think certain white people fucking revolted big time because of how all in Hillary was. I would hate to see a dem pandering to these people though, because they don't wanna hear none of it, and that's dangerous.

 

[VendettaRed07]

My guess is that the 2020 nominee is from the Midwest.

This is just our only winning strategy forever.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Might be post election feelings and listening to punk and rage against the machine but I wanna look to run for local shit because we need more socialist and leftist voices in government

 

[Kusagari]

Warren is not charismatic at all.

 

[Suikoguy]

Franken is looking like a really good choice for 2020

 

[Bowdz]

Dems need to just focus on rebuilding and standing their ground. The GOP owns the country now. If shit goes down economically or policy-wise, it is on them and the Dems need to position themselves to remind EVERYONE that the GOP fucked this up.

I'd love to proven wrong by the GOP, but their track record of late has been abysmal. Again, they turned a $236 billion surplus in 2000 and turned it into a $100 billion deficit in under 2 years. By the end of eight years, they took a booming economy and turned it into a global recession that rivaled the Great Depression. They took a peacetime nation and gave us two ground wars in 3 years. Maybe they will be different this time, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[jtb]

Not even a point. Change the vote distribution slightly, give up the gains in the south for solidifying the rust belt, and the election flips. The most data driven campaign in history had bad data, we all had bad data, and that's probably what screwed us over. We relied too much on basic data and not enough on traditional interpretation.

Yeah. This is probably the most inefficiently distributed coalition in the history of the electoral college.

I do return to the idea that - Hillary didn't dictate the terms of the map, Trump did. And that's reflective of the race as a whole. Trump dictated the rules of engagement from day one to November 8. For someone who was supposed to be the prohibitive favorite in the race, her campaign was always reactive. And that's the same story as 08 too. Ugh.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

And Michigan was lost by 13.000 votes.

FUCK

What was the turn out like in comparison to 2012?

 

[Jeels]

I am interesting in seeing if the democrats try to up their organization in AZ, GA and TX in the future. I don't think the democrats need to focus on the midwest anymore to win future elections besides maybe trying to win back PA. AZ, GA and TX are the GOP's weak links in this election to an extent. They are all ripe for the taking by democrats.

Probably not for 10-15 years. But yes, that would be the strategy then. 2020 still needs the democrats midwestern "wall" (which no longer exists obviously...)

 

[balladofwindfishes]

This is just our only winning strategy forever.

The movement of the south to blue is still going strong. The Midwest isn't viable forever, we need new ground.

 

[plagiarize]

The reservation I have with the Bernie Sanders/rural white voter theory is that we saw a similar phenomenon on 2008.... when they voted en masse for Hillary, against Obama. The hard part is untangling whether it's a vote "for" him or "against" her.

Which is the most astute rebuttal to the notion that Sanders would have won the firewall states that fell I've seen.

It's still a pointless argument that is entirely about bitter Sander's supporters trying to make themselves feel better today... which trust me I don't begrudge them... but we all need to be lining up against Trump, not kicking Clinton when she's down. Yeah she lost. Now tell me how blaming her wins us back the senate in 2018?

Maybe it feels good to say 'See I told you she would lose!" but it doesn't help us and it doesn't teach us anything because, again, there are no candidates like her to rally behind in 2020. The Clinton dynasty is dead. We will have a fresher face. Probably a name we aren't even banding about yet.

"Maybe if we just picked a better candidate everything would sort itself out!" is still nonsense. There are hard lessons to be learned here. And hard work to be done.

 

[Black Mamba]

Clinton talked a lot about mostly free college, fixing health care, raising minimum wage, expanding child credits, paid leave.

All things working white class agree with. They don't care. They didn't like her.

 

[Plinko]

And Michigan was lost by 13.000 votes.

FUCK

"Don't worry about Michigan, Plinko. Quit bedwetting."

--All of PoliGAF

 

[GutsOfThor]

Might be post election feelings and listening to punk and rage against the machine but I wanna look to run for local shit because we need more socialist and leftist voices in government

Do it. Seriously.

 

[VendettaRed07]

LOL at the Warren suggestions. Unless Trump is a disaster (I honestly don't think he will be because of Pence, who you can argue with on beliefs but is actually a good politician for the most part), a celebrity and/or outsider is the best bet. Nominating another lifelong politician would be wasting another election cycle.

It very likely will not be her. But we have no idea what it will be like 4 years from now. Maybe people will get exhausted at the reality show and jump on any suit in a tie we throw up. Maybe not. I think we just need to pay far closer attention to whatever the vibe is around the country instead of ignoring things outside of the bubble.

 

[Officerrob]

*More charismatic than Hillary

That's a fucking LOW bar

 

[sphagnum]

Might be post election feelings and listening to punk and rage against the machine but I wanna look to run for local shit because we need more socialist and leftist voices in government

Do it

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Clinton talked a lot about mostly free college, fixing health care, raising minimum wage, expanding child credits, paid leave.

All things working white class agree with. They don't care. They didn't like her.

She also talked extensively about racism and police reform.

 

[Y2Kev]

Do we care? Clinton talked about racial rights more than she talked about the economic issues and she just lost, big league. The black American and Hispanic vote - they're not the winning votes anywhere except like Florida, maybe, and even then Clinton lost despite good black and Hispanic turnout there.

I care about these issues and they'd be a top priority if I actually took governance, but I wouldn't ever put them front and centre as a Dem candidate in my campaigns. I think we need to be blunt about this: Obama did well because he won poor white votes at a much higher rate than Clinton. The black American vote was impressive and a milestone in American history, but... what states were won through it that wouldn't otherwise have been won?

OK, but Obama didn't have to put black issues in the limelight because his identity took care of any need for identity politics. Let's be real-- there was a lot of noise about "he's not really black" or "he's not black enough" but black people made sure to support the first black president. I don't think a white person (especially one with Hillary's history) can afford that.

So question for me is:

1. do you nominate a black man again to leverage the strength of the AA community and have him reach out to poor white people to reverse trump's gains, or

2. do you nominate a centrist / triangulator who will talk exclusively about classically democratic things (Bill Clinton 2.0)? Basically a GOP lite - racism + taxes on wealthy + anti trade / focus on jobs. No mention of social justice, criminal justice, social issues. the appeal to white people is built in but do you risk lower minority turnout?

I think this was a wakeup call about how big 70% of an electorate actually is.

Not sure the country is like 1992 anymore but also I'm not unconvinced that 8 years of a black president radicalized rural white voters and sent them into a voting frenzy

 

[DrMungo]

Some thoughts.
-Clinton won the popular vote. She narrowly lost FL PA WI and MI.
-third party candidates had the highest percentage take since 2000 I think.
- turnout in some states like MI and WI were low for D
- continuing demographic changes are still trending to more minorities.
So that being said I think 2020 is still possible. 2018 maybe tough but the GOP has to actually come up with laws instead of being party of obstruction.

 

[Plinko]

Michael David Smith ‏@MichaelDavSmith 6m6 minutes ago

Pundits told us women and Latinos would propel Clinton to victory. Nope. Clinton underperformed 2012 Obama among Latina women by 8 points.

.

She. Was. Unlikeably. Flawed.

 

[Suikoguy]

Which is the most astute rebuttal to the notion that Sanders would have won the firewall states that fell I've seen.

Yes, that and the Feingold/Teachout/Kander argument has me questioning what we should do to move forward. It's not seemingly about policy at this point.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I don't know about that.

Maybe Clinton had too much baggage to be an effective messenger, but by all accounts, underperforming AA turnout affected Clinton in Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida - at least. It was always going to be difficult - maybe impossible - to match the turnout from the first black president, but we also can't afford any slippage in enthusiasm from the base.

Quick maths, but even if Clinton had Obama-level black vote in Pennsylvania and Florida I don't think she wins. Black voters are 8% of Pennsylvania's eligible electorate. They voted ~90% Clinton. So if you increased black turnout by 10%, taking it from ~60% to ~70%, already an enormous stretch that actually exceeds Obama, you increase Clinton's share of the vote by 0.72%. That's not actually enough for her to win PA. Same in Florida.

Whites without college degrees are ~40% of the electorate. Black Americans are ~10%. I know which one I want to win.

 

[B-Dubs]

Clinton talked a lot about mostly free college, fixing health care, raising minimum wage, expanding child credits, paid leave.

All things working white class agree with. They don't care. They didn't like her.

Which is why we're going to get Al Franken elected president. Or Jon Stewart. Maybe both.

Fuck it, we need to find someone popular and smart. Mostly popular, the smart is just my personal preference.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Clinton talked a lot about mostly free college, fixing health care, raising minimum wage, expanding child credits, paid leave.

All things working white class agree with. They don't care. They didn't like her.

Basically this.

It didn't matter what she promised. They didn't like her, didn't believe her or people just didn't think she would deliver the type of change she promised.

 

[bplewis24]

Warren has plenty of charisma and with Trump's spending plans we're heading towards another recession. The pieces are in place,

I love Elizabeth Warren, and I think she is a firebrand. But I wouldn't confuse that with charisma. Obama and Bill had it in spades. They were the kind of people you'd want to walk into a party with because their cool rubs off on you. The type of person you'd hang out with just for the sake of hanging out. I don't think Elizabeth Warren (or any other current high profile progressive, including Bernie) has that quality. Doesn't mean she couldn't win, but I just think we need to be realistic here. I'd love to be in the virtual trenches with Warren. She's a fighter, and she's inspirational. But she doesn't ooze cool and charm.

Having said that, I don't necessarily think that's necessary to win the White House. There are probably a few factors that contributed to Hillary's defeat separate from what Trump did or didn't do: she had huge unfavorables due to perceived scandals throughout the years, and she was associated with the elite establishment and a former controversial president. Take some of those things away and perhaps an inspirational policy wonk could still build enough of a coalition to win elections.

I just don't think it gets the wave you need to take bank senate seats and the house, without a highly charismatic individual.

 

[Plinko]

It very likely will not be her. But we have no idea what it will be like 4 years from now. Maybe people will get exhausted at the reality show and jump on any suit in a tie we throw up. Maybe not. I think we just need to pay far closer attention to whatever the vibe is around the country instead of ignoring things outside of the bubble.

100% agreed. The bubble is what cost them the election.

 

[mo60]

Because minorities turned out.

The states that are shocking us are the ones where the white moderates are a major block and they repudiated Hillary across the board.

I know.

 

[numble]

Clinton talked a lot about mostly free college, fixing health care, raising minimum wage, expanding child credits, paid leave.

All things working white class agree with. They don't care. They didn't like her.

It's the economy (and trade), stupid.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/11/08/election/01-new-president-main-story.html#

And Trump showed his muscle with traditional Democratic voters. For example, the billionaire won union households by 5 points, 49 percent to 44 percent, exit polls in Ohio showed. Obama took that group in 2012 by 23 points.

...

Trump was correct to emphasize issue of trade because 46 percent of Ohio voters say it takes away jobs, while 34 percent contend it creates jobs.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/09/fox-news-general-election-exit-poll-summary.html

Trump’s criticism of international trade played particularly well in Ohio. Nearly half of Ohio voters (48 percent) think trade with other countries takes away jobs, compared 32 percent who think it creates jobs.

Those who think trade hurts jobs broke for Trump by 67-29 percent margin.

His message on trade also appears to have helped him among union voters. He won a majority of union members – 52 percent – a dramatic improvement over the 37 percent Romney took home in 2012.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/20...-dominates-among-working-class-whites-n681146

Trump's protectionist views on trade policy resonated deeply with these voters. A clear majority of working-class whites in the Rust Belt say that trade with other countries takes away U.S. jobs, compared to about a quarter who say it has no effect and 7 percent who say it creates more jobs.


Among these working-class white voters who said that trade takes away U.S. jobs, about three-quarters voted for Trump.


These are the types of voters who feel left behind by globalization and are strongly disaffected with the government. A clear majority of them no longer feel at home in the Democratic Party, and in Trump they have found a candidate who they hope can bring about some of the change — particularly economic change — that they are looking for.

 

[Dan]

Clinton talked a lot about mostly free college, fixing health care, raising minimum wage, expanding child credits, paid leave.

All things working white class agree with. They don't care. They didn't like her.

They're also afraid of Muslims, African-Americans, Mexicans, etc. They believe in fictitious crimewaves, and of a flood of refugees loyal to ISIS.

Any sort of 'not liking Hillary' is a polite excuse to embrace fear and hatred.

 

[Wiz]

Humble pie being served on Keepin it 1600

 

[mackaveli]

The only think I can somewhat hope for is that now Republicans have control of all branches that instead of being obstructionist they decide they can actually invoke positive change and create goodwill and be known as the party that united everyone, democrats and independents to continue to win election after election going forward and stay in power for a long time.

Who am I kidding.

 

[plagiarize]

.

She. Was. Unlikeably. Flawed.

Do. You. Want. A. Cookie. Or. Something?

Great. She was really unlikeable and that's why she lost.

This is a really dangerous thing to believe, because the inference there is that all we need to do to fix this is not pick a highly disliked person next time. Presto chango WIN! No hard work necessary!

The most palatable answer to an unknown is the one we need to be the most suspicious of, because it's the one we're most likely to be biased towards.

 

[RustyNails]

Post-mortem: how did polling (both state and national) miss this?

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Do it. Seriously.

Do it

Definitely gonna look into it.

I'm 24. I can't sit back and watch shit go to hell without doing anything about it.

 

[Barzul]

The only think I can somewhat hope for is that now Republicans have control of all branches that instead of being obstructionist they decide they can actually invoke positive change and create goodwill and be known as the party that united everyone, democrats and independents to continue to win election after election going forward and stay in power for a long time.

Who am I kidding.

lol

 

[Voysa Reezun]

.

She. Was. Unlikeably. Flawed.

She's not a good campaigner, unfortunately. She's a great administrator, so she should be POTUS, but she's a bad campaigner.

I don't blame her for that so much as I blame the country for needing to feel "inspired" or some such bullshit in order to stop a fascist from rising to power.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Trump's trade policies will make white working class voters even worse of.

lol

 

[Doc Holliday]

NYC looks literally half-empty today, by the way.

You're telling me. At my Wework office everyone is fucking depressed as fuck. I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler but as a Latino I can imagine that this is what it felt like in the late 1920 early 30's in europe for jews.

on that note:

"Let me just tell you, Mr. Trump has a long memory and we're keeping a list," Manigault, the campaign's director of African-American outreach, told the Independent Journal Review, a conservative magazine.

 

[Crocodile]

Do we care? Clinton talked about racial rights more than she talked about the economic issues and she just lost, big league. The black American and Hispanic vote - they're not the winning votes anywhere except like Florida, maybe, and even then Clinton lost despite good black and Hispanic turnout there.

I care about these issues and they'd be a top priority if I actually took governance, but I wouldn't ever put them front and centre as a Dem candidate in my campaigns. I think we need to be blunt about this: Obama did well because he won poor white votes at a much higher rate than Clinton. The black American vote was impressive and a milestone in American history, but... what states were won through it that wouldn't otherwise have been won?

Putting aside that it would mean actively shitting on the most loyal block of the party, letting the minority vote slip even further than it did this cycle means states like Michigan and Pennsylvania become harder as do many Southern States. I feel a general sentiment is "you can't assume _______" will show up. Dumping key policy issues or talking points will make sure they don't show up. I don't think its easy to figure out this messaging that makes all sides happy.

I will say I'll do anything within legal and moral bounds for a Democratic victory but I would still be pissed if the Democrats let off the gas on these issues and I know plenty of other minority voters - especially millennials - would tell the party to eat a dick if they did that.

 

[jtb]

Quick maths, but even if Clinton had Obama-level black vote in Pennsylvania and Florida I don't think she wins. Black voters are 8% of Pennsylvania's eligible electorate. They voted ~90% Clinton. So if you increased black turnout by 10%, taking it from ~60% to ~70%, already an enormous stretch that actually exceeds Obama, you increase Clinton's share of the vote by 0.72%. That's not actually enough for her to win PA. Same in Florida.

Whites without college degrees are ~40% of the electorate. Black Americans are ~10%. I know which one I want to win.

But can they even be won? If Ds continue their march towards being progressive party of the professionals, they'll continue eating away at the margins of the college educated. They just won't do it quickly enough to make up for the WWC vote. I don't know the answer. But there is a clear failure of the current construction of the Democratic coalition.

 

[Already Torn]

Definitely gonna look into it.

I'm 24. I can't sit back and watch shit go to hell without doing anything about it.

I believe in you. Where you at?

 

[Isaac Otherworld]

I love Elizabeth Warren, and I think she is a firebrand. But I wouldn't confuse that with charisma. Obama and Bill had it in spades. They were the kind of people you'd want to walk into a party with because their cool rubs off on you. The type of person you'd hang out with just for the sake of hanging out. I don't think Elizabeth Warren (or any other current high profile progressive, including Bernie) has that quality. Doesn't mean she couldn't win, but I just think we need to be realistic here. I'd love to be in the virtual trenches with Warren. She's a fighter, and she's inspirational. But she doesn't ooze cool and charm.

Having said that, I don't necessarily think that's necessary to win the White House. There are probably a few factors that contributed to Hillary's defeat separate from what Trump did or didn't do: she had huge unfavorables due to perceived scandals throughout the years, and she was associated with the elite establishment and a former controversial president. Take some of those things away and perhaps an inspirational policy wonk could still build enough of a coalition to win elections.

I just don't think it gets the wave you need to take bank senate seats and the house, without a highly charismatic individual.

Yeah Warren and Bernie aren't cool people the way Obama and Bill Clinton are, but being unapologetic and fiery about what you support is better than being an ashamed of being a liberal saying "Oh boy I can't wait to work with Republicans because they're so right about everything."

Because that shit has lost so many winnable seats for democratic candidates every year since 2006. And now it's lost the presidency.