• 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 |OT2| we love the poorly educated

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

User 463088

Banned
Oltsu said:
He puts economic issues and anti-big business / anti-bank rhetoric at the forefront instead of social issues.

White men aren't affected as much by the current hot social issues so when a lot of the Dem platform is based on social issues (and sometimes the representatives at the top are actually opposed to these young male dems on economic issues) you'll get people who actually don't care for obama or clinton much at all. Because both Clinton and Obama are strong on social issues but are quite honestly heavily pro big business, pro big banks etc. Another angle would also be Clinton / Obama being extremely pro surveillance state.

So essentially you have democrats who are socially liberal (as in they do think that most of the social issues are important) but are left wondering whether their economic needs and ideology are completely forgotten in the age of cronyism, terrible campaign finance, deals like the TPP, etc.

It's not that complicated.
Click to expand...

Well, voting patterns are always complicated, but that makes some sense.

Elaugaufein said:
Where do you expect (young), white , straight , male liberals to go ? They have to go somewhere and it's kind of unnatural to expect them to automatically support all other groups while not in anyway pursueing some of their own interests. A respect for human dignity / rights is not a motivation for absolute selflessness for anyone but (metaphorical) saints.
Click to expand...

Well, I want them to go to whomever they think is the best candidate, and I would prefer that to be Hillary. P However, when there is little day light between the candidates on most issues, I'm still surprised to see such a wide gap among white men (and white women.) It could be the social issue line. It could be just ideological. It could be Bernie is the shiny new toy in the room. I find this kind of thing interesting.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
It seems every poll that comes out now finds that the GOP looks worse and worse for blocking SCOTUS

Wow, McCain's approval is the shits. If only a good candidate was running against him.
 
E

Ekai

Member
CCS said:
What do you mean by this? Genuinely not sure.
Click to expand...

....You are comparing people who simply prefer Bernie/trust Hillary less on the issues to a notorious hate movement. I don't take GG as a laughing matter. Their attacks on women, transwomen, and racial minority men are sickening. As someone among the demographics that GG attacks, excuse me if I'm peeved by this illogical comparison. This reads as a comparison of someone who just prefers a different choice to the worst possible thing one could think of.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Macho Madness said:
It seems every poll that comes out now finds that the GOP looks worse and worse for blocking SCOTUS
Click to expand...

Let's hope it holds. They fucked up their hand as much as possible IMO. Not even talking to ANY nominee is so far past the mainstream. They should have agreed to hold hearings and give them a vote and just unite around shooting the nominee down there.
 
V

Veritigo_X

Member
Ekai said:
....You are comparing people who simply prefer Bernie/trust Hillary less on the issues to a notorious hate movement. I don't take GG as a laughing matter. Their attacks on women, transwomen, and racial minority men are sickening. This reads as a comparison of someone who just prefers a different choice to the worst possible thing one could think of.
Click to expand...

No one is talking about people who "simply prefer Bernie," they're talking about the toxic supporters online (on sites like Reddit and Twitter) that actually do the things you're talking about GG doing.
 
Z

Ziltoidia 9

Member
I believe the generational divide is less about sex and just more about what younger people see as the most important issue for the country is right now, and its special interest influencing politics, lobbyists writing bills, campaign finance, etc.

I'd like Hillary more if she was more anti-wall street, but ultimately she tries to influence the hard right corporatist views by bringing policy more to the liberal side, which is at least a plus.
 
M

Manmademan

Member
Macho Madness said:
Interesting.

56d8e8961e000087007034b6.png
Click to expand...

eh, I don't think this means anything. constantly diablosing about turnout between 2008 and any other year is just lunacy. Democrats were running two extremely popular candidates in a close race.

Hillary and Obama got as many democratic votes in texas as every single republican candidate in 2016 got republican votes there combined.

It's insane to think turnout would get anywhere close.
 
C

CCS

Banned
Ekai said:
....You are comparing people who simply prefer Bernie/trust Hillary less on the issues to a notorious hate movement. I don't take GG as a laughing matter. Their attacks on women, transwomen, and racial minority men are sickening. This reads as a comparison of someone who just prefers a different choice to the worst possible thing one could think of.
Click to expand...

And I'm not comparing all Bernie supporters to GGers. I'm simply stating that I have seen Bernie supporters on Twitter, and popular comments on r/sandersforpresident threads, supporting or justifying GG.
 
E

Ekai

Member
Veritigo_X said:
No one is talking about people who "simply prefer Bernie," they're talking about the toxic supporters online (on sites like Reddit and Twitter) that actually do the things you're talking about GG doing.
Click to expand...

I specified in an earlier post that "I know you're talking about 'militant' supporters". It's still a gross/illogical comparison to make.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
ivysaur12 said:
Whoa, PPP finds that Grassley's approval is only +3 now, 47/44. That's down a lot from where it's been.
Click to expand...

I wish we had someone better than Strickland in Ohio running who could actually win.

: sigh :

The Michigan Democratic Party is hosting a reception tomorrow. Hillary will be attending. Bernie has, as of this post, elected not to go even though he was invited.
 
M

Manmademan

Member
ivysaur12 said:
Whoa, PPP finds that Grassley's approval is only +3 now, 47/44. That's down a lot from where it's been.
Click to expand...

There was an article this morning in the new republic indicating that Grassley is probably in trouble over the supreme court business.

I went to his facebook page and sure enough he's getting roasted alive in the comments on everything
 
M

Manmademan

Member
QuiteWhittle said:
I still don't believe this SCOTUS stuff will hurt Republicans much. PPP approval ratings are always lower than what they should be.
Click to expand...

It can hurt Grassley. He's a republican incumbent in a state that went for obama twice. That means a lot of democratic voters have been splitting tickets because they like him personally.

Screw THAT up by looking like a tool, and that goodwill goes away.

The administration is also floating trial balloons about vetting a female judge from Iowa for the nomination- If he does Grassley will either have to back down, or get himself into a VERY nasty fight for his seat, and I'm willing to bet he comes out on the losing end of that.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
QuiteWhittle said:
I still don't believe this SCOTUS stuff will hurt Republicans much. PPP approval ratings are always lower than what they should be.
Click to expand...

A lot of (dis)approval is "soft" people may (not) like a thing but it's not relevant enough to change voting habbits.

Hell Hillary may win the Presidency with something close to the worst favourables on record partially because Trump's suck even more and partially because the things people dislike aren't enough to get them to vote Republican. Or her numbers may seriously leap as the general approsches.
 
P

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
Not sure why the Bernie-gets-young-white-males thing is so hard to figure out, since the ones that aren't explicitly bigoted or racist are all atheist socialists that aren't necessarily in love with military adventurism. Mix in disaffection for the state of the economy because there are no fucking jobs, and BAM. Bernie.

What I'm not excited to see? Bernie stans as they age into retirement someday. Y I K E S
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Ekai said:
I specified in an earlier post that "I know you're talking about 'militant' supporters". It's still a gross/illogical comparison to make.
Click to expand...

...is it? We have two groups which we acknowledge demonstrate similar behavior. If the qualifiers are in place what's the real issue?
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
Bowdz said:
Let's hope it holds. They fucked up their hand as much as possible IMO. Not even talking to ANY nominee is so far past the mainstream. They should have agreed to hold hearings and give them a vote and just unite around shooting the nominee down there.
Click to expand...

It seems like such a monumentally stupid stand to take when they could've dragged their feet, voted down any nominee, and ultimately run out the clock without actually saying that's what they're doing. I still think it's a function of being so afraid of the Tea Party that they think they can't get away with even appearing to entertain the notion of Obama nominating a Supreme Court Justice.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
PantherLotus said:
Not sure why the Bernie-gets-young-white-males thing is so hard to figure out, since the ones that aren't explicitly bigoted or racist are all atheist socialists that aren't necessarily in love with military adventurism. Mix in disaffection for the state of the economy because there are no fucking jobs, and BAM. Bernie.

What I'm not excited to see? Bernie stans as they age into retirement someday. Y I K E S
Click to expand...

You're assuming that many in that generational cohort will get to retire which is looking pretty unlikely for many, bumping the pension age up is pretty much guaranteed and the lack of jobs means they aren't going to be self-funding.
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I'm increasingly worried about some of the rhetoric I see about free trade from the left. Basically everything that was said in this thread the other day, but I'm just seeing it directly now as well
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
QuiteWhittle said:
I still don't believe this SCOTUS stuff will hurt Republicans much. PPP approval ratings are always lower than what they should be.
Click to expand...

The problem for Republicans is they have to defend so many Senate seats this cycle, many in blue/purple states. If Obama can manage to keep this in the news, it could absolutely motivate Democrats to show up to vote on those Senate races and persuade swing voters. I'd be surprised if it were enough to take down Grassley (though I'd be delighted if it did), but it'd be nice to doom the candidacies of Kirk, Johnson, Toomey, and the like.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Elaugaufein said:
You're assuming that many in that generational cohort will get to retire which is looking pretty unlikely for many, bumping the pension age up is pretty much guaranteed and the lack of jobs means they aren't going to be self-funding.
Click to expand...

Fair point. That's why winning these elections is so important -- we need to start working on expanded social programs now. The original driving force behind Social Security was the Great Depression driving poverty rates for elders above 50%. Kind of the shock doctrine in reverse. So if the recession is going to have long-term effects on millennial poverty we need to be positioned to help them.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
The Technomancer said:
I'm increasingly worried about some of the rhetoric I see about free trade from the left. Basically everything that was said in this thread the other day, but I'm just seeing it directly now as well
Click to expand...

It's not a left/right issue. That's the problem with a lot of the progressive movement I have. Not everything is a left/right issue and you don't get to claim being more "progressive" because you have a different stance than someone else. I see the term "neoliberal" being thrown out all the time like it means anything and it's just ridiculous. Ideological purity is the shits. Have a mind of your goddamn own.
 
M

Manmademan

Member
Box of Kittens said:
The problem for Republicans is they have to defend so many Senate seats this cycle, many in blue/purple states. If Obama can manage to keep this in the news, it could absolutely motivate Democrats to show up to vote on those Senate races and persuade swing voters. I'd be surprised if it were enough to take down Grassley (though I'd be delighted if it did), but it'd be nice to doom the candidacies of Kirk, Johnson, Toomey, and the like.
Click to expand...

Toomey is fucked no matter what. Democrats shouldn't spend a dime on PA
 
J

jtb

Banned
Was listening to the New Yorker politics podcast and the two writers they had on seemed pretty convinced that Hillary should choose Elizabeth Warren as her VP because she only needs to consolidate the Democrat electorate to win the election and that having two women will drive home the contrast between the Democrats and Trump's misogyny.

I had assumed Warren wasn't in contention or necessary because Hillary will pivot to the center in the general rather than to the left and that two old women on the ticket would be taking too big a risk with voters. (also, why not put Gillibrand on the ticket if you wanted two women on the ticket?) but I'd rather see Warren on the ticket than Castro, which continues to seem like an awful idea born of desperation and a complete lack of bench than anything else.

thoughts?
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
Macho Madness said:
It's not a left/right issue. That's the problem with a lot of the progressive movement I have. Not everything is a left/right issue and you don't get to claim being more "progressive" because you have a different stance than someone else. I see the term "neoliberal" being thrown out all the time like it means anything and it's just ridiculous. Ideological purity is the shits. Have a mind of your goddamn own.
Click to expand...

Historically free trade is a rightish thing in Western Democracies because of the Left/Union , Right /Industry link. Less so in America though IIRC. That link has faded significantly since the 80s but its pretty hard to claim free trade as left except maybe on global humanism grounds (the uplifting effect).

The white collar jobs that benefit haven't really been particularly unionised outside the public sector.

And on a personal level I dislike their current use as vehicles for corporate wishlists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
235
42K
OverHeat replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
59K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom