Spoiled Milk
Banned
oh no
-
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 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
VendettaRed07
Member
? I just was saying that white rural voters who don't have regular contact or much understanding of minority voters values/interests likely wouldn't be able to tell much of a difference between the type of rhetoric that Bernie was saying in that video and the sort of more tone deaf approach approach he went with; where as the minority voters he was trying to win with and how his rhetoric rubbed them the wrong way, it would have likely made a pretty big difference... Is that wrong?
You didn't say anything offensive (well, maybe if you're upset about the portrayal of rual people.) But I disagree w/ your POV.
The issue is that if he goes w/ the approach that can win over minority voters, he's likely going to lose support w/ the rural ones as a consequence. How much? I'm not sure. (and it's not like they had many other options!) but I don't think it's a clean "all gain no pain" tradeoff for him. But he should have done it because a) it was the right thing to do imo and b) he picked a losing strategy. At least pre-Comey Letter Clinton likely did have a winning hand going into the River in the general. Bernie was dead on the flop in the primaries.
Part of the reason Obama was able to assemble the coalition he did was because he didn't have to explicitly talk about race to get people to trust him on it. It's not like he never talked about it of course, but relative to the average white politician in his position it definitely was an edge he was able to use to his advantage. And yes, of course, Obama being a once-in-a-lifetime political phenom helped too!
On that phenom part- the Dems getting a wider field definitely would help them I think. We haven't had large fields for our primaries in a long time, and I think it's been a handicap for us.
RastaMentality
Banned
Even white city Bernie voters didn't understand why the approach was working. That marched with MLK! meme was all over the internet forever.
VendettaRed07
Member
Oh, right. I wasn't trying to suggest anything negative; just what the likelyhood people who live there are to be well versed on the topic of social issues that don't tend to affect them specifically, not something like "lol fly over country can't figure it out!' (was white rural voter who didn't really understand much about different people's perspectives and wasn't really equipped to hold conversations on it until later.
still am not equipped I guess
Right I suppose this is true. But I don't know if that is really a workable long term strategy is either. Or one that we can even go back to. Our candidates regardless of race I think are going to have to campaign vigorously on and start producing results for civil rights reforms or else I think it will lead to voter depression. I don't think you can side step civil rights issue discussion and then flip the switch on passing all the reforms people were asking for when in office. Even if the candidate that wins does campaign/want it they won't have the votes to do anything they want if we can't sell them to the vast majority of the party anyway.
VendettaRed07
Member
True. But hopefully, if a candidate that appeals to those same voters isn't quite as terrible messaging wise next time maybe we won't have so many people grasping at straws to stuff like that as if it was some great indicator of anything; and if the person they like has really convincing messaging and makes more effective outreach attempts, maybe they'll learn a lot in the process too.
hydragonwarrior
Member
Every word out of Trump's mouth ignites NK further - I honestly wish Bernie held back and ran after Hillary in 2020 instead. I wish he were out of the equation because this BS infighting would not have happened. AGHGHGHGH
http://www.politico.eu/article/ange...gy-avoid-confrontation-germany-election-2017/
It's Merkel until the end of times.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Merkel is going to be around for at least four U.S. presidents.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
What do the Germans even debate over? The parties are nearly indistinguishable to me.
Maybe we just think that because our parties are such a fucking shitshow.
On a superficial level, like most of the West: austerity / tax cuts on the right vs. stimulus / public investment on the left.
For a deeper look (from 2013):
https://democracy.blog.wzb.eu/2013/...of-the-german-parties-election-programs-2013/
Such an analysis shows us that, contrary to urban legend, the parties do have different profiles and are emphasizing different issues in their manifestos. In order to investigate these differences we now look at the light house issues of the parties. These issues distinguish the parties from each other, i.e. they are those that are emphasized considerably more often by one party in comparison how much the issue is stressed by all the other parties. It is important to note that these light houses are not necessarily those issues emphasized most often by this party within their own manifesto. The key distinction is that these issues are emphasized more often by this one party than by all the other parties. There is one limitation to this rule: for this analysis we only included issues which were important enough for at least one party to spend 5% of their manifesto discussing it. Graph 2 shows the share of statements for each partys light house issues within their respective manifesto. What becomes obvious at first glance is that the parties emphasize those issues in their manifesto that they are also associated with in the general political discussions.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Nate just posted this lol
Azure Dream
Member
*opens the topic*
*PoliGAF complaining about Bernie Sanders again*
Ok.
I guess I'll get my hot take off my chest once, so somebody here can call me stupid, clueless, tell me that I have no idea what I'm talking about, et cetera; the GAF Way of late.
*PoliGAF complaining about Bernie Sanders again*
Ok.
I guess I'll get my hot take off my chest once, so somebody here can call me stupid, clueless, tell me that I have no idea what I'm talking about, et cetera; the GAF Way of late.
- Sanders got started way too late, his primary staff sucked, and he wasn't flexible enough. He looped literally everything back to one of two lines. That's good to do on a regular basis, but not for every single question.
- It's really not hard to see why Sanders fans felt alienated. It did really feel like the Democratic establishment said, "Nope, Clinton's turn now," as if the Primary was 100% meaningless, just an annoyance they had to go through. Sanders didn't do much to make friends, but from day 1 they announced around 400 Superdelegates, nearly all of them siding for Clinton. That's to her credit that she made connections with them and earned their trust, but it's hard not to see that as a huge, potentially unfair handicap. Superdelegates probably shouldn't announce until near the end of the public primary. There were other instances where Sanders clearly didn't have the DNC's favor. He didn't always earn it, but they really did go a little extra out of their way to trip him up now and then.
- Sanders did try to reach out to communities, but there was this narrative quickly set, and it seemed like no matter how hard he tried, it wasn't real, or he was doing something wrong about it, etc. I still remember that he was the first to bring up Black Lives Matter on the Democratic primary stage, and Hillary was really careful to not say it directly at the time. She got better about that, mind you.
- She would've ultimately benefited from giving the VP spot to Sanders. Yes, it would've seemed risky at the time, with all the "Socialism!" claims and whatnot. There may be something iffy with Sanders' tax records too, but clearly Republicans don't give a shit about that anymore! But they ended up hitting her with every gun all the time anyway, and it ultimately worked. Sanders would've hopefully brought that energized youth into a more organized campaign. I don't think Clinton liked him at all, for obvious reasons, but she's not one to put personal preference over political expediency. And I don't mean that insultingly.
- The only concern I would've had with the above scenario is some crazy Bernie fan thinking, "With her gone, Bernie would be President!" But Trump literally told "Second Amendment People" (SAPs) to do something about her. And nobody's done anything to Trump.
- Now please stop blaming Sanders for being a thorn in Clinton's side, as if he was her ultimate destructor. Clinton was a qualified candidate who worked hard to get where she was, was unfairly demonized as Republicans shit on the Democratic process and potentially worked with a foreign power just to "win", getting a wholly-unqualified bigot with possible dementia or other medical conditions into the most powerful position in the United States and throwing away all the checks and balances that might protect us. She was trying to fight a normal battle while Trump ripped up the Rules of Engagement, and every sniveling Republican behind him squeaked, "It's always been like this!"
nature boy
Member
Lol
http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...-taxpayers-recoup-foxconn-payments/551856001/
It's a bad deal TBH
http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...-taxpayers-recoup-foxconn-payments/551856001/
It's a bad deal TBH
This is definitely true.
I've never understood this kind of thinking. The Democratic establishment initially backed Hillary over Obama in 2008, but Obama still ended up winning. If Bernie ran a competent campaign, he could have won the primary, too.
I agree about the superdelegates. As for the bolded, I'll say that the DNC was less of an enemy to Bernie than Bernie himself. It's why I came to regret my support for him.
I mean, the DNC didn't tell Bernie to not contest the South or to go after Planned Parenthood.
Part of the reason for that was because of his own actions. Claiming that "conservative" Southern Democrat votes mattered less, for example, didn't do him any favors.
Kaine may have been absolute shit as a debater and campaigner, but he was at least harmless in the sense that there wasn't much to attack him with. The socialist moniker would have been less harmful than Bernie's rape essay or comments like "When you're white, you don't know what it's like to be poor." His own problem with his taxes would've added more fuel to the "both sides are the same" fire, too. I tend to think that someone with the Bernie Sanders policies without the Bernie Sanders baggage could have been great. Kaine was too much like Hillary and did nothing to address her weaknesses.
Bernie did have a hand in demonizing Clinton, but her loss was death by a thousand cuts. I don't think anyone here has argued that Bernie was the only reason she lost.
She never did take the gloves off and gave Republicans a way out again and again and again. That was one of the things that made me worried early on (that, and "Stronger Together," which Republicans have repeatedly proven to be fundamentally untrue). Her refusal to tie Trump to Republicans was incredibly stupid. Out of the many stupid things she did during the campaign, that might have been the worst.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
It is hilarious that he is still focusing on healthcare after it failed twice.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Also funny that he switched to repeal and replace AGAIN.
While campaigning he wanted universal healthcare, then he wanted repeal and replace (with absolutely no specifics), then he wanted the house bill, then he called the house bill mean, then he wanted the senate bill, then he wanted to repeal only, then he wanted skinny repeal, now he wants to repeal and replace again (with absolutely no specifics).
nature boy
Member
Fox & Friends strikes again
Fucking seriously?
You Know Nothing
Member
Kelly's days are even more numbered now. RIP.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Byron York said:
Interesting stuff here, and a blueprint for how to discourage people from voting for him if he runs in 2020--tell them the truth about the people he surrounded himself with. These voters bought in to the "drain the swamp" mantra, and democrats absolutely have to effectively showcase the fact that he surrounded himself with rich businessmen that don't have voters' best interests in mind. Winning these voters over shouldn't be the goal--discouraging them from having a reason to vote should be.
Also, I missed this one:
Amazing.
Got the Shakes
Member
52% of Republicans would support postponing the 2020 elections if their Supreme Leader proposed to do so and 47% think he won the popular vote.
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...ld-back-postponing-2020-election-if-trump?amp
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...ld-back-postponing-2020-election-if-trump?amp
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Here is the key:
Interesting caveat, and something I wouldn't be shocked at all that he tried to pull.
That said, I am 99.9% certain Congress wouldn't go for this at all. They'll probably be praying for him to lose by that point.
nature boy
Member
balladofwindfishes
Member
AKA white people
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
aspiegamer
Member
"After some minor food poisoning at a tailgate last fall, a number of fans complained of 'Fire and Fury' coming from their anuses. You know who has an anus? Stephen K Bannon."
I think it has more to do with the fact that Republicans have railed against the government in general for so long that their own voters decided someone outside of politics was better than even Republican politicians.
If Trump were more popular and one of their own, they may have given it a shot, but they certainly won't for Trump.
ftfy
Also, I missed this one:
Amazing.
There's also a quest in WoW named "A case of crabs".
I'm really not sure what point they're trying to make, but I think any such association gets better if you use that quest name instead.
There was a quick deadline because they needed to avoid any actual consideration of what it entailed. The more time, the more thinking, the more obvious this is a terrible deal that benefits no one but Trump and Walker's need for easy PR.
Donald Trump is not a man who moves on from anything. His brain is perpetually stuck weeks, months, and years in the past.
But seriously, polls should stop giving Republicans ideas.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Hope they don't like smartphones because the only viable alternative to android is from a company led by a gay man.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Good, maybe it'll clean up YouTube a bit.
Bing about to become the new Pepe.
Where would they go? Dailymotion?
*buys FrogFrogGo.com and YouFrog.com*
Source?
Just endured Congressman (AZ) Trent Franks make an absolute spectacle of himself on MSNBC. Refused to answer any questions about misssile defense (the ostensible reason he'd been invited on) and instead continued to insist that this situation was DIRECTLY caused by Barack Obama.... and BILL CLINTON. They tried to get him back on topic six times, then gave up and asked him about the Mueller investigation - he restated that Mueller should recuse himself because hes friends with Comey, but that Sessions SHOULDN'T recuse himself because he was ON the Trump Campaign being investigated...
It was absolutely aggravating and the host literally ended the interview with, "wow."
It was absolutely aggravating and the host literally ended the interview with, "wow."
This is what happens when you give poorly informed people too much power.
- Status