PPP: Democrats Have Big Enthusiasm Edge for 2018
- Thread starter Autoignition
- Start date
- Status
Autoignition
Member
I don't understand the difference between these two things.
81% of the party supports medicare for all. expecting their elected officials to go along with that does not represent a radical or extremist viewpoint.
They mean nothing despite basically being pretty correct in 2016?
You realize the polls said the nationwide aggregate was correct. They predicted Hillary would win by as much as she did. And the state polls were within margin of error, too. No one was saying it was 100% chance of Hillary winning. That's ridiculous and didn't happen. There was always a chance of Trump winning, and that chance came from the fact that with the electoral college state you could have a tipping point caused by a bit of difference even within the margin of error.
So yeah, trust polls but also realize there's a margin of error there and they're not nor have they ever meant to be 100% exact.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Not all of these Democrats are in areas dominated by Democrats.
legacyzero
Banned
This.
Though I will say that I do like seeing Sanders and Perez out with their Unity tour. Let Bernie-Crats in, and the infighting stops.
SmackDaddy
Member
Guys, I'm edging
Abjectively false. State polling, particularly in the rust belt states, were off by quite a bit. I don't even think that's up for debate.
MisterR
Member
There is nothing weird about enthusiasm gap polls. They happen before every big election and are important, especially in mid term elections when participation is usually down.
democratic officials who came into office by winning an election on the strength of democratic voters should do what their voters want them to do. i don't see why this is controversial at all.
and it's not like single payer is unpopular with other groups anyway, even among republicans support is something around 45%. it keeps coming up in congressional town halls in deep red districts too.
They're already in. The problem isn't Bernie-crats, it's Bernie. Saying things like "I don't know if Ossoff is a progressive" while he makes campaign appearances for anti-abortion Ds says it all.
Democratic Officials voted in by their local constituents are beholden to their local constituents. And those local Ds are not always going to be in line with the national one (and hell, the party's all over the place on the specifics of things like health care.)
Vox just released a video on why climate change is so hard for the public to tackle and I think it makes a great parallel with the ozone layer problem of the 80s/90s. That issue was much more simple than climate change so the comparison isn't 1:1 but the way the problem was framed as a "hole" in the ozone layer that needed to be closed by discontinuing the use of certain aerosol sprays was really simple and easy to understand by the public. We need something similar for a lot of other issues such as healthcare and climate change, otherwise the public will continue to drag its feet because they just can't wrap their heads around the problem.
democrats are not progressive simply by virtue of being democrats, they need to prove themselves and ossoff certainly has not.
and the hand-wringing about the nebraska thing is sadly hilarious. harry reid, who was the head democrat in the senate for something like 12 years, is staunchly anti-abortion. i don't like mello either but why is it only a huge fucking deal when bernie (who is himself reliably pro-choice) has an event like that?
balladofwindfishes
Member
Elected officials are meant to represent everyone in their district, not just those that voted for them.
As much as I'd want single payer, I see it as being politically impossible to accomplish any time soon, and so to me, requiring my democrats to hold hardline stances on that specific issue strikes me as exactly the same as the GOP being hardline on repealing Obamacare. Something that has no real chance of happening any time soon, but you dedicate your entire message to it, and when you have a chance to do it, you're left not being able to do it, you're voters are left disappointed, and you start the loop all over again.
There aren't enough safe Democrat areas and certainly not enough safe Democrat senate seats for it to be feasible.
Autoignition
Member
Ran on a platform of:
+ Pro choice
+ Climate change
+ Criminal justice reform
+ LGBTQ rights
But not sure if progressive. okay.jpg
Also women's rights should not even be in question right now. Are you kidding me? I don't care what Harry Reid thought. He's not in office anymore. If someone's not pro-choice, we shouldn't embrace them.
Gotta be Bernie Certified.
The idea that people standing for women's/gay/minority rights aren't "progressive" because they're not far left enough on economics is absolute garbage. Progressive does not mean "know-nothing populist."
The issue w/ the Nebraska thing is that it says everything about where Bernie wants to compromise. I don't have an issue w/ pro-life D candidates if they're appropriate for the district! I have an issue w/ Bernie clearly expressing a strong preference for compromising solely on social issues.
jack_package_200
Banned
Considering Ossoff needs to peel off moderates from Handel, I am fine with Bernie ignoring/not endorsing him. He might actually win it.
Something something identity politics
Something something identity politics
i agree, abortion rights are a hard line that shouldn't even be approached. i wouldn't personally support any candidate that favors any restrictions in that area.
the point is that centrist democrats are losing their minds over sanders having an event with mello when it's somehow not a problem that there's a million other national-level democrats, including those in leadership roles, who are themselves anti-abortion. it seems hypocritical.
Autoignition
Member
The problem is that Bernie keeps vying to be the face of the Democratic movement in this country. If that's the role he wants, then he needs to actually be representative of us and our message. If he really really wants to have that big of a role, he can't be compromising on pro-choice. He. Just. Can. Not.
The issue is not other national-level Dems. The issue is Bernie and his place in the political arena right now.
You must not have read NeoGAF at any point in 2016.
He is simultaneously campaigning for multiple anti-abortion candidates while shitting on Ossoff, who's got an election in 2 months.
The juxtaposition creates the narrative. The Dems who are angry aren't fucking centrists, they're the base of the goddamn party.
Sam Wang was saying 99.999999999999% or something along those lines, and GAF considered him to be way more precise than Nate Silver. at least Nate had an inkling the blue wall could be an illusion
never checked if Sam really ate that insect
I'm much more convinced that the grassroots mobilization will be coming from the Favreau/Crooked Media wing of the party, and not the Bernie wing.
It's nice that Bernie's along for the ride, and he's great fodder to get a bunch of people that hate Democrats to vote for Democrats (see! Bernie hates all Democrats too! ~so edgy~ ~so authentic~) Which is good in a lot of white, rural states that haven't voted blue in decades!
I'd be worried if I thought Bernie would be the only source of grassroots energy for the party. He's not.
It's nice that Bernie's along for the ride, and he's great fodder to get a bunch of people that hate Democrats to vote for Democrats (see! Bernie hates all Democrats too! ~so edgy~ ~so authentic~) Which is good in a lot of white, rural states that haven't voted blue in decades!
I'd be worried if I thought Bernie would be the only source of grassroots energy for the party. He's not.
1. bernie sanders was chosen by the senate democratic caucus to be the head of party outreach, and was asked by the head of the DNC to go on a national tour in that role. the party wants him to be the face of the democratic movement.
2. he himself is pro-choice and always has been, and as far as i know he's never compromised on that when he votes.
Sam Wang is not a pollster. Nate Silver is not a pollster. That's not how polling works.
Autoignition
Member
Neither of these things matter. They literally don't matter. He has a job to do, and that job is not compromising on pro-choice.
Fuck him, honestly. Fuck him for using his position to do this. I take it intensely personally.
The only people who ever compromise on abortion rights, or who write them off as "social issues" or don't see them as economic issues, are people who have never needed one.
He can also go fuck himself for chucking Ossoff under the bus.
LegendofJoe
Member
The median amount of retirement savings is $12k. The next economic downturn will require a huge expansion of social programs to prevent all hell from breaking loose.
Man Called Aerodynamics
Member
2enthusiastic4me
This would all be fine if Bernie wasn't the self-appointed arbiter of progressivism. Progressives have existed before Bernie, and they will exist after Bernie.
He (and the Dems!) can have their cake and eat it too, but I don't really understand the need to continue feeding this cult of personality. He's 75! What good is a movement tied to a single person that's nearing the end of his political career!
What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? "No one"? When did I say that?
I'm literally stating a fact. The polls were more accurate during this election than in 2012. That's a fact.
He (and the Dems!) can have their cake and eat it too, but I don't really understand the need to continue feeding this cult of personality. He's 75! What good is a movement tied to a single person that's nearing the end of his political career!
What are you talking about? Who are you talking to? "No one"? When did I say that?
I'm literally stating a fact. The polls were more accurate during this election than in 2012. That's a fact.
This is good, hopefully they can stop sabatoging left-wing candidates
AstroNut325
Member
I wouldn't bank on them realizing this. Boomers blindly follow trickle down. And if they do realize it... They'll get scared the moment they see their taxes go up significantly.
Autoignition
Member
lol Bernie gave this guy exactly $900. Pot, kettle, etc. If Bernie wants his guys to win, he actually has to do some, you know, work.
And watch young liberal voters not vote because all options don't pass the purity test.
MisterShine
Member
When has that ever actually been his job?
Sabotage? Was Bernie a member of the inside job too?
Also, the importance of winning special elections that will just go revert back to the mean in 2018 is a little bit overstated. The electorate is not as stupid or simplistic as Bernie fans seem to think that it is.
When he appointed himself the gatekeeper of progressivism?
Autoignition
Member
I'm sorry, is his job not to promote Democratic ideals as the person in charge of outreach?
Not wasting funds on a district we were very unlikely to win is not "sabotaging left-wing candidates."
LegendofJoe
Member
Which most of them won't be paying in any significant amount because they're retired.
Retired people already have single payer, and they poll the worst on "support" of it. They don't give a fuck about giving it to anyone else. In fact, they're worried about splitting that pie and having to share it with younger sick people.
Ditto for all social programs. Rinse, repeat.
the whole "bernie sanders thinks he's the final arbiter of progressivism" seems like projection to me. he's entitled to give his opinion and i don't think there's as many people who blindly follow it as some posters here seem to think.
i certainly disagree with him on plenty of things, and so does every leftist i know. the reason he has such a singular following is because he is basically the only national politician who's willing to talk about economic injustice and real solutions. people are passionate about the message more than the man, god knows bernie sanders is not the most personally charming and charismatic person in the world.
i certainly disagree with him on plenty of things, and so does every leftist i know. the reason he has such a singular following is because he is basically the only national politician who's willing to talk about economic injustice and real solutions. people are passionate about the message more than the man, god knows bernie sanders is not the most personally charming and charismatic person in the world.
That article is remarkable. It once again places an outsized amount of attention on the DNC (seriously, PLEASE learn what the DNC does before mentioning it), and says the Democrats are sabotaging their candidates, while also finding time to shit on Jon Ossoff.
Yes, Jon Ossoff,the 30 year old first time candidate, is an appendage of the ESTABLISHMENT. Why? He was...gasp...a congressional aide! The horror.
LegendofJoe
Member
They'll care when their children and grandchildren become destitute once deflation sets in. Changes will have to happen at that point. The large majority of people do not have the savings or resources to survive another economic downturn. Any Democratice leader that isn't scared to death of the lack of financial flexibility available to people doesn't belong in a position of influence.
Our economy is operating on the edge, most people have no margin for error. It's a recipe for disaster. The fact that so few of our 'leaders' understand this is monumentally distressing.
- Status