|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: U.S. Presidential Election 2016
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
More entertaining is the question, Who can we blame for Trump? Bobby Jindal says that It's all Obama's fault.
It is only fair to say that people of Jindal's stripe blame Obama for everything from El Nino to the check engine light going on in their car yesterday.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
For instance, I'm pretty sure what I really wanted to know in the post which you responded to was whether Ted Cruz was an anchor baby, but I clearly forgot that early on in the drafting process.
I repeat: Is Ted Cruz an anchor baby?
No-- his situation is pretty much the reverse of anchor baby.
Unless one is standing in Canada, where he most definitely was an anchor baby and both his parents gained Canadian citizenship. Thankfully, we're now free of junior. ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
And I really wish someone would challenge Cruz or Rubio to defend the privileged status of Cubans when it comes to entering the USA illegally.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
For instance, I'm pretty sure what I really wanted to know in the post which you responded to was whether Ted Cruz was an anchor baby, but I clearly forgot that early on in the drafting process.
I repeat: Is Ted Cruz an anchor baby?
No-- his situation is pretty much the reverse of anchor baby.
Unless one is standing in Canada, where he most definitely was an anchor baby and both his parents gained Canadian citizenship. Thankfully, we're now free of junior.
Ah, dang, I didn't think of that. Now I'll be up all night with a case of the "if only..."s...
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
And I really wish someone would challenge Cruz or Rubio to defend the privileged status of Cubans when it comes to entering the USA illegally.
Yes. Although basically our entire immigration system is set up that way to prioritize some countries over others on similarly arcane/politically motivated rationale, as well as to prioritize wealthy immigrants over poor immigrants.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
It is interesting that there is very little anecdotal evidence for the wide existence of Trump supporters, although a lot of Republicans seem to be voting for him. While he does have some fanatical support, the one thing he does as a crowd-pleaser is bash the establishment. in fact, I kind of like that bit too. So having liked that, then going and voting for the establishment is a bit schizophrenic. So maybe that's the wave he's riding.
There is a good chance that people will eventually take fright at their own courage to stir insurrection, but perhaps not before being taken over by the mass-current thinking that he can't be that bad of this many people a voting for him.
What people are really wanting is someone who anti-establishment lite. Expect Trump to move to the centre soon in order show that while being anti-esta., he is still quite sensitive. If he makes a convincing show of that, then he could become really dangerous to HC. Since she is just sooo establishment, Sanders would probably be a stronger horse come November.
[ 05. March 2016, 21:56: Message edited by: molopata ]
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
molopata: Expect Trump to move to the centre soon
I expect him to try to move to the left of Hilary once he's nominated.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
Looks like Sanders won another two primaries, or rather, one primary and one caucus. Nebraska and Kansas. Not sure how many delegates that gets him though.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:
Looks like Sanders won another two primaries, or rather, one primary and one caucus. Nebraska and Kansas. Not sure how many delegates that gets him though.
According to the New York Times, Clinton has 663 pledged delegates and 458 super delegates; Sanders has 457 pledged delegates and 22 super delegates. A total of 2,383 is needed to win the nomination.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
But at this point, unable to find even a single Trump supporter (or at least one who'll admit to it) in the very very conservative evangelical circles I run in, I honestly can say, even with every exercise of empathy and openness I can muster, I just don't get it.
There is an excellent discussion of the roots of Trumpism in the dissatisfaction of white working class people who first left the Democratic party when it seemed the Democrats had more interest in catering to black voters and have since found that the Republicans aren't doing anything for them either: Washington Post.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
That makes sense, but if I were voting I'd have more confidence in Bernie Sanders delivering for the working class than Trump. I don't believe that Trump fundamentally gives a toss about anyone but himself, or any interests but his own.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Sure, but that's you (and me). Sanders hasn't figured out how to reach people who didn't go to college. And he isn't appealing to the racial resentment many of them feel. The things that make us recoil from Trump are the things they find attractive.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Sure, but that's you (and me). Sanders hasn't figured out how to reach people who didn't go to college. And he isn't appealing to the racial resentment many of them feel. The things that make us recoil from Trump are the things they find attractive.
And I'm not sure Sanders can do anything about the racial component. He is certainly not going to come out in favor of border walls or immigration bans (let alone physically harming people at rallies -- I swear one tries to avoid the comparisons, but Nuremberg comes to mind).
So that leaves Bernie in the cold with the people who should be his natural allies -- people to whom "the system" has given the deep shaft. How to disabuse these people of the mistaken idea that their problems are caused by immigrants and brown people? I do not know. One is reminded of the adage, "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't arrive at through reason."
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
And I'm not sure Sanders can do anything about the racial component. He is certainly not going to come out in favor of border walls or immigration bans (let alone physically harming people at rallies -- I swear one tries to avoid the comparisons, but Nuremberg comes to mind).
Then there was the Trump rally where he asked everyone to raise their right hands and swear to vote for him. The visuals were exactly what you'd expect. If the Trump campaign wants to avoid comparisons to the Nuremberg rallies, they have to stop doing stuff like that.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
So that leaves Bernie in the cold with the people who should be his natural allies -- people to whom "the system" has given the deep shaft. How to disabuse these people of the mistaken idea that their problems are caused by immigrants and brown people? I do not know. One is reminded of the adage, "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't arrive at through reason."
Amen!
This is why children can't be reasoned out of a tantrum. Many parents try 'tho.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Oh, and someone said upthread that they had not met any supporters of Trump. Here is a long piece with many interviews of Trump voters. With a good deal of extra stick for the unlucky Mitt Romney.
Thanks for that, but it really doesn't clear anything up for me. The article really just quotes Trump supporters as pissed off at Romney for telling them not to vote for him. But there's nothing in there to explain why they want to vote for him in the first place, so again, nothing to help me understand this group of people or what is motivating them.
I find it so curious that he is doing so well with the electorate, yet I honestly don't know a single person in real life or among online friends who has admitted to supporting him. Again, I am almost completely immersed in con-evo culture: I pastor an evangelical church, teach at an evangelical seminary, and worship frequently at a church described by a mystery worshipper as the happy clappiest of all the happy clappy churches. Almost all my colleagues, students, and friends are con-evos. Yet out of all of them-- no Trump supporters. Not ONE. Again, lots of Carson supporters, some Cruz and Rubio--but no Trump. Obviously there ARE Trump supporters-- millions of them-- but where? Who are they? What drives them? Still a mystery to me.
Trump supporters come in many stripes but the core of them are people who, even if they are not the worst off economically in this country, are extremely disillusioned, disoriented, and angry because of how their lives and their sense of their place in the world has gone counter to what they were raised to expect. These are people who grew up thinking that success was not guaranteed if you worked hard but that life overall would probably be better for them then it was for their parents and that it would be better for their children than it was for them.
American-born white people are more likely to feel this way than most blacks and many Latinos because underprivileged ethnic minorities grow up in this country (or come to this country) expecting a certain amount of hardship and not sure whether life gets better for each generation. Even first-generation immigrants, even those that come to America with an exaggerated idea of this country, often come from countries where they had already dealt with hardship and diminishing social prospects for future generations. They come expecting to have to work very hard to get by and acknowledging that maybe the better life they dream of will only be enjoyed by their children.
There has been a lot of press recently about how certain age groups, and educational groups, etc., of whites (mainly middle-aged whites with low levels of education, and men more than women) are now not only facing lower economic prospects than their parents but also are showing a lower life expectancy (whereas life expectancy is increasing for all other groups). Suicide and drug addiction is higher for this group of people than before (heroin and other opioid addiction is increasing at a rate in this population that is causing it to be considered a national epidemic). I know that drugs and other hardships have problems for poorer whites and for underprivileged ethnic minorities for a long time without causing nearly as much alarm in the news. But again, this is because working and middle class whites in this country have had expectations of an increasing standard of living across generations that have been dashed.
The final component of what makes this group support a candidate with policies like Trump's is that people who are disillusioned and angry with the way their expectations have not been met are often more resentful of poor and ethnic minority individuals in their communities receiving government benefits that they themselves are not eligible for than they are of wealthy individuals and powerful corportations who benefit disproportionately from the current economy and pay less in taxes than they did before. Part of this is because those parts of the white working and middle class that are most economically squeezed at the moment see much more of the poor than they do of the wealthy (who increasingly live lives isolated from the rest of the country). Trump actually does pay lip service to the need for the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes (although his proposed tax plan does the opposite), attacks the power of corporations to make political donations (while being vague about anything he would do about it if elected), criticizes corporations that benefit from tax breaks while moving jobs overseas, and defends government entitlement programs that everyone (including the white middle class) benefits from (like Medicare and Social Security). But the nerve he has hit has much more to do with the resentment of the white middle and working class of those who are eligible for government benefits that they themselves are not eligible for.
I am pretty left of center and do not think there is any valid reason to support Trump or his policies. But my parents have supported him (I am not sure if they still do, but they still are pretty sympathetic towards him). And unlike the people I have described, they were wealthy before the economic crash of 2008 hit them hard and my father is a Hispanic immigrant. But a lot of my description (which I have read in a lot of political analyses of Trump) is true of what they feel about him.
Of course Trump's reality TV theatrics and his deliberate rejection of all conventions of modern American politics also have something to do with his support. Many of his supporters are also savvy enough to know that Trump says and does outrageous things to get attention but that he doesn't necessarily believe everything he says. They also admire his ability to be ideologically flexible and "make deals." But when Trump says "we don't win anymore" and "make America great again" he is delivering a very specific message that resonates with a very specific group of people. Trump may move to the center if he is nominated but he will probably still tap into the frustrations of this group in order to try to win the election (I'm not sure if he can).
Oh, and as a last note, although much has been said about Trump's support in the Deep South, his strongest supporters are probably in the Rust Belt of former manufacturing towns in the Great Lakes area, Upstate New York, and Central and Western Pennsylvania. Trump does well among Evangelicals, but much less so among the kinds of Evangelicals that frequently attend church and agree with a rigidly orthodox set of doctrines on faith and morals. That latter group, along with Tea Party ideologues, have been the strongest supporters of Cruz and Carson.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Oh, and as a last note, although much has been said about Trump's support in the Deep South, his strongest supporters are probably in the Rust Belt of former manufacturing towns in the Great Lakes area, Upstate New York, and Central and Western Pennsylvania. Trump does well among Evangelicals, but much less so among the kinds of Evangelicals that frequently attend church and agree with a rigidly orthodox set of doctrines on faith and morals. That latter group, along with Tea Party ideologues, have been the strongest supporters of Cruz and Carson.
I forgot to mention above that Trump is likely to perform better in the Eastern part of the Rust Belt (especially parts of Upstate New York like Buffalo) than in the Midwest, where his brash attitude is a bit more "foreign" than it is in the Northeast or even in the South.
Trump support is also very strong in Appalachia and Coal Country, basically for the reasons I listed.
It is worth noting that in some online studies of racist language in social media, the Rust Belt had higher percentages than the Deep South (not that the Deep South didn't have a lot of racist language!).
Finally, I should add that my dad is a Cuban, so it's not that shocking that he would support a Republican - although he opposes the embargo and did not like George W. Bush at all.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Thanks that's helpful, and also helps explain why I'm seeing so few Trump supporters here among my west coast con-evo friends/neighbors.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
Why do people on the left have to be nice anyway? Historically, if you look at the development, of the Union Movement, success has involved physical confrontations and street fighting, intimidation and bruising political battles. Without those battles, we wouldn't have the 36 hour week, OH&S and a living wage.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
stonespring, lovely posts on Trump. Thanks. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
Meanwhile, Michael Bloomberg has officially annnounced he will NOT run for president, for fear that his presence in the race would make a President Trump or Cruz more likely.
[ 08. March 2016, 00:27: Message edited by: Nicolemr ]
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
However, it looks as though, his statements to the contrary, mitt Romney might be gearing up for a run if there's a brokered convention:
Mitt Romney recently filed papers with the FEC
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
What's the evidence that Mitt Romney himself filed the papers?
From the last paragraph of your link:
quote:
Though many social media users have called an FEC filing by Romney a “sure” bet that he is running for president, it bears mentioning that practically anyone can file with the FEC without actually running. In fact, this year there is filings for Abraham Lincoln for President 2016, Dat Fat A$$, Syndeys Voluptious Buttocks and Don’t Vote For Trump.
Type "resident" into the first text entry box on this Federal Election Commission page and hit the "Get Listing" button to see who else is registered.
Here's a PDF of God's own statement of candidacy for President, filled out by hand (he's running as a Republican, it turns out.)
[ 08. March 2016, 00:56: Message edited by: Dave W. ]
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
If the GOP seriously wants the White House back, they have to nominate John Kasich. Unfortunately for them, he's in last place, likely because he hasn't bragged about the size of his dick. The GOP will get the nominee they deserve.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
If the GOP seriously wants the White House back, they have to nominate John Kasich. Unfortunately for them, he's in last place, likely because he hasn't bragged about the size of his dick. The GOP will get the nominee they deserve.
Doesn't the fact that he can't seem to get very many people to vote for him indicate he's not a good candidate for winning the Presidency for the Republicans? What exactly are you basing his electoral chances on?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
If the GOP seriously wants the White House back, they have to nominate John Kasich. Unfortunately for them, he's in last place, likely because he hasn't bragged about the size of his dick. The GOP will get the nominee they deserve.
Doesn't the fact that he can't seem to get very many people to vote for him indicate he's not a good candidate for winning the Presidency for the Republicans? What exactly are you basing his electoral chances on?
Presumably how he would do in the general election. If Hillary wins the Dem nod, there will be disenfranchised Sanders voters, independents, swing voters, etc in play.
Kasich won the last GOP debate by a landslide in my estimation just by standing to one side acting like an adult who'd come prepared to talk seriously about domestic policy and int'l affairs and keeping his **** size to himself and Mrs. Kasich. But obviously not in the estimation of Republican voters.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
I guess the key question is whether there is a huge non-GOP-primary-participating group that would vote Kasich rather than Trump in the general election (either because Kasich turns non-voters into voters or turns Clinton-voters into GOP-voters).
The former seems unlikely since if Kasich can energize them for a general election why wouldn't he be energizing them for the primary?
The latter also seems unlikely because anyone on the GOP-side who hated Trump that much that they'd vote Clinton to keep him out - well one would have thought they'd turn up to the primary to keep him out.
So I don't see that his fortunes would change all that much.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
My son, a young but passionate political observer, says that we're done. All hail our next president, Hillary Clinton, because there is now no way forward for the GOP. I have a good imagination, and generated some more creative scenarios -- Romney as savior? Condi Rice or Colin Powell steps up to the plate? Ronald Reagan rises from his coffin when they open the grave to inter Nancy? But he says it's over. He is no prophet (would a real soothsayer not have a girlfriend, his mother queries acerbically? Do his laundry only once a quarter?) but in some things he is very accurate.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Is he sure that Trump won't win? Because I'm not.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Is he sure that Trump won't win? Because I'm not.
In a general? I can't believe we've sunk that low yet.
Once you get into the far more diverse constituency of a general election, where Trump's key demographic are not the majority, I cannot see any scenario where Trump wins, regardless of whether he's facing Sanders or Clinton. I think there will be a lot of Republicans who stay home rather than vote for a Dem, which will have the added bonus of giving us back the House. Which I think is why the GOP establishment is working so hard to get someone, anyone other than Trump. They may not win the presidency, but at least they might be able to hang onto the House.
[ 08. March 2016, 14:31: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Is he sure that Trump won't win? Because I'm not.
The way the American electoral system is set up any major party nominee has a non-trivial chance of winning the presidency. That being said, on the face of it Donald Trump seems like a particularly weak general election candidate.
- Most of his support in the Republican primaries is due to idiosyncratic features of the Republican electorate that likely won't be a factor in a general election.
- - Even within the Republican party, Trump's ceiling of support seems to top out at 35%-45%, as indicated by recent ABC polling on head-to-head matchups between Republican presidential contenders. I don't doubt that if Trump is the eventual nominee most Republicans will eventually rally around him, but I don't see him getting much support outside the existing GOP faithful.
And in other breaking news, apparently Ted Cruz's Senate colleagues still hate him.
[ 08. March 2016, 14:39: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
I think (hope?) Trump probably is unelectable by the American public at large.
It does indeed look like a shoo-in for Hillary Clinton if he gets the nomination. Nonetheless, as Fred Clark points out on slacktivist, this should by no means be celebrated by Democrats as a good thing, because of the way that America is being changed for the worse by Trump’s campaign.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
My son, a young but passionate political observer, says that we're done. All hail our next president, Hillary Clinton, because there is now no way forward for the GOP. I have a good imagination, and generated some more creative scenarios -- Romney as savior? Condi Rice or Colin Powell steps up to the plate? Ronald Reagan rises from his coffin when they open the grave to inter Nancy? But he says it's over. He is no prophet (would a real soothsayer not have a girlfriend, his mother queries acerbically? Do his laundry only once a quarter?) but in some things he is very accurate.
This is common sense and what I think is most likely, too. But this election has been so unpredictable and what I have thought would happen from the beginning has so often been wrong.
I think Hillary is most likely to be the Democratic nominee. Not sure who the Republican nominee will be. Against Trump or Cruz Hillary may be able to pull together a winning coalition of general election voters determined to make sure that those GOP candidates do not win. I am not so sure of her chances against Rubio, Kasich, or some dark horse GOP candidate that might emerge.
As hard as it is for liberals like me who live in a community of other liberals to believe, there is a wave of discontent at 8 years of a Democratic Presidency that is similar to the wave of discontent in 2008 at 8 years of a GOP presidency. I know that part of this is because of racism in the case of Obama but it isn't that simple. It is very rare in recent US history for a president of a party to be elected after 8 years of a president from the same party. It happened in 1988 with George H W Bush (but the election was by no means a shoo in for Bush).
There also is a lot of anti-Hillary sentiment among voters Left, Right, and Center. I like her, think she is the most qualified candidate in this race, and even feel an affinity with her personality (although for policy reasons I am probably voting for Sanders in the primary). I would enthusiastically support Hillary in the general election. But I am amazed at how many people, friends and family included, cannot stand her. Part of this may be sexism but I think that a lot of it is an antipathy towards politicians coming from the same families. Aside from Blue-Collar moderate Democrats who have been moving towards the GOP for years anyway, I do not think many Democrats would vote for a Republican against her. However, a lot of Democrats might stay home (or not make much effort to get to the polls even if they aren't intentionally staying home). Democrats and would-be Democrats are notorious for not turning out to vote in large percentages (or even registering to vote) unless a candidate gets them very excited like Obama did in 2008. Hillary just does not inspire that much enthusiasm among that many Democrats so unless someone really scary like Trump or Cruz is running against her I'm not so sure how big Democratic turnout will be.
In addition, it looks like Republican turnout in the general election will be very high. I do not think the high GOP turnout in primaries is just because of Trump supporters. I think it is also because of anti-incumbent sentiment like what we saw for Democrats in 2008. So if neither Trump or Cruz is the GOP nominee, Democrats should be concerned (and do all they can to get out the vote!).
[ 08. March 2016, 15:39: Message edited by: stonespring ]
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
As hard as it is for liberals like me who live in a community of other liberals to believe, there is a wave of discontent at 8 years of a Democratic Presidency that is similar to the wave of discontent in 2008 at 8 years of a GOP presidency.
I'm not sure that's an accurate assessment. Among Democrats there's a good deal of satisfaction with the accomplishments of the incumbent president. Candidates seem to be competing to see who can best position themselves as Obama's legitimate successor. Clinton and Sanders seem to be succeeding at this, O'Malley, Webb, and Chafee took a different tack. The results speak for themselves.
Republicans, on the other hand, aren't feeling "a wave of discontent at 8 years of a Democratic Presidency". They felt that wave of discontent starting around 12:01 pm (Eastern Standard Time) on January 20, 2009. I'm not sure they're any more discontented with the Obama administration now than they were on November 6, 2012, and that amount of discontent wasn't enough to swing things in their favor then.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carex
Shipmate
# 9643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
As hard as it is for liberals like me who live in a community of other liberals to believe, there is a wave of discontent at 8 years of a Democratic Presidency that is similar to the wave of discontent in 2008 at 8 years of a GOP presidency.
I'm not sure that's an accurate assessment. Among Democrats there's a good deal of satisfaction with the accomplishments of the incumbent president.
Indeed. In my experience the discontent is at the Republicans in Congress whose primary focus for the last 8 years was not to obstruct everything possible.
Sure, there are plenty of Republicans who declaim how horrible a job Obama has done, but when pressed they are short on details - they appear to be parroting what they hear repeated on talk radio and assuming everyone else agrees with them. Oh, of course Obamacare is the end of the world, but when pressed they can't tell you why, or what parts should be changed - they just know it is an evil socialist plot. At that point the discussion veers off to his being a Muslim, because that is as factually-based as everything else they think about him...
Posts: 1425 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I went to a church earlier this year, in which a guy in the parking lot assured me that Barack Obama is a Muslim. It is always nice when God gives you a clear leading about which church to not attend.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I think (hope?) Trump probably is unelectable by the American public at large.
It does indeed look like a shoo-in for Hillary Clinton if he gets the nomination. Nonetheless, as Fred Clark points out on slacktivist, this should by no means be celebrated by Democrats as a good thing, because of the way that America is being changed for the worse by Trump’s campaign.
Trump reveals what is, what has not changed. The other bad thing about Hilary becoming president is that she is very much part of the establishment that is very much part of the problem with American politics.
If she wins, the probability of real change diminishes.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I'd say that she will win because the odds of real change were ever illusory. Both sides have a populist candidate that they hope will lead them to change, but I would agree that neither candidate will be electable, and I rather doubt either candidate could get their dreams past Congress if they were elected.
Illusion is powerful. Trump is nothing but illusion, even his populism is based on illusion.
Sanders, at least, has some decent ideas and is a working politician. However, he would be facing an increasingly desperate, primarily Republican congress and that would make the beginnings difficult.
The frustration that drives both the buffoon and Sanders has some legitimate roots and, despite her positive credentials, I do not see Clinton altering any of that. She will mouth progressive policy and, as soon as elected, shift back to centre-left. She is certainly better than what the right have to offer, but not what the US needs.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
As hard as it is for liberals like me who live in a community of other liberals to believe, there is a wave of discontent at 8 years of a Democratic Presidency that is similar to the wave of discontent in 2008 at 8 years of a GOP presidency.
I'm not sure that's an accurate assessment. Among Democrats there's a good deal of satisfaction with the accomplishments of the incumbent president. Candidates seem to be competing to see who can best position themselves as Obama's legitimate successor. Clinton and Sanders seem to be succeeding at this, O'Malley, Webb, and Chafee took a different tack. The results speak for themselves.
Republicans, on the other hand, aren't feeling "a wave of discontent at 8 years of a Democratic Presidency". They felt that wave of discontent starting around 12:01 pm (Eastern Standard Time) on January 20, 2009. I'm not sure they're any more discontented with the Obama administration now than they were on November 6, 2012, and that amount of discontent wasn't enough to swing things in their favor then.
A lot of liberal Democrats were sharing memes well before 9/11 and the Iraq War of George W. Bush as a chimpanzee and all kinds of baseless rumors of the homosexual hijinks he must have engaged in as a cheerleader, as an inductee and member of Skull and Bones, or in one of his drunk or high hazes. The War in Iraq only amplified the rabid hatred against him on the left. I took part in it. The knee-jerk hatred of Obama was stronger earlier in his presidency than it was with George W. Bush and it definitely has an uglier racist component but as with obstructionism in Congress a lot of the things that the GOP has done against Obama was done first by the Democrats, albeit to a lesser degree.
2008 was different for the GOP in that it really did try to distance itself from Bush whereas the Democrats are trying to embrace the Obama legacy in 2016. Your points are valid. However, do not discount the American public's tendency to tire of an incumbent party. Rightly or wrongly, your average American tends to view the party of the President as the party in power, regardless of who controls either house of Congress. A lot of Americans who are relatively moderate in their political views and do not spend much time learning the details of policies think that Obamacare is not a success because all they know about it is the controversy that the GOP has generated (in addition to the news coverage of the failed healthcare.gov website rollout and the outcry from people who were unhappy with the expiration of their current policies and/or the large deductibles in their new policies). Looked at holistically, Obamacare is a pretty significant success, but people pay attention to anecdotes more than unbiased quantitative analysis and the loudest anecdotes in the media have been those that attack it.
In terms of NSA personal data collection, the rise of ISIS, Russian aggression, and other issues, a lot of Americans associate the Obama presidency with controversy, scandal, and miscalculation. Obama has faced huge international threats and kept Americans relatively safe but most people do not think of things in that way.
As for the economy, Obama brought it back from the brink and has led during a very significant recovery but so many people have faced stagnant incomes, rising costs of living, poor employment prospects, etc., that they do not feel the effects of the recovery. Most people do resent the rising income inequality and want the government to do something about it but since a Democrat has been president for 8 years they do not trust Democrats to do something about it. (As I said, your average American just thinks about the presidency and not Congress when it comes to who is to credit or blame for the economy). Even most Bernie Sanders supporters think fixing the rigged economy is all or mostly about who is president.
So don't be surprised if a lot of voters that might support Hillary don't go out of their way to vote in November or even feel sympathetic to arguments that a candidate from a different party should be president. A Trump or Cruz GOP candidacy would make thinks completely different though - and although I am inclined to think that would help Hillary win I am not sure since this election has been so unpredictable.
Eventually, in the US as well as in Western European countries, a Populist candidate or party with extreme rhetoric will win an election. I just don't know if the US is at that point yet.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
sadly, I think you are correct in your assessment. How that will play out in Nov. and beyond, I can't say. Too many moving parts.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
I agree with the people who are saying we can't be too confident that Trump will lose in November. The state-level maths are in the Democrats' advantage; most swing states have heavy black and/or latino populations, but there are many unforeseeable factors.
One thing I'm curious about is how a Clinton-Trump line-up would play out with the youth. The youth are mostly voting Democratic, but I'm not ruling out that Trump's approach may resonate with a number of them. And Clinton hasn't been doing well with the youth in the primaries.
Another factor is how the Clinton-Trump debates would play out. If anyone among the Democrats can take him on it is Clinton (and I'm sure her team are already working on strategies); she'll undoubtedly do better than the Republican bonzo's. But Trump may have some tricks up his sleeve here (for example, suddenly trying to move to the left of Clinton). She mustn't play his game, which isn't easy.
I still think Clinton has a better chance than Trump to win in November, but I don't think the Democrats can relax because it will be a 'shoe-in'.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
One thing I'm curious about is how a Clinton-Trump line-up would play out with the youth. The youth are mostly voting Democratic, but I'm not ruling out that Trump's approach may resonate with a number of them. And Clinton hasn't been doing well with the youth in the primaries.
So far Trump hasn't been doing well with the young. Voters under 30 are his weakest group of support in every primary or caucus entrance/exit poll I've seen. In many states they're the only age group to go for someone other than Trump.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Crœsos: So far Trump hasn't been doing well with the young. Voters under 30 are his weakest group of support in every primary or caucus entrance/exit poll I've seen. In many states they're the only age group to go for someone other than Trump.
Okay thank you, I hadn't analysed it that well. I guess that's a bit of a relief. Still, it would be good if Clinton for example would choose a running mate who would do well with the youth.
[ 08. March 2016, 21:32: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Crœsos: So far Trump hasn't been doing well with the young. Voters under 30 are his weakest group of support in every primary or caucus entrance/exit poll I've seen. In many states they're the only age group to go for someone other than Trump.
Okay thank you, I hadn't analysed it that well. I guess that's a bit of a relief. Still, it would be good if Clinton for example would choose a running mate who would do well with the youth.
I'm still dreaming of Elizabeth Warren (for either Clinton or Sanders...)
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
cliffdweller: I'm still dreaming of Elizabeth Warren (for either Clinton or Sanders...)
Yes definitely. The big problem is that as vice president she perhaps would have less influence than she does now.
Another thing that would be important to me, if Clinton indeed gets the nomination, is for her to say to the youth: "I heard you". This doesn't mean that she should become Sanders (I'd like that, but I don't think such a move would be wise politically), but it would be good if she made the youth feel that their support for Sanders wasn't some kind of juvenile folly, but that she would take seriously what they have to say.
[ 08. March 2016, 22:17: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
I have a scenario that I use when I want to keep awake:
Trump wins the nomination, successfully pivots his rhetoric to something of more general appeal, and keeps his base of extremist support because he could shoot someone and his supporters would still vote for him.
Honestly, sometimes I sit straight upright in bed and say, "Trump could shoot someone and people would still vote for him."
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I have a different worry. I remember George Wallace. Gun laws have been gutted, since that day. I live in an open-carry state, and it is profoundly depressing.
The man is a excrescence upon the face of politics, we may agree. I would not trust him to walk my dog, never mind the nuclear button. My cat would make a better President. Nevertheless, I am very glad that Donald Trump has Secret Service protection, and I am sure he can afford the very best in Kevlar linings for his bespoke suits.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I'm still dreaming of Elizabeth Warren (for either Clinton or Sanders...)
She can do far more good in the Senate, especially if the Democrats take it back.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
cliffdweller: I'm still dreaming of Elizabeth Warren (for either Clinton or Sanders...)
Yes definitely. The big problem is that as vice president she perhaps would have less influence than she does now.
Or to put it in the same pithy terms of one Senator being considered for the position "I'd rather have a vote than a gavel".
Long form version of why this is a terrible idea here.
quote:
Nothing suggests the shallowness of most people’s political analysis, even well-informed people, then how they talk about the vice-presidency. Why do people see a largely useless position, barring a president’s death, as a place to put a completely capable and even great political figure, just because they like them? In other words, Elizabeth Warren as Vice-President would be an absolutely terrible idea. Even assuming she wanted it, why would she leave the Senate, where she would be a lot more powerful?
It goes on from there, but why do people who claim to like Elizabeth Warren want to punish her with the Vice Presidency?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Good points. Although some presidents have had the good sense to use their VP's fully and take advantage of their expertise. (And then, some prez did so to our peril. Yes, W, I'm looking at you).
The best thing about Warren as VP would be it would set her up to run for President.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
There is also the point of balancing the ticket. One female from a Northeastern Democratic state does not need a second one beside her. Hillary should select someone from the Midwest or West. Gabrielle Giffords would be ideal, or Bill Richardson or Julian Castro.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
