|
I mean there's no way to know though, all conventional wisdom is out the window. If the country really is going to poo poo by 2018, we could have reached the point where Trump is calling for crackdowns on minorities, and the barest majority of the population is supporting him. The stuff I'm saying about midterm elections is reliant upon society and laws remaining "normal," which we really can't count on. All bets are off now and that's genuinely terrifying.
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Yeah, part of why the rural former mill towns of the rust belt are such a pain in the rear end to reach out to. You can't just go and tell hundreds of thousands of people they got duped and have been getting duped over and over for decades by the GOP who robbed them blind for the exclusive benefit of the upper crust of the international capital class and blamed regulations, taxes, "welfare queens," and "urban youths." If they had just been duped by the GOP you would have a point. They saw they were being duped, so they went with the democrats, who promptly screwed them with Nafta. No amount of education helps you make a good choice when there are no good choices to make.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:this would require people admitting they were wrong and had been had, which is something people really hate to do But it's not about them being wrong, it's about them being lied to. Directly and in a way that's undeniable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:While Dean was hardly a Champion of the workers, he was not the Clintons animal. Which is why he got forced out after the great victory of 08. The Clinton's have always wanted total control over the party. Time for that to end and for us to forget about their so called golden age. No, In 2008 it was Obama's people taking over the DNC. You can't blame that one on Clinton. Unless Obama is just a pawn in her game I guess.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/juliannagoldman/status/798289453940883457 Eric "/pol/ poster" Trump with loving top clearance. Good loving Lord, America.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
kzin602 posted:Like how they turned on Reagan? People actually liked Reagan. People don't like Trump and without a 9/11 event that he can make hay out of he's going to be like second term Bush.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Tatsuta Age posted:https://twitter.com/juliannagoldman/status/798289453940883457 And they will still be running his companies right? Now America will at least get another good example of what corruption actually looks like.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Voter enthusiasm is a real thing. It's an important factor in a society where voting requires registration weeks beforehand, standing in line for a long period of time, and happens on a work day, meaning you may have to lose out on money to take time to vote. That's why I think saying "people won't want to admit they were wrong" is utterly irrelevant. They don't have to admit they're wrong, they just have to decide they're not going to bother to vote this time, or say, hey I like what that other person is saying, they make me enthusiastic, let's go vote for them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:If they had just been duped by the GOP you would have a point. They saw they were being duped, so they went with the democrats, who promptly screwed them with Nafta. No amount of education helps you make a good choice when there are no good choices to make. nafta didn't screw anyone, it was a convenient scapegoat to point out while manufacturing was already in decline 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:I'm not so sure about that. Like you said at least some of them are calling him out on lying about coal jobs, and if by 2020 there's no new jobs, no wall, and life in the Rust Belt still sucks (and possibly sucks even worse) a portion of the people are going to realize they've been used and abandoned. It's a real possibility but he already ran as a screw-you candidate once, if circumstances are anything short of disastrous in 2020 and he can still plausibly bill himself as less hateful than the alternative he might just pick up an incumbent boost instead
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:The PUMAs did way worse poo poo than the berniebros in 08. That's 100% true but they also showed up to vote in November.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Just saw a family friend on Facebook make the argument that "you say Bannon's an anti-semite? Well I say Obama's an anti-semite!" And I cannot  hard enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:Heritage foundation statistics I think I see your problem here sir.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Remember that we can't know how many votes Hillary got because like 7 million of them haven't been counted, and they are mostly in places like NY, California and Washington. If she wins these votes 2 to 1 she'll meet or exceed obama's 2012 total. https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/507455/
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:nafta didn't screw anyone, it was a convenient scapegoat to point out while manufacturing was already in decline Another thing I found fascinating: apparently, a lot of the manufacturing didn't necessarily move overseas, it just moved to right to work states in the South. There's still a lot of American manufacturing, it just offers poo poo pay/benefits or is being automated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Tatsuta Age posted:https://twitter.com/juliannagoldman/status/798289453940883457 Oh come the gently caress on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
His total at this point, or his total after his remaining voters were counted?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:That's 100% true but they also showed up to vote in November. I don't remember Obama supporters constantly whining about them until election night.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:nafta didn't screw anyone, it was a convenient scapegoat to point out while manufacturing was already in decline It very likely played a big part in the depressed wages through the 90s in all three signatory countries along with the breakup of major unions, which went hand in hand at the time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
thechosenone posted:His total at this point, or his total after his remaining voters were counted? The latter
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Rodenthar Drothman posted:Just saw a family friend on Facebook make the argument that "you say Bannon's an anti-semite? Well I say Obama's an anti-semite!" This is your chance to either try to pierce their bubble, or disengage from them. I would totally not blame you for disengaging. Punching a brick wall rarely gets you anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:I don't remember Obama supporters constantly whining about them until election night. People were basically flipping the gently caress out about pumas right up to the landslide. 2008 was way uglier primary than 2016.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:The latter Well, fooey. I've already said either attenuating, mitigating, or abolishing the electoral college is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:People actually liked Reagan. People don't like Trump and without a 9/11 event that he can make hay out of he's going to be like second term Bush. Indeed, it's kind of ironic...if Trump actually does make the unbelievable mistake of appointing Giuliani AG, you'll have constant invocations of 9/11 working against a GOP president for a change. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:They retook it on the sly largely during the horse trading phase that led to Obama getting the nom in the first place (he actually didn't get the popular vote but it was definitely closer in 2008 than in 2016). Had that not happened I suspect we'd be looking at McCain's second term right now. Well its in the neoliberals nature to throw fits when the world doesn't go there way. Also Michelle haters are only slightly less bad then Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Oh lol. I do love the liberals who really think that everyone is stupid and their the only ones that get the world. If things are lovely and your guy is in charge it rapidly decreaces the chances you'll turn out, which actually happened in 2006. Its also happened to the dems both in 2014, and in 2010. 1994 happened because limbaugh and gingrich were able to drum up outrage over the failed Health Security Act 1998 didn't happen because the economy was in the middle of a boom and people had turned on gingrich for the shutdown and overblowing the lewinsky scandal, which was mostly burnt out. 2002 didn't happen because of 9/11 2006 happened because of a combination of bush's immigration bill not being "build the wall!!!!" and most people realizing after katrina that he really was that bad of a president. 2010 happened because the RSLC poured shitloads of money into attack mailers, and the repubs having a very consistent message of "kill the bill" in regards to the PPACA. OFA left all the downballot candidates out to dry this year, and a lot of them had tried to distance themselves as much as possible from obama, and the centrists and blue dogs ended up taking the brunt of it. 2014 happened because that was RIGHT when the healthcare exchanges under the ACA were rolled out and any teething problems were big news, several republican candidates decided to try running to the center instead of the far right, and really loving low turnout. also, OFA was no loving help, again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:1994 happened because limbaugh and gingrich were able to drum up outrage over the failed Health Security Act Still proves how poo poo at their job the DNC has been, since they can only seem to succeed when the GOP fucks up enough. Edit: Bip Roberts posted:People were basically flipping the gently caress out about pumas right up to the landslide. 2008 was way uglier primary than 2016. Good thing I said "I don't remember," now I can pretend it wasn't just a have-assed rebuttal. MizPiz fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Nov 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Another thing I found fascinating: apparently, a lot of the manufacturing didn't necessarily move overseas, it just moved to right to work states in the South. There's still a lot of American manufacturing, it just offers poo poo pay/benefits or is being automated. Yep.  Manufacturing isn't "coming back" because the US is already a manufacturing powerhouse. We just don't really need a lot of people to produce a lot of stuff anymore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
zxqv8 posted:This is your chance to either try to pierce their bubble, or disengage from them. Ah, I wish I could. He and I have many a political talk, but he's not gonna have his bubble pierced. (Also lol because we know him from karate and he's like 6'2" and built like a brick shithouse. He's a tank.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Manufacturing isn't "coming back" because the US is already a manufacturing powerhouse. We just don't really need a lot of people to produce a lot of stuff anymore. and we especially dont need people who are going to demand high wages, health benefits, and pensions from private industry. it makes so much more sense for the government to provide those things instead, since the government is not bound by profit motive (yet)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Another thing I found fascinating: apparently, a lot of the manufacturing didn't necessarily move overseas, it just moved to right to work states in the South. There's still a lot of American manufacturing, it just offers poo poo pay/benefits or is being automated. Alright, I know that you've seen me post this in multiple threads over the past 5 weeks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bkm2Vfj42FY Watch it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:and we especially dont need people who are going to demand high wages, health benefits, and pensions from private industry. it makes so much more sense for the government to provide those things instead, since the government is not bound by profit motive (yet) Let's see where we are in four years  wrt manufacturing, one thing that anyone talking about this should really pay attention to is the fact that output recovers (and even increases) while employment doesn't. Manufacturing is shedding workers like crazy while actually increasing overall productivity drastically.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
My pet peeve about this election is people picking up the habit of using "the DNC" to refer to the Democratic Party as a whole when the Democratic National Committee has very little influence on anything beyond fundraising and giving out that cash to candidates. I know it's the result of the primary mess and the fact that we've got "the GOP" for the republicans and we want a nice three letter acronym but it results in attributing things to the DNC that have nothing to do with them and that's my incredibly petty complaint for the day. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
thechosenone posted:I think I see your problem here sir.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Quorum posted:My pet peeve about this election is people picking up the habit of using "the DNC" to refer to the Democratic Party as a whole when the Democratic National Committee has very little influence on anything beyond fundraising and giving out that cash to candidates. I mean, it's fair to make the distinction, but folks have been conflating the two entities for a lot longer than this election, tbf.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Quorum posted:My pet peeve about this election is people picking up the habit of using "the DNC" to refer to the Democratic Party as a whole when the Democratic National Committee has very little influence on anything beyond fundraising and giving out that cash to candidates. I know it's the result of the primary mess and the fact that we've got "the GOP" for the republicans and we want a nice three letter acronym but it results in attributing things to the DNC that have nothing to do with them and that's my incredibly petty complaint for the day. Yeah, how can you influence a party when all you do is control it's assets?  Edit: Majorian posted:Obviously, it doesn't hurt that young people vote less during midterm elections, while old people vote in ALL elections. No denying that, either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Still proves how poo poo at their job the DNC has been, since they can only seem to succeed when the GOP fucks up enough. Obviously, it doesn't hurt that young people vote less during midterm elections, while old people vote in ALL elections.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:If the Heritage Foundation could pin the problem on a Clinton policy, they would. I trust those numbers. Well I guess I was figuring that the Heritage foundation liked NAFTA, and so would not like saying that it is bad (and so couldn't use it against Clinton). Trump's dislike of trade agreements doesn't seem to be that popular in GOP circles? Maybe I'm wrong?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:There was a really interesting article that explained how Congressional midterm elections are less about the actual candidates running and more like a referendum on the current President. If Trump utterly fails to keep his promises AND the economy shits itself again, which seems likely, then the Dems could have an opportunity to take back Congress in 2018. I think we might want to keep in mind the threat of voter suppression laws having potentially big effects in 2018 (and 2020). They seem to have been pretty effective in places like Wisconsin, and while generally it's a state-by-state issue, I imagine there are some tricks the national party can pull by then with the level of control they're going to have, especially if they axe the filibuster. Also gerrymandering requiring a big wave to ever take back the house + the senate seats up in 2018 being mostly difficult ones for the dems to defend to begin with. It could happen, but it's going to be an uphill battle even if Trump and the economy both poo poo the bed. Quorum posted:My pet peeve about this election is people picking up the habit of using "the DNC" to refer to the Democratic Party as a whole when the Democratic National Committee has very little influence on anything beyond fundraising and giving out that cash to candidates. I know it's the result of the primary mess and the fact that we've got "the GOP" for the republicans and we want a nice three letter acronym but it results in attributing things to the DNC that have nothing to do with them and that's my incredibly petty complaint for the day. To some extent yes, but "fundraising and giving out that cash to candidates" basically lets them dictate national electoral strategy (whether to go for a 50-state strategy on the local level or funnel money into creating "stronghold" states, for example), so it's still really important.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
I think the advantage of a 50 state strategy has the benefit of them not taking anyone for granted. At least, that is what it sounds like to me, since it would figure that if you are paying attention to everyone, you end up looking like you care, which I think people like.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 00:31
|
|