|
A Winner is Jew posted:Demographics dipshit. "Demographics" is the 'A Wizard Did It" of politics. You'd think all the talk about how 2016 was a guaranteed win for Democrats because of "demographics" would put people off making the exact same mistake about 2020.
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 03:59 |
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Sander's base is at best very similar to Clinton and you can make enthusiasm arguments but taking for granted that Sanders would have the exact same enthusiasm as Clinton is unjustified. He might have more support among millennials and less among older voters or done more poorly with black voters or a lot of other things that are plausible but unprovable because Bernie Sanders was not the candidate and we can only make assumptions. The idea that the (tied for) least popular politician in America is doing exactly as well as the most popular politician in America would have done in her place is batty. Yes, it's a counterfactual, but so is insisting that while the rollout of your new 'asphalt and dead skunk' flavored ice cream has gone poorly, strawberry ice cream wouldn't have sold any better.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Not sure if I'm reading you correctly, but Clinton's favourables aren't particularly bad. She's at like 45%. quote:Registered voters see Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in a nearly identical negative light, mirroring a persistently close split in overall vote preference in a new Washington Post-ABC News Tracking Poll. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ing-poll-finds/ http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/yougov-economist-26618
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
Pakled posted:It's not so far-fetched when you consider the idea that Bernie wouldn't have the same favorables if he'd won the nomination. Neither Hillary nor Republicans ever really brought out the big guns against Sanders, because he never really stood a chance of winning. Hillary had no reason to antagonize him, so her primary campaign treated him with kid gloves. Republicans saw more benefit in driving a wedge in the Democratic party so they never attacked him as much as they could have either, and in some cases even complimented him (see Trump during the debates) This is just special pleading, the insistence that the GOP had some big red 'Destroy Sanders' button at RNC headquarters they could have pressed if Sanders were nominated. And the idea that the Clinton campaign never went after Sanders is simply wrong, Clintonworld tried to find that button themselves and they weren't able to make anything stick. Sanders' numbers no doubt would have dropped some if he had been the nominee, but the idea that they'd be anywhere near Clinton's historic lows is unsupportable. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/02/tracking-poll-finds-race-tied-as-trump-opens-up-an-8-point-edge-on-honesty/ quote:Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are tied in the new Washington Post-ABC News Tracking Poll, which finds Trump now holds an edge on which candidate is honest and trustworthy. There is no remotely plausible world in which you can substitute in 'Bernie Sanders' for 'Hillary Trump' in that lede.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:People think you can't be sexist unless you're actively saying "women are inferior" just like how you can't be racist unless you're yelling ethnic slurs. Exactly. Which is why sociologists and political scientists will often use more diffuse measures like 'racial resentment' to measure negative racial attitudes rather than a simple blunt 'racism' when exploring the role of attitudes about race in politics and society. For example: 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
RVProfootballer posted:This is really interesting, thanks for posting. Any more interesting info about breaking down supporters by primary candidate there (and if so can I get a link)? http://blogs.reuters.com/talesfromthetrail/2016/07/01/belatedly-what-sanders-supporters-say-about-race/ The detailed breakdown doesn't seem to be publicly available, which is unfortunate. I would be curious to see what the numbers were taking only white voters into consideration. Obviously the numbers of the Republicans wouldn't change much, but it's a virtual certainty that the racial resentment numbers for Clinton supporters would jump quite a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled/status/792870801724870656
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
iospace posted:The thing about emails is that it did nothing but give people already in the tank reason to cry about Clinton. quote:From:ntanden@gmail.com  Look how deep the rabbit hole goes What's the #WokeWithHer equivalent of the red pill? I suggest the 'hill pill' if there's nothing else yet.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:God you unbearable twat. I regret every time I try to engage with you in good faith. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Don't talk to me like we're having a conversation in good faith you incorrigible douchebag. Your views of history are childish and every time you post on anything it's to roleplay this arms-length superiority fantasy you have. "Oh I'm Cingular I'm so above it all, lol at you guys thinking problems exist, don't you know you can attain enlightenment if you literally never read or learn or thing about anything at all. Lol at you at your facts and lived experiences. Everything looks fine to me from my basement." Tiny Brontosaurus posted:The infuriating thing about you is you're too ignorant to even suspect you might be ignorant. Choke on your own dick. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Fart-huffing white twats like him have no concept of what chattel slavery was and they will Tiny Brontosaurus posted:I just randomly decided this well was a good place to piss. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:"The only thing that matters in every conversation is that I get to feel smart. I will contort my arguments, ignore all context, and drag the goalpost all over the field in pursuit of this. There are no facts. There are only my feelings." Some cogent points there T.B. I would suggest that if there is any comparison to be made between Roman slavery and colonial/American slavery it would be between the Southern plantation system and the Roman latifundia. Both are examples of a sort of industrialized agriculture based on vast estates owned by a small number of wealthy landowners and worked by slaves. Slaves sent to the mines were generally criminals enslaved as punishment, and so bore fewer similarities to the economic system of Southern slavery.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2016 20:50
|
|
at every thing you try to say on the subject
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 03:59 |
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:But he does worship the Ruinous Powers? Nonsense, Trump is clearly the chosen of the Dark Gods. Podesta? The guy whose boss is allegedly kept barely alive only by the most advanced medical technology and is venerated by her countless followers? Do I need to say more?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 01:45
|
|