uspol november: as it turns out they could not stump the trump

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > uspol november: as it turns out they could not stump the trump

«‹›7 »

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

corn in the bible posted:

no, no, i am sure all those whites will die in the next 4 years and we can retake the senate and house and save freedom. clinton 2020

This is the death throes of the GOP, as has been everything they have done in the past 12 years, according to my objective analysis.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 08:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 19:17

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

ModernMajorGeneral posted:

Do people really think the silver lining to the Trump presidency is detente with Russia? I'm pretty sure that Donald loving Trump, as the new most powerful person in the world, is not going to miss the chance to swing his metaphorical dick around if the opportunity to confront Russia arises. Every aspect of his image is based around being an unrestrained strongman and the only thing to encourage him de-escalating tensions with Russia is "he said he would", ie. the sacrosanct word of Donald Trump.

Detente with Russia would be the opposite of a silver lining.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 09:23

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Where is fishmech

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 10:09

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

It's because one party has been telling them that they have had things far too easy for far too long (and should be ashamed of it), while the other party told them they can make things better for them than they are, and that the better future is rightfully theirs. You don't have to be a genius to see the result.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 10:32

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

BigglesSWE posted:

As long as that person isn't a woman, it's totally viable for anyone to become president.

As long as that person isn't an uncharismatic, elitist, ivory tower piece of garbage of a candidate

You chose a right-wing caricature of a spineless conceited liberal to run for president, you fuckers

steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 11:52 on Nov 9, 2016

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 11:50

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

AShamefulDisplay posted:

So Sanders is an established dem politician by that logic. The only things he regularly disagrees with dems on are guns and foreign policy. There are many dems who agree with him on those issues. Several of which were often derided in DnD as blue dogs.

It's hard to find a position with which Clinton didn't agree at one point or another.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 11:54

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

AShamefulDisplay posted:

Absolutely, which is why it's hilarious to me to see posters in this thread act like Bernie was going to lead us into a Proletarian uprising because he supported literally the basic societal infrastructure in the rest of the Western world. It was God drat shameful witnessing so many of my socialist comrades rooting for him in the loving primary for the "left" wing of American bourgeois democracy.

lol

Sanders had a proven track record of policy consistency, and he was a net positive change. He was the pragmatic choice, unlike the supposed pragmatic strategy of choosing a hated status quo shill.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 12:01

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Junior G-man posted:

I too hope that the new president spends his time jailing his political opponent. That's a worthy use of the office and the first 100 days.

Frankly, failing as hard as Hillary should be a criminal offense.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 12:06

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lawman 0 posted:

Turns out America was poo poo all along.

The more reason to make it great.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 12:57

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Rookersh posted:

It's way more then this.

Look at the election results across the board, and notice two things in particular.

First off, vote totals -across the board- are lower then previous elections. Especially for the Democrats. Compare the amounts Clinton/Trump won to the Obama/Romney election. Or the Obama/McCain election. Trump was winning some Blue states handily with numbers lower then Romney got, with Clinton barely getting anything.

Secondly, the real killer here wasn't a loss of new markets. It was the collapse of old ones. Red Wisconsin? Red Michigan? Red Pennsylvania? Minnesota and Virginia eking in with barely 5k votes to Dem, despite being some of the sturdiest strongholds the Dems have?

Democrats had a lock on the Presidency not because people loved the message. They had a lock on the Presidency because the coalition they formed controlled all of the major states in terms of electoral college votes, and Republicans needed to win all the swing states just to be competitive. All Democrats had to do, every year was win Virginia, maybe Florida, and they'd eke out a win. Hell even tonight, all Clinton technically had to do was win Virginia and she "should" have won. The loss wasn't losing Florida, or North Carolina, or even Ohio. She could have lost all of those states and still won tonight. It was losing states that weren't even in play.

This then ties around to.....well basically everything about the Democratic strategy so far, and just how bad it's been getting while we haven't been paying attention. Throwing random schmucks into the House positions that have no hope of victory, and no chance to be competitive year after year because why bother when they'll lose anyway isn't a great strategy. Sure the House is largely schmuckville anyway, but the Republican schmucks tend to have better soundbytes. Utterly needing to break gerrymandering, voter suppression, and more, but leaving those fights down the road because they didn't want to seem overly partisan is now biting them in the rear end badly.

Part of this is white backlash. But more then anything, this was voters not wanting to engage with this election, and that being utterly key for the Democrats in the Midwest. And that wouldn't be so terrible, outside of the fact the Democratic party has long been way underequipped for doing anything but being President/hopefully Senate.

The Democrats need, and needed new blood badly. They need to start funding and focusing on downticket races, and need to actually figure out a system for handling those downticket races as effectively as the Republicans. And they'll now need to work twice as hard, because you can bet your rear end the Republican SC is going to rip up voter rights/help gerrymandering spread across more of the country now, which'll make it even harder for Democrats in the future to win. They likely need to moderate hard, and try to re-energize their base in the Midwest, before it stays red, taking away all paths to power.

The fact Florida and NC were as competitive as they were speaks to their ground game. Don't blame predominantly swingy red states for going red for a populist, we didn't need them. Blame blue strongholds for winning with less then 5k votes, or formerly blue strongholds losing to less then 5k votes. That's where the election was lost this year. This year wasn't lost because Trump was a better candidate, or the whites came out in droves, or because of anything Trump did. This year was lost because Democrats largely rejected Clinton, rejected the party, and chose not to engage with the election at all, wiping their hands of the whole mess. The only people that showed up seems to be Obama's minority coalition, and they were betrayed by their allies across the board. That's what killed this election.

On the bright side McCrory lost.

( Bernie 100% needs to leave politics after today. I'd argue he is near 60% the cause of this loss, because from the sounds of things many of the people in the Midwest chose not to vote because they were huge Bernie fans that got led on too long/"Corrupt Hillary". Considering how many losses across the board were at the 1k-2k range, Berniebros did have an affect on this election. As I said, this wasn't a Republican victory, this was a Democrat failure, and much of that ties to Bernie, the corruption scandals, and more I imagine. )

Bernie Sanders gave that stupid dead party a recipe for success, and they decided to throw it away to instead feed their own power hungry bureaucracy, which then made its best effort to alienate as many people as possible without reaching out to anybody new.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 15:10

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

porfiria posted:

-By far the scariest thing about Trump is foreign policy. Domestically at the end of the day the president's powers are fairly demarcated and limited by Congress and the Supreme Court

If he doesn't gently caress up, he will have both on his side. Which means Trump presidency will be dictated by House and Senate Republicans.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 15:17

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Glazier posted:

True but no the whole story, it was just white women. POC number was around 7%.

He did very well with The Hispanics, just as he promised.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 15:29

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Radish posted:

Trump doesn't get to claim he was outspent when he got effectively billions in free advertising from the media covering him constantly and smoothing his edges.

Blame Hillary for not being able to come up with a media (counter)strategy despite virtually all journos favoring her. You can't blame the media for being unbalanced if only one candidate is actually showing signs of life.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 17:23

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Radish posted:

I can identify with this sentiment. Hillary wasn't great but if the media was constantly explaining why the emails were bullshit and that Trump's scandals were REAL on a daily basis (so the inverse of what how they treated the candidates) it might have swung differently. I mean they bitched endlessly about her not giving press conferences while Trump not only didn't do them but openly mocked them. From the beginning they treated her like a real candidate and Trump like some amusement and welp here we are.

They've already lost conservatives and I hope left leaning people tell them to gently caress off with their trash polls and clickbait garbage. Worthless.

They did exactly what you were asking, what should they have done more, call Trump a dumb baby poo poo head and order people not to vote for him, lest they face their wrath? And play straight into Trump's cards?

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 17:25

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Yeah, Hillary was really a smart and talented candidate, she should run again in 2020.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 17:29

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

The Trump coalition is built on racism. His platform was literally "gently caress immigrants and foreigners." White working class people abandoned the Dems for that platform.

What do you think we could do to win them back? I frankly don't think Obama could win in 2020 even if he were allowed to run.

It was a platform of "Put our interests ahead of non-Americans, we can't waste our money abroad if our own people are doing poorly."

Clinton wasn't able to explain what those interests mean, and how they could be best served through cooperation, instead she tacitly conceded the point that her own legacy as a SoS would impoverish more Americans via her flip flopping on the TPP. She also failed to make a positive impression in all matters relating to war and foreign policy.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 17:54

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

The problem is that you're forgetting why American labor failed in the first place.

If you push class identity you will lose because the Right will push racism and win because race > class. Remember the Southern Strategy?

If you push identity politics you'll lose because " wah, white people are so persecuted now, you don't focus on us anymore, no I don't care your platform would be amazing for me too, you're not sucking my dick while you say it."

You must have missed the election campaigns, people who ended up voting Trump were overwhelmingly convinced that Clinton's presidency would be awful for them, with her selling them out to her wealthy friends and to assertive foreign leaders. They believed she would take away from them the little they got, and lol if you think people in that mind set will even consider some idealistic ramifications of their vote.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:01

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Pakled posted:

Anyone who feels antagonized by the message "bigotry is bad" is not going to vote Democrat any time soon.

People are antagonized by the message "You are bigoted, because I say so, and I'm smarter than you. Also I'm not going to listen to what you are going to say in response, so don't even bother."

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:04

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

I mean what do you want? Shall we do some America First anti-immigrant, anti-free trade garbage?

Everything these people want is toxic. This country is hosed because the electorate are literally stupid children.

I want a candidate who can explain why those positions are ineffective, and who can also precisely name and describe the issues paining people in terms that resonate with them, while rhetorically leading into a progressive policy solution (that's what Sanders was doing). A candidate who can't communicate is worse than useless, and Clinton is a terrible communicator.

If the electorate is stupid, it's because so are their leaders.

steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Nov 9, 2016

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:04

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Eugene V. Dabs posted:

How the gently caress are you supposed to listen, understand, and convincingly retort when they're just screaming at you about immigrants?

Yeah, that's totally what everybody is like, screaming 99% of the time.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:23

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

"I wish to win the elections... But I'm scared of people, sometimes they can be mean to me or have opinions I don't agree with :ohdear:

Better hope if I stand in the corner, somebody will notice me."

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:25

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Doctor Butts posted:

"Hey guys let's try to engage and help conservatives understand our policies and how they help everyone while they circle the loving wagons once again and turn every synonym of liberal into a dirty word and turn the country into a regressive shithole 3rd world country

I mean, if they just understood us..."

Give me a loving break with that poo poo.

So resign on politics, close the shop and just hope somebody remembers to write your name in the next time?

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:26

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

I love how quick leftists are to minimize racism.

"Oh they just don't agree with us, why are you so close-minded?"

The realization we will have over the course of the next two years how actually hosed we are will be fascinating to see unfold.

It's amazing how quick some people are to assume that just because somebody disagrees with them, they must be totes hosed up in the head, and probably irrevocably so, and the more charged insults you pile on top of them, the more likely you are to expose their hidden monstrosity to others.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:29

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Martha Stewart Undying posted:

Demographics is inherently long game, dude. Black people have lived through poo poo before, we'll live through this poo poo as well. See you in 2040 provided you don't die from the lack of some basic care robbed from us by white people's pig stupidity.

lol

seek help

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:32

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Who What Now posted:

Why does it matter what we call them? They wouldn't have voted for Clinton even if we had coddled them like the fragile children they are. So why shouldn't we treat them as the reprehensible pieces of poo poo that they are?

The only value they have any more is to be yelled at for catharsis, and it's honestly more than they deserve.

Why did you even bother running a candidate if you are absolutely certain that 50% of Americans can't have their minds changed, and will always pick the Wrong option. Also, was Romney right about the 47% thing?

The amount of people who choose not to understand politics on this day is hilarious.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:38

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Crowsbeak posted:

This is definitely a place the dems could use to bounce back. It definitely helps with Millennials. Likewise maybe remember that all workers want dignity.

They don't deserve dignity if they are traitors to a party that itself proudly proclaims it doesn't represent them.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:39

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

No but I don't think white voters in general would go for a non-white straight dude at this point.

I give up because my gut tells me it wouldnt work.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:41

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Who What Now posted:

Because I underestimated just how deep and widespread the cancer in this country is. Everybody did.

FTFY

I mean, if you seriously think all people are idiots who don't care about their well-being, and instead instantly ascribe the darkest possible motives to everything that doesn't align with your preferences, you actually SHOULD give up on politics, because you and people similar to you are going to lose the Democrats countless many future elections.

People didn't believe a word of what Clinton promised, but they saw her track record which was a major albatross in this climate, what with her support for war and interventionism, for NAFTA and TPP etc. She represented all the wrong things in the public eye, and campaign promises couldn't overcome this. In the end, she ended up looking worse than a blank slate billionaire.

steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Nov 9, 2016

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:47

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

z0glin Warchief posted:

The democratic voters in PA/WI/MI didn't believe this to be true. Clinton didn't lose because those people voted for Trump, she lost because they either weren't aware of the policies she would be pushing, or didn't trust her to follow through on them, and so stayed home.

Some of this is their fault for not trying to educate themselves, some of it is the media's fault for failing to educate them, some of it Clinton's fault for failing to package the message in an easily digestible format.

On the last point, I find myself agreeing with Yglesias. Clinton had a bunch of great policies that were well developed in white papers, she knew them inside and out, and she talked about them at length. But when you talk about a long laundry list of policy details that have already been watered down to fit what is more likely to actually get passed, a lot of people tune out, and the media is less likely to write you a punchy memorable headline or get good soundbites to use. Instead, she may have been better served by presenting overarching goals, and leaving the details to the white papers and policy interviews. Like, you got a lot of "we'll push for this much maternity/paternity leave and spend this much more on early-child education and blah blah blah, and college tuition will be subsidized, to qualifying state schools, if you work X hours a week and your family makes under Y annual income" and it went right over marginal voters' heads.

Instead, if she'd gone with "We are going to give everyone paid leave when you have kids! College tuition to public schools will be free!", and hammered those big points more, maybe you'd have something for people to latch onto besides loving emails, which is 90% of what people were hearing about. When the remaining 10% is split between a million policy details, none of it penetrates. And maybe that swings the vote in Michigan, PA, and Wisconsin by a total of 100,000 and you win the election.

Because, in case we've forgotten already, she lost those three states, states that every democrat in the last 25 years has won and that would have given her the election, by a combined total of less than 100k votes. Barely more than a rounding error. Like 2000, this was an election decided on the margin, and if one of a million tiny things had gone differently we would have President-elect Hillary Clinton right now.

(my two examples are both sort of economy related, but I don't meant to imply she should have necessarily spent more time talking about those over racial/social issues, just that the time she spent talking about the issues in general was utilized in a sub-par way, and in such a tight race that could have made the difference)

You have to hand it to Trump, whenever somebody unearthed something on him, he just got out there, and carried on with his usual message as if everything went as planned, at most he made some disparaging remarks. Compared to that the Clinton campaign was not only anemic, but also neurotic and defensive.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:53

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Who What Now posted:

These are the people Steinroker wants us to ally with.

Yeah, they are representative of 150 million people without an exception, including those who voted for Obama.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:54

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Crowsbeak posted:

For the most part I agree, but the people who are already part of the KKK, Nazis and others. We should subjugate, we should make fear, we should make wish they did not think the way they did.

But instead the current strategy is to convince the people who are not part of those groups that they are, in fact, just as bad, and might as well join them because we won't be arsed to acknowledge any difference.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 18:56

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Who What Now posted:

If you ally yourself with Neo-Nazis you can't bitch when you're called an ally of Neo-Nazis.

They allied themselves with the Republican Party, the largest and longest running party in the USA. How are they responsible for who else affiliates with them, were people who voted Democrat also complicit on George Wallace's segregationist policies in Alabama, or affiliated with the KKK because they voted for the party represented by KKK member Byrd?

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:00

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Who What Now posted:

The parties are not equal in their reprehensibleness, and only the most irredeemable of morons pretends that they are.

I do not, but it makes no sense to infer that

A likes B
C likes B
therefore A likes C

Especially when B is one of only two options available in the most important act of citizen empowerment.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:02

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Trabisnikof posted:

If they voted for George Wallace, yes that's not that hard.

Trump people didn't vote for David Duke or whatever.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:06

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

C2C - 2.0 posted:

Again, you're hinting that outside of identifiable groups like the KKK/Arayans/et. al., that racism wasn't a driving factor in the rest of the Trump voters.

I'm "hinting" that it racism is one of ways in which frustration can manifest, and that Democrats are first incompetent that they can't use the same frustration to inspire a different, more constructive emotion, second that they refuse to delve into these supposedly forever tainted waters, thuse conceding the conservatives, who have no such reservations about interfering on ideologically hostile ground, more and more territory. In other words, that they are so afraid of getting their hands dirty that they would rather lose everything.

Nobody is born racist, and nobody is irreversibly racist, especially if racism squares off demonstrably with his primary material concerns. If those were true, the entire leftist project would collapse at its foundations.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:13

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

~looks at election results~

Uh it kind of is bro.

Sorry, but assuming that just because you lost an election, everybody is forever racist, is plain and simply the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:15

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

I mean, people itt are proposing to use their Facebook conversations as a guideline for a long term federal strategy of political professionals. Never go full retard.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:17

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

C2C - 2.0 posted:

After the hullaballoo subsides a bit, I'll probably reactivate my FB account. And those same folks will be there; the ones who I tried MANY, MANY, MANY loving times to have civil conversations with about the state of the nation.

Before I was met with "BENGHAZI! EMAILS! LYING LIAR WHO LIES!" when talking about stuff like climate change, education funding, etc. I'll earnestly wade back into the fray...and will likely be met with "LOSER! TRUMP! LEAVE THIS COUNTRY!".

I mean, do some of you just not co-mingle with people in conservative circles or something? I can't find a single data point upon which even the most frugal of inroads can be made with these folks. Maybe I'm a poor explainer or poor debater or whatever. I dunno', but since 2000 it seems like I'm trying to talk to some sort of hivemind instead of an individual when confronting people who are conservative that I know personally.

Begin by reforming your own party with new talent, capable of establishing some credibility for themselves. Then you'll have the same structural advantage as they. The GOP machine is well oiled, but the Democratic has been objectively lackluster, and as long as this state of affairs is allowed to persist, there can be only minimal inroads into the GOP territory. The Democratic party needs to find a common energy to start proselytizing en masse, not rely on individuals to try and do the politicians' jobs for them. Unfortunately Clinton was emblematic of the ivory tower attitude of not engaging with people she found beneath her. Meanwhile the GOP side has so much organized energy, used for wrong purposes.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:34

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lessail posted:

The common energy is racism in america

The common energy is hatred. It's up to politicians to channel it towards some particular object.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 19:17

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Lightning Knight posted:

I don't think you can magically wipe out 500 years of racism with "hey guys hate this instead" no matter your level of charisma.

The more reason to begin yesterday.

Reminds me of people in the climate change thread who say that if you can't undo all of global warming in one giant swoop, you shouldn't do anything at all.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2016 19:42

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > uspol november: as it turns out they could not stump the trump

«‹›7 »