|
the trump campaign was real bad but 'make america great again' and the hats were real good not sure what clinton's slogan actually was. 'stronger together' was okay i guess but mostly i remember 'i'm with her' which wasn't
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 05:06 |
|
|
Venom Snake posted:B. Warren has given up. Bernie is also on the verge of throwing in the the towel. The only person I know willing to present opposition/unification right now is the Tim Kaine crowd/NOVA dems who believe we should rally around Bernie's primary message. Even if he himself won't do it. comparing this to the rapid republican transition to defence and entrenchment after 2008 is remarkable i gotta think they'll get over it once the shock wears off
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
so i'm british and something akin to this happened recently with us, as you may have heard no not brexit. 2015 general election the tories were stupid and incompetent and we had a milquetoast nonentity in charge of labour but it looked like they'd scrape it out anyway. but then the polls were wrong and the tories got a majority and 18 months later the country is imploding and labour is still in disarray. so the sanders talk is similar to our corbyn talk. the old party establishment just wasn't working at all so we tried something new. and we've had a year of corbyn now so i can say some things about the experience 1. if you make a serious push to make the party go left (not just nonbinding platforms, but credible left policy) there will likely be deep deep resistance. the idea is anathema to a lot of wealthy liberals (not leftists) with entrenched power. you'll also face a hostile press which will make its peace with trump, or just with congressional republicans, or with leadership figures of the democratic right given permanent platforms to undermine you in the name of Seriousness. 2. corbyn genuinely isn't a very good politician but we have no alternative because our dnc-equivalent could slam down the door to any replacement if they were able to force him out. we're obligated to keep him due to the party civil war. try to make sure you don't get stuck in the same position. but there's some good signs too. corbyn's rise was met with sheer panic and total resistance, sanders seems to have better relations with the dnc wing at least in public. and you can make a credible claim that the democratic coalition is the genuine majority of the country, just hobbled by suppression, gerrymandering, etc. it's harder to make that claim in the uk for labour. Peel has issued a correction as of 01:52 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:There is nobody left to oppose him. seriously: they'll appear, and rally, if a left wing seems to be seriously taking over
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:
this isn't an 'i told you so' since i didn't say anything, but i did think during the election that people were foolish to dismiss trump campaigning in michigan et. al. if the polls were correct he was doomed no matter what - so you should campaign to be in the best position assuming the polls are wrong by enough points to make you competitive. which they were. so i guess the inverse is you should play defence assuming the polls are wrong by enough points to make your opponent competitive.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
also brace for people who think what the democrats need is a good hearty dose of racism
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
realtalk: do not let the people who want to go in on racism win. you won't be able to out-racist the party of trump and you're telling your actual core (the expanding part of your coalition) to stay home as they have no place in america. plus you know, reinforcing white supremacy. people who want to do it will probably wrap it up with talk about how it's wrong to dismiss whites as 'just racist', but that's exactly what they'll be doing when saying that getting their vote relies on racism, however they choose to code it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
also don't let the Serious people preen about the foolish poors and their ignorance. their bungling brought us the iraq war, then the great recession, then austerity, and ultimately trump. they told themselves self-serving myths while voting to gently caress people over with obvious drivel, exactly like the trumpists they deride. their policy expertise just means their drivel is presented in elaborate working papers that make them feel good rather than the incoherent rambling of a trump speech it deserves.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:just ignore race. talk about class. talk about income brackets, shut up about 'poor whites' and 'poor blacks' because that is dogwhistling anyways i don't think you can put racism not as central to trump's appeal given how much time he spent on the wall and banning muslims and so on but more importantly, a politics that ignores race is going to be completely impossible given the actual politics on the ground. the war over police brutality isn't going to quiet down now donald j. 'execute the central park five' trump is in charge at the head of a unified congress of vote-suppressors. you can't say 'we need a movement of the dispossessed' while ignoring the really existing movements of the dispossessed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:hillary didnt lose b/c of misogyny there doesn't need to be a single reason she lost its possible that clinton wins in the universe where everything is the same but she's a man, and the universe where american whites are less racist, and the universe where she's an economic populist, and the universe where everything was the same just with more resources in the midwest, and the universe where the pussy tape dropped ten days before the election rather than a month out and tbh i don't want to tell women not to lament misogyny just after the first major female candidate is beaten by a slavering rapist
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
any political campaign is going to produce rancorous arguments between opposing camps and hothousing within camps, particularly on the internet and particularly particularly on this forum. neither clinton or sanders are going to lead in 2020 and i don't think relitigating not even the primary, but the primary thread, is the path forward
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
when i heard about the secret wall speech speeches thing i wasn't much bothered by it - clinton is friendly with wall street? you don't say - until i discovered they were given post-2008 she didn't need the money and she should have been well aware that it was a bad time to associate herself with the financial elite just as a matter of political expediency Venom Snake posted:Clinton does not matter anymore. What we do next matters. this is officially the campaign autopsy thread, tbf
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:There is nobody left at the helm to block him. Obamas hosed because his legacy just got flushed down the toilet. The Clintons have given up. obama was already planning to do post-presidency politics, it'd be helpful if he still did even if it's not the same thing
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
Calling to appeal to working class whites by abandoning racial politics is a call to appeal to one segment of the democratic coalition by abandoning other parts of that coalition, right after an election where the Democrats were undermined by low turnout caused (so the theory goes) by abandoning key parts of their coalition. It's also impossible. A white supremacist is entering the White House, and Black Lives Matter has been around for years. Neither is going away and racially anxious whites will be getting plenty of stimulus to that anxiety no matter what you do. The call to suppress anti-Trump protests is particularly strange. That is what energised politics looks like. (none of this is a defence of daft poo poo like tweeting about the extinction of white men while working for a campaign, but that goes without saying as basic message discipline)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
basically lol at looking at this election and those turnout graphs and saying 'well the democrats should just abandon their base to chase marginal voters - what are they going to do, vote for the republicans?'guts and bolts posted:Basic message discipline and also you know hateful nonsense racism haha That's fair, there's been some people saying things like 'don't talk about race' or 'give those whiny anti-trump protesters cookies so they shut up' who I'm mainly directed at. I'm on edge because I can feel the pull toward abandoning minorities to reflexively focus on white concerns coming out in these post-mortem conversations and it worries me because minorities are going to be taking Trump on the chin. Liberals, minorities and poor people are the three often-overlapping legs of the left-wing coalition and you can appeal to all of them in a positive way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
If I were to point to some particular recent thing that alienated white people in America I'd probably go for BLM (which is good, and should be strengthened, particularly given the nightmare policing is going to become under Trump).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Also I'm pretty sure the 'grassroots level' of the democratic party includes a whole lot of latino union workers and black churchgoers and you know struggling white people, and so on and so forth.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
this thread's conception of naive-college-leftist-millennials, their prevalence, homogeneity, social position and share in the blame for your woes is at least as crude as the stereotype this group is thought to hold of poor white people
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
i don't know about 'bad person' but trumpvoting, whether through malice or negligence, is definitely an evil act for which an account will be demanded in the court of eternity however that's not strictly relevant to the question of democratic autopsy and rebuilding, which this thread is about (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
liberal elites can (so long as trump doesn't go crazy vindictive) but it's going to be a hell of a time for the people they rely on to vote for them every 2-4 years
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Astroclassicist posted:
I don't think it was a mistake to trust the consensus of polling and try for important bonuses like propositions. We know the polling was systematically wrong now, but going with your gut feeling over what reputable polls tell you will burn you more often than not. Bill Mitchell was lucky, not insightful. The problem was aiming for electoral votes in landslide states at the cost of maintaining your firewall in case of a polling error, because bonus electoral votes don't actually get you anything.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Polling wasn't that off. LV models were extremely off. I consider those part of but yeah, that seems to have been the particular problem.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
tadashi posted:Remember that one black 19 year old who was supporting Trump and allegedly skewing the polls 5 points in Trump's favor? The LAT poll was still well off, though to its credit no more off than the others in the final analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
This thread has had some good posting but I think we need to be aware that mostly we are recapitulating our prejudices in the immediate aftermath of an event, not doing analysis. In the case of this forum this means it's dominated by angry bernie supporters squeezed out by the clinton hothouse over the last few months, now returned. So I'd like to say some words in favour of responses to the election outside of the 'more economic populism to win back white workers' consensus view ITT. First there have been a few posts mocking or excoriating women on whatever other site for being angry or distraught at misogyny. Honestly this is kind of a bad look. In the first place if you don't think sexism has been a factor in making Clinton not just uninspiring but the least popular candidate ever this side of Cheeto Hitler himself you're deluding yourself. In the second place women are one of the groups that Trump's America will be extra-bad for, so maybe give angry women a moment to be pissed about what men* just did to them. Secondly the talk has focused almost entirely on the 'white working class' as the possible target for populism presumably on the grounds that minorities can be taken for granted. And you have the corollaries to that of blaming the lack of wwc votes on whatever aspect of Clintonian messaging they're presumed to not like, suggestions ranging from the possible to the fatuous. But if you look at that turnout graph that's been going around, besides the slump in the vote from 2012 -> 2016 that's attracted attention there's also the fact that Trump's turnout isn't much different to 2012 or 2008. It's actually a little lower. So it's not immediately obvious there's some block of voters that switched from Democrats to Trump, or if there was he lost even more voters than he gained. Trump was selling something but people in general weren't eager to buy it and he ended up doing more or less the same as previous Republican candidates. And while Clinton's fortunes would have been better with more white votes, they would also have been better with more minority votes, which might have delivered Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida and so the presidency. And economic populism is an obvious possible way to increase margins and enthusiasm among voters of colour, because the working class is not a white class. Even if you want democratic economic populism as an electoral strategy, it's not necessarily its effects on poor white voters that make it most attractive. Relatedly I wouldn't confidently assume that white people (or areas, it's not necessarily the same people) that voted for Obama but not Clinton would have voted for Obama again, or at least not by a comparable margin. A great deal has happened to increase white racial stress since 2008 - continued economic weakness, BLM, the immigration argument and of course the presence of Obama himself in the top job. Lastly when declaring that people shouldn't be angry or contemptuous of Trump or his supporters, recall that the Republican response to Obama was to immediately melt down about the socialist usurper, and this reaction delivered them the House, the Senate and ultimately the presidency. Perhaps a hard line against Trump, rather than increasing his support, would reduce it by demoralising his softer supporters and hardening opposition, particularly in the wake of his inevitable bungling. The exhortations not to oppose Trumpists are both based on an unsafe assumption and asking something inhuman of people in the firing line of the most repulsive figure to ever assume the presidency. *and white women lmao
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:I'm only going to respond to this because this sums up how wrong about everything you are and incapable of self examination. You've mistakenly assumed I'm a neoliberal Clintonite, I'm an actual 'Sanders is just a social democrat' socialist and have advocated the democratic party move left economically to recover from this debacle from my first substantial post in this thread. I'm just sceptical of the degree to which the victory this will deliver will involve winning more than a marginal number of white voters back from Trump outright, rather than improving the collapsed Clinton turnout, and insistent that compromising on racial politics out of a belief it'll make you more palatable to whites as a few have advocated is a bad move.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:I don't think anyone would suggest you compromise on racial or identity politics; I think that you can't win solely on those issues (and hey, you can't) so maybe include some other elements to your messaging that might appeal to, say, the largest voting bloc in the United States of America It's not common but at least one person has explicitly advocated so in this thread, and I think it's something even the well-meaning among us can slip toward. And as I said, I think those elements of messaging aren't just important for the white working class specifically. Trump did level with Romney among minorities. That's a shameful state of affairs. Pener Kropoopkin posted:The bottom line is, there has to be a genuine campaign for socialist policies because they will benefit everyone. It can't be sold as a wonkish policy "product" to seize the now-coveted white working poor demographic. Yes, this exactly.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:Addressing the concerns of poor white Americans is not mutually exclusive with advancing social justice in racial matters. I agree with this, dude. But be prepared for the possibility of still not getting a majority of the subdemographic and for your stronger gains to come from the rest of the working class. To be clear, I think democratic margins can improve among poorer white Americans without winning many voters back from Trump outright, i.e. taking Trump voters and making them Kanye voters. Modern American electoral politics turns heavily on turnout.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:No no, that's reasonable. I just haven't had much sleep and I'm not processing things well. That's fair, I've had maybe 8-9 hours total the last two nights and I'm not even American.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
If DNC chair is a committee decision I wouldn't put too much hope in it, but it's worth a shot and there'll be more battles to come either way. Even a populist-sympathetic gives scope for moving forward.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
While we're rolling up sleeves here's the activism thread in case someone is in this thread but doesn't check the main listing much.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Chicago is on the Canadian coast.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
lmao the ultimate
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Fiction posted:No way she and Bernie don't publicly make nice to each other. Warren sees the writing on the wall and she's up for reelection in 2018. I don't think Warren has to worry, there's no way she can lose to an idiot clown like Curt Sch*separated into 500 pieces by a yuge golden alien noise*
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:There's more than one type of pragmatism. yeah seriously being pragmatic and Serious brought us president trump, on both the micro level of the clinton campaign and the macro level of austerity and the financial crisis this doesn't mean you stop being pragmatic, it means you realise what centrists call 'pragmatism' is (frequently sincere) rationalisation of class interest
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
even before he actually won i was cool on the notion that clinton aiding trump was a sign of wisdom rather than a pretty serious black mark just by running the man did serious damage to vulnerable populations. and now he's president.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Who and what Keith Ellison is the black Muslim left-wing candidate for DNC chair that Sanders is backing. Chuck Schumer is the neoliberal centrist incoming leader of the senate Democrats. Even when it looked like Clinton would pull it out and we were set for 4-8 years of things getting sorta better, there was an 'ugh, Schumer' bullet point. If the latter really is backing the former that's legit surprising and suggests some of the corporate democrats might actually be surrendering.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
silver lining to all this is maybe democrats and 'progressives' will stop whining about 'neoliberal' lol
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
tbf she probably would have won with better data losing by several small margins in key states means there's a laundry list of things she could have done differently to win. the democrats were blindsided but not blown out
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Typo posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way the precursor to fascism, rather than fascism itself
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 05:06 |
|
|
Harry Reid's statement: http://www.reid.senate.gov/press_releases/2016-11-11-reid-statement-on-the-election-of-donald-trump#.WCXUjsQ8KnMquote:“I have personally been on the ballot in Nevada for 26 elections and I have never seen anything like the reaction to the election completed last Tuesday. The election of Donald Trump has emboldened the forces of hate and bigotry in America.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 16:50
|
|