Springfield Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said: The reason Trump or if it isn't Trump in 2020 has a chance to win; the Dems seriously could nominate someone undetectable in a general election. The base of the Democratic party is on the Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren wing of the party. That won't win them a national election in 2020. Maybe by 2032 it would, but not now or in 3 years. Hillary lost because she was terrible candidate. The Dems could've easily won this election if someone else was the nominee. IF the GOP has Kasich, Bush or Rubio; they probably would've blown out Hillary. Trump barely won, electoral college withstanding. I think you're wrong. If the dems run someone who isn't pro national health care, then I'll throw my vote away again. They need to get back to actual democratic tendencies, not corporate shills. Someone who is for common sense tax reform. Someone with actual ideas and knowledge. You don't get that by putting out some middle of the road, business as usual candidate our there. That's what we got from Hillary and we got smoked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Just a lot of people who were willing to be fooled. I think it was some who looked at an improving economy, but who didn't see it improve for them. Some who were uneasy with the Clinton email thing and had memories of endless Clinton witch hunts and didn't want to go through that again. I suspect there were a fair number to whom Trump's scapegoating and racist attacks appealed too, but those generally don't admit to their real motivation to vote. Very few racists admit they're racists. Mainly though, I think it's that a lot of people wanted to be lied to and wanted to believe said lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Alternative reason: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/525771/ I would say the whole email / crooked H / she's shady combined with her lack of charisma is as good an explanation as any. The pathology that allowed people to vote for Trump is really a more interesting subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 16 minutes ago, Burgold said: . Mainly though, I think it's that a lot of people wanted to be lied to and wanted to believe said lie. Of Course Hope/Change.......gotta have hope things will change or ya are a cynical realist or suicidal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 9 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said: Cross section of depressingly low information voters who are easily conned and vote for the charismatic candidate. I hope the other half of you has a better definition of "charismatic". Good grief...yuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted May 13, 2017 Author Share Posted May 13, 2017 2 hours ago, RedskinsFan44 said: Alternative reason: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/525771/ I would say the whole email / crooked H / she's shady combined with her lack of charisma is as good an explanation as any. The pathology that allowed people to vote for Trump is really a more interesting subject. The Atlantic article is one of my views too. Again, a perfect storm-multiple factors are away at her "lead". -societal change (per your link). Dems overplayed their hand with bathrooms, Kneeling, BLM, and gay marriage. Nothing wrong with those things but it energized the opposition. -Bernie voters not coming out -inadequately run campaign -Comey revelation -Hillary being Hillary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 34 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said: I hope the other half of you has a better definition of "charismatic". Good grief...yuck. I suspect he meant charismatic as in charismatic church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 16 minutes ago, Burgold said: I suspect he meant charismatic as in charismatic church. I don't get it, I guess. I don't know how anyone feels good about themselves if they're that stupid...to deny climate change, to believe that a self-reported (but not confirmed) billionaire will know how better to put $350 a week and no health coverage to work for the average person...I just can't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Just now, skinsmarydu said: I don't get it, I guess. I don't know how anyone feels good about themselves if they're that stupid...to deny climate change, to believe that a self-reported (but not confirmed) billionaire will know how better to put $350 a week and no health coverage to work for the average person...I just can't get it. Some have been trained to worship wealth in this country. They think if you are rich that means you are better and that you are smarter. It goes side by side with those who think poor people are lazy. It's a gross stereotype. I liken it to what Tevya said in Fiddler on the Roof during the song- If I were a Rich Man. The most important men in town will come to fawn on me They will ask me to advise them, Like a Solomon the Wise "If you please, Reb Tevye?" "Pardon me, Reb Tevye?" Posing problems that would cross a rabbi's eyes Ya va voy, ya va voy voy vum And it won't make one bit of difference If I answer right or wrong When you're rich they think you really know. This is the logic that many in America especially on the right have truly come to believe. Mind you, I'm doing my own stereotyping here, but it seems to me the deification of wealth is the reason Trump is a celebrity and ultimately why he became President. It sure wasn't about good works, policy, or a well articulated argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Economics is hard. Also Dunning-Kruger is a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 https://reason.com/blog/2017/05/10/frustration-with-political-correctness-w http://programs.clearerthinking.org/trump_clinton/trump_clinton_analysis.htm "The Washington post says, "If there is one uniting principle the defines Donald Trump's campaign for president -- besides, perhaps, winning and being classy -- it is that ." political correctness is bad. It's probably not a coincidence that he talks about this issue so much: we found it to be the 4th strongest predictor of support for him (out of all 138 we studied). In a follow up study, we found that Clinton supporters are highly divided on whether there is too much political correctness, but those who don't think there is too much like Political Correctness because they think it reduces how often people are offended, sets a minimum standard for politeness, and reduces societal tolerance for prejudice. On the other hand, Trump supporters in our study nearly all agreed that there is too much political correctness, and tend to believe that our society has become far too sensitive to being offended. They see political correctness as frustrating because it limits their freedom of speech, and dangerous because it prevents topics they feel are important, related to radical Islamic terrorism, illegal immigration, and race, from being discussed." _________________ This an explanation that continually gets dismissed, but it's clearly a factor. People who voted for Trump (and those who didn't) are telling you it's a factor. Its not the only factor - if Hillary was slightly likable, she'd have won, but it was a factor. The sooner the dems realize this, the better off they will be in 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 8 hours ago, Springfield said: I think you're wrong. If the dems run someone who isn't pro national health care, then I'll throw my vote away again. They need to get back to actual democratic tendencies, not corporate shills. Someone who is for common sense tax reform. Someone with actual ideas and knowledge. You don't get that by putting out some middle of the road, business as usual candidate our there. That's what we got from Hillary and we got smoked. Well, we disagree. We will find out in 2020. I just have this feeling the Dems will snatch away victory in 2020 by nominating someone to far to the left. A repeat of 1972. Bernie would've excited the base and brought them out but I think he wouldn't have appealed to the general election voters. Bernie would've brought out enough people to help the Dems down ticket but I just don't believe the majority of the country would vote a candidate like that yet. Healthcare for all, well how do you pay for that? Sounds nice but then when you see how much you will have to pay in taxes; not so appealing. Free college? More social security benefits. Etc... Give it another 10 - 16 years. By then, the voters will have changed their minds or the ones opposed will be dead by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 26 minutes ago, grego said: https://reason.com/blog/2017/05/10/frustration-with-political-correctness-w http://programs.clearerthinking.org/trump_clinton/trump_clinton_analysis.htm "The Washington post says, "If there is one uniting principle the defines Donald Trump's campaign for president -- besides, perhaps, winning and being classy -- it is that ." political correctness is bad. It's probably not a coincidence that he talks about this issue so much: we found it to be the 4th strongest predictor of support for him (out of all 138 we studied). In a follow up study, we found that Clinton supporters are highly divided on whether there is too much political correctness, but those who don't think there is too much like Political Correctness because they think it reduces how often people are offended, sets a minimum standard for politeness, and reduces societal tolerance for prejudice. On the other hand, Trump supporters in our study nearly all agreed that there is too much political correctness, and tend to believe that our society has become far too sensitive to being offended. They see political correctness as frustrating because it limits their freedom of speech, and dangerous because it prevents topics they feel are important, related to radical Islamic terrorism, illegal immigration, and race, from being discussed." _________________ This an explanation that continually gets dismissed, but it's clearly a factor. People who voted for Trump (and those who didn't) are telling you it's a factor. Its not the only factor - if Hillary was slightly likable, she'd have won, but it was a factor. The sooner the dems realize this, the better off they will be in 3 years. The irony of that is it turns out that Trump and his supporters are among the thinnest skinned, most delicate snowflakes ever born. Any criticism rendered against them sends them into apoplectic shock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Kind of relevant. Also note that in typical Trump fashion he doesn't realize the vast majority of college students are of voting age. https://mobile.twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/863406437946408961/video/1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 7 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said: Well, we disagree. We will find out in 2020. I just have this feeling the Dems will snatch away victory in 2020 by nominating someone to far to the left. A repeat of 1972. Bernie would've excited the base and brought them out but I think he wouldn't have appealed to the general election voters. Bernie would've brought out enough people to help the Dems down ticket but I just don't believe the majority of the country would vote a candidate like that yet. Healthcare for all, well how do you pay for that? Sounds nice but then when you see how much you will have to pay in taxes; not so appealing. Free college? More social security benefits. Etc... Give it another 10 - 16 years. By then, the voters will have changed their minds or the ones opposed will be dead by then. Here's the thing: Bernie couldn't have gotten everything he campaigned on, just like Trump won't. But he would have AT THE VERY LEAST made an effort. He's been serving his constituents for decades, and he also knows how to draft legislation, how to work with others, and how to meet in the middle. Trump can't do any of that because he DOESN'T KNOW HOW. And neither do his voters...bet they never watched School House Rock either. Don't know what they've spent their lives doing, but I can pretty much guarantee that learning **** wasn't involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Both parties strongly favor the wealthy. Trump favors them more strongly than most but he was smart enough to throw the working class a bone, even if it was entirely dishonest. Democrats told them they should have gotten a college degree, mocked people without degrees as low education voters, and ridiculed Sander's voters as out of touch "bros." Their positive message to the working class? Job training (eventually). That message, which is already a tough sell (lol), didn't benefit from Hillary Clinton's absolute lack of charisma. Her terrible campaign which failed to spend enough time in key states also worked against her. We can call these voters dumb all we like, and if they believed Trump would champion the working class they are, but the bottom line here is that the democratic party came out of this looking like the real idiots. The party of the working class, lost the working class... to a ridiculous New York billionaire that even Republicans didn't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Why ask "Why did Trump win?" - which we've been hearing time and time again from the Democratic Party and its sympathizers - and ask instead "what can we do to make sure it doesn't happen again?" And I'm not talking about a more aggressive "social media presence" from Democrats (or further alienating whatever passes for its Left Wing). A big chunk of that is going to be learning how to engage with and respond to the valid and genuine concerns of people in "Trump Country." I live in Trump Country here in eastern North Carolina and I'll continue living there after I move to southeastern PA. The concerns are diverse and many of them, as I said before, are valid. When we heard toward the end of the Obama Administration that the economy was improving and things have never been better, you should have heard the scoffs and bitter laughter. We're still dealing with high levels of unemployment, poverty, and food scarcity down here and people have the nerve to tell us "things are getting better." Does that excuse people throwing their support behind an obvious con artist who is, as we speak, swindling these voters out of what little many of them had to begin with? Absolutely not. It's one of the reasons why I voted for Democrats down ballot. But what else did they have to choose from? A holding pattern for the same policies that helped tie the rope around their neck tighter? Folks down here are hurting and that hurt goes deep and is reinforced by a complex web of cultural, political, and economic factors. The Democratic Party's effort to subvert these power structures and engage the rank-and-file was weak. Change must be made or else these trenches are going to be dug deeper still and tens of millions of Americans, including people that do not fall in line with the prevalent ideology (but are stuck in these areas none the less) or aren't aware there is an alternative, are going to continue descending deeper and deeper into the void as the rich get richer and they get poorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 So like, I don't see the down trodden country folk as one that really embraces big business. Aside for their affinity towards vendors like Walmart (which offer low paying jobs and low priced goods) and similar. I think it would do the democrats some good to try and break up the near monopolies that these businesses have. Problem is that I don't think the down trodden country folk would see it that way, which is odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtdrums Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 7 minutes ago, Springfield said: So like, I don't see the down trodden country folk as one that really embraces big business. Aside for their affinity towards vendors like Walmart (which offer low paying jobs and low priced goods) and similar. I think it would do the democrats some good to try and break up the near monopolies that these businesses have. Problem is that I don't think the down trodden country folk would see it that way, which is odd. The biggest problem Democrats have in that regard is that, for good or ill (depending on your views), every time they do something that is supposed to help the little guy vs the big guy, they hurt (accidentally or not) the little and average guys. Large corporations can survive (and even thrive) in an environment of increased regulations and taxes. They can bear every burden that is thrown at them up to a breaking point, which is where people lose jobs and doors get closed. I'm highly skeptical that "Increasing taxes," (or keeping them where they are) or, "Increase regulations to make things more fair," is a solution that can help small to mid-sized businesses. I know plenty of business owners whose businesses pull in $8-16M with 30-60 employees, and even the most staunchly Democrat among them belly-ached under Bush and Obama. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/white-working-class-trump-cultural-anxiety/525771/ white working class culutal anxiety = racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and every other negative view a person can have. "America is losing its identity" is that in a nutshell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 23 minutes ago, Springfield said: So like, I don't see the down trodden country folk as one that really embraces big business. Aside for their affinity towards vendors like Walmart (which offer low paying jobs and low priced goods) and similar. I think it would do the democrats some good to try and break up the near monopolies that these businesses have. Problem is that I don't think the down trodden country folk would see it that way, which is odd. Eh - yes and no, I guess. I mean, there's always that chip on your shoulder kind of mentality regarding the "big guy" and the "little guy" but you can bet whenever a giant box retail store or chain restaurant comes to town, it is *the* place to be. I'll never forget when Olive Garden opened in Jacksonville, NC on Western Blvd. The parking lot was consistently packed for years. For years. There's this weird mixture of resentment and admiration (I guess that makes envy) for the "big guy" in these places because when they actually look your way and bring something to your "rinky dink town" - whether its a Hobby Lobby or a Presidential candidate - it feels validating. Plus, those in local power keep telling people that "if we bring this big, multi-national company to town, it's gonna mean more jobs and a flashy new thing for everyone to shop at." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 13 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/white-working-class-trump-cultural-anxiety/525771/ white working class culutal anxiety = racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and every other negative view a person can have. "America is losing its identity" is that in a nutshell. Conflating those 2 is mistake, and a bit ironic if you tie that kind of thinking in with what I posted earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 I'm from a small town in the VA hills, it's turning into a bigger town. I argue with my mom every time I'm home, because everything is from WalMart...and I ask her, "How many people have you known over the years who have lost their business?" Our town was nothing but small businesses when I was growing up. Y'all know what I'm talking about...places that sold trash cans, bath rugs, and flower vases, and all the other stuff one would need. (And everyone would know the owners, you knew the people whose pockets/families were benefiting from your purchase.) It's hard to accept lining the pockets of the richest family on the face of the earth just to save more for the next day's purchases...in the same place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 Probably shouldn't sleep on the successful sale of the narrative "The best way to help the working class is to let the rich make and keep more money" and the demonization of the intellectuals (scientists, journalists, professors, etc) by right wing media. Trumps campaign really focused on anger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 2008: 69m / 59m 2012: 66m / 61m 2016: 65.8m / 63m 2016: Michigan 11k votes Wisconsin 23k votes Pennsylvania 43k votes The dems didn't lose the national election because their candidate was to close to the middle or because of her "scandals". The dems lost because Trump promised he would bring back manufacturing and mining jobs while Hillary didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.