2020 US Election (Part One)

[metalhead]

Agreed. Cruz's message is much more tailored to the traditional party message. He will not pack football stadiums, as Trump did, but his organization will be much better.

Then why did he lose to Trump, if he's so great?

 

[stinkubus]

Kasich played spoiler during the primaries. He stayed in until the very end despite not actually running a legitimate/good faith campaign.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Kasich played spoiler during the primaries. He stayed in until the very end despite not actually running a legitimate/good faith campaign.

By "spoiler" you mean he gave voters an option other than the two obviously horrid choices?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Then why did he lose to Trump, if he's so great?

Cause Trump is greater'er... obviously

He will not pack football stadiums, as Trump did

Trump did not "pack football stadiums" during the campaign... 1/3rd full does not constitute "packed" and High School fields do not count as "stadiums" (unless we're talking about Texas maybe).

Kerry was a better candidate. If it were not for his position on Iraq being Democrat, I might have voted for him.

FTFY.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Kasich played spoiler during the primaries.

Who did he "spoil" it for? Cruz?

 

[Gori the Grey]

Agreed. Cruz's message is much more tailored to the traditional party message. He will not pack football stadiums, as Trump did, but his organization will be much better.

Right, but what brought us into this discussion was who could duplicate what had made Trump a success and you're here saying Cruz won't be able to do that.

A "tailored message" is not "finding and giving a voice to a silenced theme." When you

Spoiler :

1/3

pack

Spoiler :

highschool

football stadiums, that's when you can have the kind of success Trump had.

We get it, you like Cruz. The question was could he, or someone, duplicate Trump's success.

 

[sophie]

I think this is an absolutely accurate formulation, along the lines of analyses I've offered on this site.

I also think, however, that Cruz does not possess Trump's skill for finding and voicing such a theme.

That implies that Trump's happening on a solid theme was deliberate or could be attributed to skill. Given that the wall, in all likelihood, began as a mnemonic device given to him by his campaign advisers to keep him on-message, it seems doubtful that any of this can be attributed to skill.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That implies that Trump's happening on a solid theme was deliberate or could be attributed to skill. Given that the wall, in all likelihood, began as a mnemonic device given to him by his campaign advisers to keep him on-message, it seems doubtful that any of this can be attributed to skill.

The wall was a device, but the basic "hate the brown people, hate the democrats, hate hate hate" message was there from day one, and that was indeed the appeal to the "shamed into silence" disaffected Republicans. I don't think it was skill, so much as that being the one way that D'ump himself qualifies as a "man of the people."

 

[Lexicus]

Trump has skills as a showman, and I think that the rallies demonstrated that he has an enormous capacity to intuit what people want on an emotional level and then deliver it. I believe his rallies will likely be of enormous sociological and anthropological interest decades and centuries after the more immediate and urgent political stuff has been hashed out.

 

[Sommerswerd]

he has an enormous capacity to intuit what people want on an emotional level and then deliver it. I believe his rallies will likely be of enormous sociological and anthropological interest decades and centuries after the more immediate and urgent political stuff has been hashed out.

Sounds familiar...

 

[onejayhawk]

FTFY.

That's wrong and you should apologize. I voted for Obama who was also a Democrat. He proceeded to prove I was right about Kerry's position on Iraq.

J

 

[Gori the Grey]

That implies that Trump's happening on a solid theme was deliberate or could be attributed to skill.

We keep not knowing what to call it. I had a thread asking if it was a form of intelligence. It's some kind of aptitude. And he has that aptitude. I don't think it has to be deliberate, and I don't think it is in his case. It's a "feel."

So, what Lex said about future anthropological studies (and rhetorical ones, I think)

 

[metalhead]

That implies that Trump's happening on a solid theme was deliberate or could be attributed to skill. Given that the wall, in all likelihood, began as a mnemonic device given to him by his campaign advisers to keep him on-message, it seems doubtful that any of this can be attributed to skill.

True. It doesn't really take skill to pander to racists and white nationalists. It just takes a complete lack of decency and shame.

 

[Takhisis]

In short... Cruz is a weasel and nobody likes him.

Which makes him worse than your ‘primer mandatario’ how?

That implies that Trump's happening on a solid theme was deliberate or could be attributed to skill. Given that the wall, in all likelihood, began as a mnemonic device given to him by his campaign advisers to keep him on-message, it seems doubtful that any of this can be attributed to skill.

Am I the only one who just had the mental image of a sleazy consultant gesturing at Mr. Burns to eat the three-eyed fish?

 

[Gori the Grey]

True. It doesn't really take skill to pander to racists and white nationalists. It just takes a complete lack of decency and shame.

No, it takes a skill, too, and Trump has that skill.

And Cruz may well be our test case. So Trump has forged this formula. And Cruz wouldn't be hesitant to employ it. But watch him try. He won't be able to do it. A huge part of it involves playing dumb. And to play dumb as successfully as Trump did, you have to actually be dumb. It's a stupidity cultivated over a lifetime, and it's no small part of how Trump got racism to work way better than any previous racist Republican. Or future, I'm willing to wager.

 

[Sommerswerd]

That's wrong and you should apologize. I voted for Obama who was also a Democrat.

As you are well aware, I'm fully aware that you've said this many times. You know (or should realize) that this has no bearing whatsoever on the the truth of my statement. My point stands.

Obama was a rockstar... a once in a generation (possibly lifetime) opportunity votingwise... riding the wave of history to go with the obvious winning horse one time doesn't sponge away an entire body of fully expressed political ideology.

Also... wouldn't you say that asking me to apologize to you because you deigned to vote for the black dude... is a just a touch... well... I'll just leave it at that.

 

[Ajidica]

Those three, in particular Dukakis, never did a damn thing worthy of mention other than winning the Democratic party nomination, and yet we all know their names even today. I rest my case; winning the nomination, in itself, produces all the necessary name recognition.

I think you are being a bit hard on Mondale. He was, after all, a former Vice President and generally considered to be responsible for creating the modern Vice Presidency as an institution with a legitimate role in policy making and governing as opposed to being a dumping ground for the unwanted, unloved, and where you stick someone to buy them off.

 

[Sommerswerd]

I think you are being a bit hard on Mondale. He was, after all, a former Vice President and generally considered to be responsible for creating the modern Vice Presidency as an institution with a legitimate role in policy making and governing as opposed to being a dumping ground for the unwanted, unloved, and where you stick someone to buy them off.

To Tim's point... I doubt you could walk any street in America and find 10 people who were aware of any of that within 24 hours. At best they would be able to correctly identify him as a failed POTUS candidate from the 80s.

 

[Rashiminos]

Anyway... all the above being said... I do think Cruz could beat Hickenlooper, Buttigeig or Inslee, maybe even Gilibrand or Klobuchar... based purely on name recognition and maybe the names themselves.In a way, it was the same "charisma" that got him a'paddlin' from Stormy Daniels.

That's fairly correct.

By "spoiler" you mean he gave voters an option other than the two obviously horrid choices?

Kasich wasn't a good choice. He had all the appeal of reheated leftovers if leftovers could give a paternalistic lecture on community service while sneaking the occasional swig of gin.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Kasich wasn't a good choice. He had all the appeal of reheated leftovers if leftovers could give a paternalistic lecture on community service while sneaking the occasional swig of gin.

"Good" is a relative term. In this case relative to Donald Trump and Ted Cruz...a very low bar, and an even lower bar.