2020 US Election (Part One)

[caketastydelish]

The Democrat party has a much larger demographic voter base than the Republicans do.

Democratic voters have, on average, a much lower voter turnout than their Republican counterparts. The Dems have more than enough voters to win with just the Dems and perhaps some reasonable independence but you have to realize you cannot take the base of the Democratic voter base for granted. You cannot assume "when push comes to shove they will just stick with the lesser of two evils". Even if they "should" the reality is they won't. Bernie Sanders was doing better against Trump in hypothetical matchups than Hillary did throughout the primaries. I am 100% sure this is the reason why.

 

[cardgame]

Yes, the fact that Hillary won the republican states in the primaries means absolutely nothing in the general because those same states are a freebie for whoever the Republican is, the primary results in red states literally don't matter. First past the post democracy is so good and democratic and your vote is truly valued /s

 

[caketastydelish]

The other thing I said, that I want to emphasize is Hillary's choice of a running mate. Absolutely horrible pick. She could have chosen a true progressive (probably not Bernie himself obviously), to try to salvage at least some of those votes. Did she do that? Nope. She just got the most boring, plain, generic, moderate old white guy she could possibly find.

 

[rah]

This is the flaw in your argument. Hillary Clinton couldn't appeal to moderate Republicans and independents because they have been trained to hate her for a full generation, or longer. That made Hillary a bad choice, and in truth only the GOP fielding a complete dingbat kept her from getting totally blown out. But that doesn't change the reality that no Democrat can win without appealing to moderate Republicans and independents...that's just math.

Ding ding ding. Yep, dems are going to win the states on the coast even if they put up mickey mouse. They have to find someone to sell and win in the middle. Granted that means the coasts won't be thrilled but it's the only path to victory.

 

[caketastydelish]

There are plenty of legit progressives who live in swing states. But they matter the most because they are flaky as it pertains to voter turnout, so you have to actually give them what they want.

 

[Socrates99]

Ding ding ding. Yep, dems are going to win the states on the coast even if they put up mickey mouse. They have to find someone to sell and win in the middle. Granted that means the coasts won't be thrilled but it's the only path to victory.

That's following the flawed assumption that moderates do better in the midwest. Bernie won Michigan over Clinton. He's polling better in the Rust Belt than Biden. Moderate isn't the way to go to pull in the midwest, populist is. Independents are not somewhere between the Democrats and Republicans, they just hate the two parties.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The Democrat party has a much larger demographic voter base than the Republicans do.

Yeah. 31% to 24%. Guess what, you can't win with 31% any better than you can with 24%...no matter how excited you can make that 31%. The vast apolitical "middle," who as Socrates99 points out aren't really 'in between,' though they are better described as "pay no attention" than "hate," decide the election. But even though they paid no attention they were still thoroughly indoctrinated in hating Hillary. And they hate D'ump. But that doesn't mean that they can't be scared away by a "self declared socialist" or an "angry young crazy who doesn't understand reality" or any number of other generically identifiable "Democrat labels" the GOP has been building for decades. The don't care crowd are actually the conservatives in the true sense of the word...they want someone who will make it easy for them to get back to paying no attention at all...no big changes, no big waves, no sudden intrusions; just a steady pablum of business as usual.

 

[caketastydelish]

Far more of them would have voted for Bernie than you are willing to acknowledge, hence why Bernie was beating Trump in hypothetical matchups/polls by a better margin than Hillary was during the primaries.

Bernie, in particular, was a populist/anti-establishment candidate. He was, in this way, the left wing version of Trump. There were many people who's political views at the time were not "conservative vs liberal", so much as establishment vs populist.

 

[Sommerswerd]

This is the flaw in your argument. Hillary Clinton couldn't appeal to moderate Republicans and independents because they have been trained to hate her for a full generation, or longer. That made Hillary a bad choice, and in truth only the GOP fielding a complete dingbat kept her from getting totally blown out. But that doesn't change the reality that no Democrat can win without appealing to moderate Republicans and independents...that's just math.

The GOP will have a much harder time sticking the opponent with "but socialist" or "but progressive" than they had sticking her with "but Hillary." That doesn't mean the Democrat can afford to make it easy for them.

Its true that Hillary inspired a singular hatred in 2008 and 2016 that no other Democrat could have mustered... As I've said repeatedly, during the 2008 cycle, Sean Hannity renamed his show "The Stop Hillary Express" as in instead of calling it "Hannity" or "the Sean Hannity Show". He would open his shows saying... "Welcome to the Stop Hillary Express... I'm your host Sean Hannity"... everyday... TV and Radio. Conservatives, etc hated Hillary Clinton with the fires of hell and damnation like nothing else imaginable... you can see it still, even on these threads... look at how many of your CFC pals get just apoplectic about Hillary Clinton and can't resist criticizing her and bringing up how much they despise and hate her at every opportunity.

As an aside... I'm getting the sense that mission creep is starting to turn those guys into professional, round-the-clock Kamala Harris haters, as their new drug of choice... just pay attention and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Zardnaar]

Even I don't like Hilary, and I'm not American or conservative. She is a charisma void political animal.

I kinda like Haris and Warrren.

I don't think the USA has had an honest president since 1980, or a good one since the 50s.

 

[Kyriakos]

Is there any basis for this diagnosis, or is it just a reflection of the knee jerk misogyny I've come to expect from you?

Could be casual racism too. At any rate it can't be about actual negative traits of the candidate - that would not allow for emblematic posting.

 

[Takhisis]

Ding ding ding. Yep, dems are going to win the states on the coast even if they put up mickey mouse. They have to find someone to sell and win in the middle. Granted that means the coasts won't be thrilled but it's the only path to victory.

How would the choice of VP and the provision or withholding of assistance by local legislators and governors help in this matter?

 

[caketastydelish]

I am literally unsure what you're asking. Please elaborate.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Its true that Hillary inspired a singular hatred in 2008 and 2016 that no other Democrat could have mustered... As I've said repeatedly, during the 2008 cycle, Sean Hannity renamed his show "The Stop Hillary Express" as in instead of calling it "Hannity" or "the Sean Hannity Show". He would open his shows saying... "Welcome to the Stop Hillary Express... I'm your host Sean Hannity"... everyday... TV and Radio. Conservatives, etc hated Hillary Clinton with the fires of hell and damnation like nothing else imaginable... you can see it still, even on these threads... look at how many of your CFC pals get just apoplectic about Hillary Clinton and can't resist criticizing her and bringing up how much they despise and hate her at every opportunity.

As an aside... I'm getting the sense that mission creep is starting to turn those guys into professional, round-the-clock Kamala Harris haters, as their new drug of choice... just pay attention and you'll see what I mean.

Too late. The Hillary hate was baked in over a loooooong stretch before 2008. Trying to turn it on Harris in a matter of months isn't going to work. Well, except for the obvious people whose hatred of Hillary is rooted in nothing more than "women shouldn't be in politics so I am automatically opposed," they'll follow right along and spew constantly about Harris being crazy or whatever, just like they spout constantly about Clinton without any particular grounds.

 

[Kyriakos]

You know, Tim, if you are dead-set on making some lame attempt to attack me, at least find a more believable thing to say. Last I checked Tulsi is female too (so is AOC, a good future candidate) so I am not sure how myself thinking that Harris is a bad candidate (like Hillary was in the past) has to do with misogyny. For someone who harps on about how terrible it is to have Fox news, you certainly don't mind saying stuff that are easy to strike down with half a sentence.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Strike a nerve?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

In other words, principally because of busing, large city school districts became de facto even more segregated than before.'

This statement is incorrect.

I don't think the topic of reparations is polically viable, but it needs to stop being seen as an "us vs. them" topic to begin with. It's about making society whole. As you mentioned, it's not just about slavery, it goes all the way up to 40 years ago with school segregation, the effects of which are still being felt to this day.

I look at reparations as a massive economy boosting stimulus that also happens to correct a historical (and ongoing) wrongness in our society. I'm stoked that this is on the table even if I don't benefit from it. And I will! Even if money's not being put into my pocket, it's being put into the pockets of people who will put that cash into the economy rather than parking it in high-interest stock accounts.

 

[Kyriakos]

Strike a nerve?

Reverting to kindergarten? Or just bored with being around already. At any rate, not my problem.

 

[Arakhor]

Moderator Action: Let's get back to discussing the topic, not each other. Thank you.

 

[Berzerker]

This statement is incorrect.

How so?

I look at reparations as a massive economy boosting stimulus that also happens to correct a historical (and ongoing) wrongness in our society. I'm stoked that this is on the table even if I don't benefit from it. And I will! Even if money's not being put into my pocket, it's being put into the pockets of people who will put that cash into the economy rather than parking it in high-interest stock accounts.

Gimme your money and I'll spend it