# Democrats should NOT emulate Trump **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 8, 2019, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206 "2019-04-08T04:55:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ambivalid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a5b964/32.png) [@Ambivalid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambivalid)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/21 "2019-04-08T22:46:04Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > About [80% of registered voters](http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/the-green-new-deal-has-strong-bipartisan-support/) support the idea of a Green New Deal. Nearly 60% [support expanded or universal Medicare](https://www.kff.org/slideshow/public-opinion-on-single-payer-national-health-plans-and-expanding-access-to-medicare-coverage/) (this fluctuates a bit depending on how various plans are explained and whether a higher tax burden is emphasized). Most of the “radical” progressive agenda items involving economics, gun safety and AGW amelioration actually have broad support. Dems should stop being shy about those ideas. What exactly does “supporting the idea of a Green New Deal” even mean? It sounds like just a bunch of nothing to me. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/22 "2019-04-08T22:52:16Z")
> [@Ambivalid](#): > > What exactly does “supporting the idea of a Green New Deal” even mean? It sounds like just a bunch of nothing to me. Your question is answered in the first three paragraphs of my citation. I used the particular wording (“the idea of”) because poll respondents last December were given a brief but accurate description of the GND rather than given the completed resolution. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/23 "2019-04-08T22:52:43Z")
Xenophon, I don’t believe “reactionary” means what you think it means. > [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Quick question **SlackerInc** : > > Is it possible that you posted this thought at a Facebook page for a particular group? I just wanted to make sure it was you, and not someone “borrowing” your post. I would not be surprised if there is overlap between SDMB folks and this other group, but just checking… If you’re talking about a three-sigma high IQ society group, then yes. 🙂 (Please don’t doxx me.) Cool to know there are others from our group here! Feel free to PM me if you want to tell me who you are; or remain asymmetrically mysterious if you prefer. 😉 > [@Kimstu](#): > > I think late seventies is too old to start a Presidential term, period. People approaching 80 should be enjoying a comfortable retirement or second career or part-time business or whatever, but they should be leaving positions of major power and authority for succeeding generations to handle. There is something wrong with a political system that can’t manage to direct its senior leaders into retirement even after they’ve passed the average life expectancy for their society. Word. One of my friends is a hardcore Bernie supporter. Yet he and I have argued over the retirement age for years. I think it would make sense to move it up a bit, maybe to the nice round number of 70. He has bitterly opposed this, but now he strongly supports the idea of an octogenarian president. 😕 > [@Knowed\_Out](#): > > I agree in principle, but we’ve reached an age where Trump lowered the bar, did all the things he wasn’t supposed to do, ignored long-standing presidential traditions, and dared disturb the previously undisturbed waters - and got away with it. As long as he’s heading the party of the majority, he will continue to get away with it. > > Taking the high road in response to his immaturity hasn’t worked. Cain refused to sink to his level, but his influence was nowhere near as far-reaching as Trump’s. Acts of class and dignity don’t make the headlines. The American voter is too visceral. Drama sells. Trump didn’t win the GOP nomination because of the “American voter”. He won it by winning a plurality (not majority) of support among wingnut GOP primary voters. Saying that provides a blueprint for Democratics is like a new Whole Foods CEO coming in and saying “Dollar General is doing well, so we’ll make WF just like them.” You’re not going to get the Dollar General customers, and you’ll just alienate your own. And the House vote last fall proves that Trump is \*not \*“heading the party of the majority”! > [@BigT](#): > > You can’t make an OP like you did and then make another post saying that the problems are only with the side you aren’t on. I wasn’t saying that (although I’d point out that the “horses” I’m backing are Beto, Booker, and Inslee in that order, and I haven’t seen a sign that they are particularly guilty of this). I just wanted to clarify, because reading “I agree with you: [bunch of stuff I strongly disagree with]” made me eager to clarify, as I don’t want to be misrepresented. That’s it. > [@XT](#): > > I honestly think the Democrats should go all in this time…and all out. This is the election where they could really get someone who isn’t just another DNC pick, someone new and fresh and unorthodox. This might be their only chance for something or someone like that in fact, as the blow back from Trump is going to be (IMHO and all) huge…much more huger than Trumps hands in fact. There is a battle going on right now between the DNC establishment and the Progressives. No idea how that will pan out, but if the Progressives ever want to get one of their own elected, this is their shot. I don’t think they should hold back or try for the safe move or safe candidate. > > YMMV of course. Just my thoughts as someone who will almost certainly vote Democrat but who isn’t a Democrat, FWIW. I agree with your analysis, although not your preference. I think this is absolutely the best chance the far left will likely have in our lifetimes to get one of theirs in the White House. If they can get Warren or Sanders through the primaries, either should be a favorite against Trump. So for their camp, it’s an incredibly tantalizing opportunity. But I still see it as riskier than going with a more mainstream candidate, plus I don’t think either of them would be as good a president as one of the mainstream candidates I prefer. (Buck Godot and kaylasdad also make some excellent points about the longer term impact.) And as unlike you I _am_ a proud Democrat, it would especially irk me to see Bernie get the nomination, as he has only tepidly joined the party to the degree he has to, to exploit DNC resources. He’s a parasite, IOW. But I’d still vote for him against Trump, obviously, which again underlines what an opportunity it is for the far left. An opportunity I will work assiduously during primary season to deny them! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/24 "2019-04-08T22:58:50Z")
_Radical incrementalism_, then. That is my latest political position and its a dandy, so long as I don’t have to explain how its different from plain old liberalism. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2019, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/25 "2019-04-08T23:20:39Z")
_Radical incrementalism_ would, in all seriousness\*, involve conducting (or promoting) radical changes in a planned and staged manner over a budgeted time frame. I’m fine with that, **luc** ’. And I’m using “reactionary” above in it’s classic sense, as politically resistant to real or perceived sudden changes. Usually, reactionaries are resisting political or social change. I need us to be reactive to climate change and its attendant problems. \*[sub]'Cause that’s how I roll.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/26 "2019-04-09T00:02:27Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > Dems should stop being shy about those ideas. Well and good but my basic point still stands: let the voters decide who they want their candidate to be. If that candidate is outspoken on all those issues, cool. If you believe candidates should get that message out there, even better - they’re already doing that. If they win the nomination, then that’s what the Dems, as a general body, want. If the eventual candidate is shy on those issues, well that’s what the voters want in that case. I’m for democracy. If my preferred candidates or issues aren’t a focus, well that’s a shame and I’ll do my part in supporting them the next time, not demand the majority bend to my will or emulate some of the more asinine online behavior we’ve all seen. ---
**Author:** ![Ambivalid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a5b964/32.png) [@Ambivalid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambivalid)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/27 "2019-04-09T00:05:15Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > Your question is answered in the first three paragraphs of my citation. I used the particular wording (“the idea of”) because poll respondents last December were given a brief but accurate description of the GND rather than given the completed resolution. They were given a very incomplete (therefore inaccurate) description of the GND. I mean, I’m honestly surprised a higher percentage of the voters in the poll in your cite didn’t respond positively to the main goals of the GND as presented. If they included any sort of realistic cost/consequence to achieving the GND, the poll results would look very different. The poll basically presented a package that included a vague timeframe (and nothing more) for producing jobs, upgrading crumbling infrastructure, strengthening the economy, transitioning to clean, renewable energy and increasing energy efficiency in the process. Then they asked a bunch of people if they support these things. Who wouldn’t support these laudable goals? IMO, that poll doesn’t provide much in the way of useful information. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/28 "2019-04-09T00:35:20Z")
Yeah, my aforementioned Bernhead friend loves to cite polls that he argues prove there is a ginormous progressive majority in this country. They are always polls that present a rosy or vague view of the outcomes, without any obstacles, downsides, or potential complications. A good poll would ask the top strategists for each side to give a paragraph of their best argument pro or con, and ask people which one they agree with more. But that almost never happens. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/29 "2019-04-09T00:43:31Z")
The Democrats emulating Trump both wouldn’t work and wouldn’t be allowed. The rules are entirely different for the Republicans and everyone else; a Democrat who acted like Trump would be arrested, not elected. There is also no large pool of hard left voters for such a Democrat to attract. People talking about things like the “Green New Deal” are engaging in a false equivalence; that’s\* nowhere near\* as far left as Trump is far right. A Democratic mirror image of Trump would be someone who wanted to install a totalitarian Communist dictatorship, subjugate or expel all white people, reduce men to second class citizens, destroy the upper and middle class, outlaw religion, and so on. And there just aren’t enough people in the US who would support such a person to elect them. Also, electing a monster to replace a monster means you haven’t actually \*improved \*anything. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/30 "2019-04-09T00:50:11Z")
> [@slackerinc](#): > > if you’re talking about a three-sigma high iq society group, then yes. 🙂 (please don’t doxx me.) cool to know there are others from our group here! Feel free to pm me if you want to tell me who you are; or remain asymmetrically mysterious if you prefer. loooooooooooooooooool ---
**Author:** ![Ambivalid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a5b964/32.png) [@Ambivalid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambivalid)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/31 "2019-04-09T01:20:44Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Yeah, my aforementioned Bernhead friend loves to cite polls that he argues prove there is a ginormous progressive majority in this country. They are always polls that present a rosy or vague view of the outcomes, without any obstacles, downsides, or potential complications. A good poll would ask the top strategists for each side to give a paragraph of their best argument pro or con, and ask people which one they agree with more. But that almost never happens. It’s not just people in the public responding to polls though, it’s pervasive. The Democrats in Congress who “support” the GND are just moving their lips, no words are coming out. What does this support entail? When asked, most all Dems turn into slippery snot and hem and haw and refuse to make a single goddamn concrete policy statement or say anything that would create a connection between themselves and the GND less tenuous than a bond of smoke and mirrors. It’s the same song and dance with reparations. They say “I definitely am in favor of examining the issue more closely”. Which sounds good, is a seeming non rejection of the idea, and at the end of the day, doesnt really mean a goddamn thing. ---
**Author:** ![poweroftheglory](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/919ad9/32.png) [@poweroftheglory](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/poweroftheglory)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/32 "2019-04-09T01:24:11Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > The problem is what do you get when you win with such a candidate. You get 2 years in which you control the house and maybe the senate, you might be able to start undoing some of the damage Trump has caused, but any radical progressive legislation isn’t going to make it past the Blue dogs who are the only reason you are in the majority in the first place. Then the midterms come around, and with it a wave of reactionary indignation, which knocks out all the blue dogs, who were either have been primaried away for not supporting the president’s agenda or lose in the general because they supported it. We then have two to six years of partisan gridlock in which the country declines further due to general neglect, a Trump 2.0 figure emerges and wins in 2024 or 2028, and proceeds to reverse everything his predecessor tried to fix and we start the whole cycle over again. > > **The only chance we’ve got as a country is someone who is willing to take baby steps, working towards the low hanging fruit of getting the government back on track and preventing future damage, rather than trying to radically change society which will just make the pendulum swing more wildly without actually achieving anything.** The problem is that we literally do not have time for baby steps. According to the IPCC, best case scenario we only have about 12 years to make some of the greatest changes to society in human history to avert catastrophe. If you think Trump is bad, imagine the monster who will be elected when there are tens if not hundreds of millions of climate refugees worldwide fleeing devastated countries in the coming decades. Now might be the last opportunity to avoid a hundred holocausts. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/33 "2019-04-09T01:52:04Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > We clearly don’t agree, then. When it comes to these disputes between the DNC or mainstream Democrats on the one hand, and the left wing that accuses them of being “corporate” lackeys, I firmly take the side of the DNC and reject that kind of invective. I disagree with your views then. Voters of both parties are to the left of the parties themselves on economic issues. Democratic voters are trying to move the party in a direction that makes them more appealing to voters enough to win elections and get things done. All this talk of unity among the democratic party is usually coached in a ‘kick the liberals’ doublespeak, as if liberals are the problem. Liberals, when all is said and done, will almost all vote for the democratic candidate no matter who it is. However we’d prefer democrats that represent the will of the voters who elect them and who will actually fight for their voters. If ~85% of democratic voters want medicare for all, then when the mainstream democratic party writes it off as a pipe dream before even trying to fight for it that is a problem. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/34 "2019-04-09T02:05:48Z")
> [@poweroftheglory](#): > > The problem is that we literally do not have time for baby steps. According to the IPCC, best case scenario we only have about 12 years to make some of the greatest changes to society in human history to avert catastrophe. This. Storm’s a’comin’ and we’re all unsheltered, even the 1 percenters. We need one of the political parties to show the appropriate level of urgency. Leadership isn’t accomplished through narrow political calculation and trepidation. Yes, politics is always the art of the possible, but I would argue that moderation is increasingly **impossible** , and that bold steps are the only way forward. And voters _don’t_ seem to want the careful, minor adjustments of incrementalism. Donald J. Trump is POTUS. That didn’t happen because voters wanted _slight changes_ to the status quo. (Yes, I know HRC won the popular vote. That’s a weak refutation of the point; Trump got enough votes in enough states to win the EC because enough people wanted a wrecking ball.) ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/35 "2019-04-09T03:38:11Z")
The main point in favor of incremental change is that it’s the kind most likely to survive the administration that enacts it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/36 "2019-04-09T03:53:36Z")
But then how do we resolve the rising conflict between the radical incrementalists and the counter-cultural Marxists? ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/37 "2019-04-09T05:21:14Z")
> [@poweroftheglory](#): > > The problem is that we literally do not have time for baby steps. According to the IPCC, best case scenario we only have about 12 years to make some of the greatest changes to society in human history to avert catastrophe. If you think Trump is bad, imagine the monster who will be elected when there are tens if not hundreds of millions of climate refugees worldwide fleeing devastated countries in the coming decades. Now might be the last opportunity to avoid a hundred holocausts. I hope you’re backing Jay Inslee then. Climate change is not that high on my list of priorities, but I think he’s just the kind of classic upbeat politician we need, so I would be quite happy with Inslee as nominee. Of the many running, there are only two I like better than Inslee: Beto and Booker. But if you consider the climate issue that dire, then you should definitely be behind Inslee, as he clearly feels the same way and has a real urgency and determination about it that I don’t think is present with any of the others. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2019, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206/38 "2019-04-09T06:03:59Z")
Almost every post in this thread talks about what the _voters_ want or how to appeal to the _voters_ – this is pointless unless people are allowed to vote! Between brazen Republican removals of people from voter registration lists, increasing the difficulty of registering to vote, eliminating polling locations, and tricks at the polls like deliberate under-supply of voting machines in blue precincts (mostly in urban areas), more & more people are finding it hard to vote. Deliberate efforts are being made to discourage voting, especially in certain groups. Hillary lost in part because anti-voting efforts in Detroit sent Michigan’s electoral votes to Trump, and similar anti-voting efforts in Milwaukee gave Wisconsin’s to Trump. Such anti-voting efforts are still going on, and accelerating. Here in Minnesota, with the highest voter turnout in the country, Republicans in the Senate are fighting against higher security for electronic poll books, are pushing for (never-counted) provisional ballots, and more restrictions on absentee & early voting. Next door in Iowa, they are trying to make it harder for students on college campuses to vote. All this is happening now, and could make the actual 2020 Election Day counts a foregone conclusion. **What the majority of people say they want (in polls) only matters if they can actually vote!** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/democrats-should-not-emulate-trump/832206.md?page=1)