Regardless, this sidetrack was started talking about which candidate would excite which group of voters. Not sure which candidate or policy would excite the convict vote.
Are you having a difficult time following the current topic being discussed? Let me walk you through my reasoning here:
-
Yes, they vote at drastically lower rates. Doesn’t matter what their underlying demographics are. The fact is they lean Democratic.
-
Republicans have a lot to do with these low voting rates. Above and beyond the suppression tactics that they perpetuate on black populations, they also are trying to disenfranchise convicted felons. Why? Because they know such efforts pay off for them in the long term.
-
Dems who continue to shrug this off, do so at their own peril. Every likely Dem vote counts in this election if it’s in a swing state.
I am not having any difficulty. I see what you’re saying, understand it completely and think it’s a fool’s errand as far as 2020 goes. At least, in partisan politics gains. I think it’s the right thing to do, encouraging felons to retake their rights.
I don’t disagree that they need to appeal to every group.
But I also think we need to lower our expectations about white women, at least for a while. They are not “the base” that Dseid was asking about. Too many of them are in favor of ignoring (or even enabling) sexism and misogyny just as long as they feel like the administration is hurting the “right” people. If between now and election day a 911 type event occurs, I predict the majority of them will vote for Trump again.
Another campaign, another year in which Bernie Sanders’ campaign bitches about why they’re losing and how the system is rigged against them:
I’ve liked Sanders a lot as a Senator, but my patience is growing thin with his presidential campaign schtick. I went into this campaign with an open mind to see how far his campaign could go, but I’m beginning to get to the point where I will cheer the further he slides into the polls.
I just hope that they don’t drop out and form a third party campaign, but I could totally see Sanders’ more committed fanatics doing it.
He isn’t eligible for the nomination anyway, unless he surprises everyone and actually joins the party.
Just as broad brush stroking the base is a mistake so is lumping white women together as one group. Educated white women, often urban and suburban, are a different demographic than less educated more commonly rural women. What excites one group may overlap little with the important issues of the other.
Lol. So cute.
Upon Googling: Actually, he did!
Snark happily withdrawn.
His campaign media man spends all day attacking Biden. He should take a look at the polls and see Warren and Harris are ahead in several. Warren occupying the same line on the left but actively building a coalition (compared to Bernie who preaches to the converted). And Harris whose one hit on Biden registered more than Bernie’s several.
If anyone is wondering where he, or any of the other candidates, got this form, it’s on the last page of this document.
They are pretty clustered geographically, though. As we were reminded, the presidency is about winning a bunch of population weighted state level elections not winning the national popular vote. The Midwest states that swung Trump’s way in 2016 are in single digits for Latin share of the population. (Cite from wiki of the by state share. There’s some red/red leaning states that have high Latin population like Texas and Arizona that might be susceptible. A lot of those Latin voters are in states where whether they vote or not won’t matter for the result. The Democrat is going to win easily either way. The states that Trump picked up in the Midwest, though, tend to have total Latin populations in the single digits. There’s just not that many votes to pick up by focusing on Latin non-voters in what look to be critical states again.
Florida.
That sounds nice, but there are limits in practice. What message is going to appeal to both minorities and racists?
Anyone who voted Republican in 2018 is almost surely out of reach. Trying to appeal to everyone else is a reasonable approach.
You don’t try to appeal to racists, but you can try to appeal to (for instance) working-class small-town folks. And if you do a good job, you’ll pull in some folks who are working-class and small-town, and also racist, because they find the economic part of your platform more relevant than the social justice part of your platform.
According to that argument, there’d be even less sense in targeting any white men, no?
Hispanic Floridians are not equal to Hispanics in much of the rest of the country. For most of the rest of the country country Mexican heritage predominates; in Florida it has traditionally been Cuban and recently a major uptick in Puerto Rican heritage (the two are now equal in numbers as eligible voters). Both are very worthwhile targets of outreach and currently the Florida Hispanic voting population leans D but they do not share all the same priorities and identities as Hispanics in the rest of the country.
Exactly. People with racist beliefs (who most commonly do not think they have any racist beliefs) share quite a few problems and issues with many people who are not racist and, shockingly, even with people who have minority identities, even beyond wealth inequality and other economic issues. (Environmental safety, health care, more dying younger, feeling like your representative cares about people like yourself … ) I am pretty sure quite a few people with many racist beliefs voted for Obama because they also care about other things than race, the same things their neighbors without racist beliefs care about, and sometimes even more.
There is a big electoral difference between losing, for example, white non-college educated voters by 25 points, as Obama did in 2012, and losing it by 39 points, as Clinton did in 2016. Both sizably lost the demographic, true, but the size of the loss mattered much.
It is basic math that seems to often be forgotten.
Do not target racists. And do not ignore the real issues and problems of the demographics that include racists just because the demographic includes them, and because of that you will not get a majority of those votes in any case.
CNN has announced the format for dividing the candidates into the two nights for the July 30 & 31 debate
Each night will have:
Two of: Biden, Harris, Sanders, Warren
Three of: Booker, Buttigieg, Castro, Klobuchar, O’Rourke, Yang
Five of: Bennet, Bullock, de Blasio, Delaney, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Hickenlooper, Inslee, Ryan, Williamson
Once the candidates’ nights have been determined, “public polling” will determine who stands next to whom.
The drawing is tonight, 7/18/19 at 8 pm EST on CNN.
CNN have been hyping this up for the last 48 hours. THE DRAW!