Is it your opinion that they do it equally?
I love blanket statements of false equivalence. They’re like a warm cover of comfort to the simple minded.
It’s a bit like marketing focusing on “white young males” for anything except house cleaners, isn’t it? That piece seems like the biggest one so it’s the one to grab for, even though the rest of the cake is actually larger and may not be all that difficult* to bring together. Heck: it’s what Obama did, twice!
- For some values of “difficult”. I don’t think it’s easy, but the way the option gets disregarded you’d think it’s actually impossible rather than merely… complicated.
Great analogy, reminds me of SNL. After years of ratings stagnation, the show finally figured out it needed to broaden its appeal beyond the young white male demographic if it was to stay viable. And so they added more color and estrogen to their cast and writing team. The show has become funnier as a result. They stopped treating white men like the holy fucking grail and it helped them.
Can the Dems please follow suit? Or will they continue to take for granted black and brown voters just as they’ve been accused of doing for years? Both Bernie and Hillary have dealt with this criticism (if anything, Bernie moreso), which is why I doubt Bernie could’ve beat Trump any better than she did. It’s not a coincidence that the Berniebro archetype is a young white male.
This is all bullshit. We elected Barack Obama TWICE. Here are the states that Obama won in 2012 and Hillary lost in 2016:
Florida
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Iowa
Wisconsin
Michigan
And In 2008 Obama won these states that Hillary lost:
North Carolina
Indiana
Florida
Ohio
Iowa
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Michigan
and part of Nebraska
Where were all those dumb hicks back then?
Trump’s victory isn’t the result of an ignorant rural electorate. Its the result of running against Hillary. You can rationalize all you want so that you can avoid thinking about how this was our fault but it was. We biffed it by nominating Hillary.
Elections are often a referendum on the incumbent party. Could it be that these voters sent a Democrat to Washington twice and received jack squat with a side of condescension? Hillary had her flaws, yes, but maybe Obama just didn’t deliver what they expected. (Again, talking about Rust Belt, not Deep South).
Yes, but running Hillary would have won easily if there wasn’t such a large percentage that were supportive and/or tolerant of bigotry.
But I think we have the same conclusion – all the Democrats need to do to win presidential elections is nominate good candidates. A slightly better candidate would have won this election.
:dubious:
Pretty sure we established that this site is not particularly friendly to conservatives. it is Arrakis for conservatives. Only the strong survive. Liberals OTOH can thrive here even if they are complete fucking nimrods.
Well, in retrospect, running an elderly, white, male arm-waving loon with a track record of almost zero accomplishments and an extremist agenda doesn’t look quite as bad, then. Head to head, it would have been Change v. Change, with the same disastrous future either way.
Name the last candidate, of either party, you thought really lived up to the record and potential of whomever you consider the ten greated POTUSi. And no, don’t say Obama - he worked out well, but his inexperience hampered at least his first two years, if not all eight. Name a candidate, not a prez.
I am not sure I can think of one since I started voting nationally in 1980. We’ve gone from sock-puppet buffoons like Reagan and 43 to what Philip K. Dick might have termed “prez-clowns.”
As far as winning the presidency, this is doable. For all the talk about how the country won’t listen to reason, it’s not like there was a massive wave of votes for Trump. The narrative that Trump brought out all the cranks who normally don’t vote is false. What happened is that Clinton lost. She underperformed in the key states she needed. And those key states were all marginal wins for Trump, that could have been turned around by a better candidate than Clinton, with just a increase in Democratic voter turnout.
So stop thinking of ways to convince Trump voters not to be idiots, and start trying to convince the people who turned out for Obama but didn’t turn out for Clinton.
Your analysis is retarded. Yep, I said it. Please stop posting moronic things.
For the love of sanity and self-respect, please read the article I just cited.
Focus in on this part:
I’ve seen and been on both sides of the argument; I grew up in a pretty conservative family in a pretty conservative area (SW Houston in the 1970s and 1980s), but I’m now what they’d probably call a liberal, even though I’m far from progressive, and prefer a sort of less bullshit foreign policy than we typically espouse.
The thing is, even the conservative people are typically doing what they see as best. And so are the progressives and everyone in between.
But when one group turns inward, and only listens to affirming sources, and only discusses issues with like minded people, it’s easy to lose touch with the other side, easy for destructive ideas to take firm root, and easy to demonize the other side.
That’s the real tragedy here; I really don’t think it’s as easy or as pat as saying “Everyone who voted for Trump is a racist” and then automatically discounting or disregarding everything they have to say. But nor is it a good thing for them to say that progressives’ goal is to raise taxes to give money to minorities and gays. That’s inaccurate as well.
Ultiimately, the conjunction of the group of people who will vote Republican 100% of the time, the people who voted FOR Trump and the people who essentially voted against Hillary was larger than the conjunction of the group of people who vote Democrat 100% of the time, the people who voted FOR Hillary and the people who voted against Trump.
I’m with Damuri Ajashi; I think the election wasn’t decided by the people voting FOR either candidate, or people who always vote Republican or Democrat. I think it was really decided by who voted AGAINST Trump or Hillary. The Democratic party and the left have a pretty big blind spot when it comes to realizing just how odious many people found Bill Clinton, and how much more odious they find Hillary. I mean, people bitched about Hillary running for the Senate from New York- they found that distasteful, because their perception was that she moved to New York to run because she considered it a likely state to win. That notion was distasteful to many because she wasn’t representing her home (Arkansas), and she wasn’t really a New Yorker either- just an opportunist with a lot of ambition.
And that was 15 years ago. Before that, there was a lot of animus toward her for her perceived intrusion into policy making as First Lady, her response to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Whitewater, Vince Foster, etc…
She hasn’t done much in the interim to make herself look better, and the right-wing media amplified anything bad that she did- Benghazi, email scandal, etc… You may say all that stuff is hot air, but a big chunk of the population thinks where there is hot air and smoke, there must be fire, even if they don’t believe it all outright.
So it looks to me like more people found that stuff more bitter than they found Trump’s obnoxiousness.
To put it in perspective, I voted for Hillary, but me and my family don’t stand to lose much from a Trump presidency being white, upper middle class and moderate. I can totally see people who are indifferent or ambivalent about race relations, equality or gender issues voting for Trump vs. Clinton for that reason alone.
Hillary was running against Trump.
Trump was not some unbeatable candidate of destiny.
Where were all those bigots when we elected a black man named Barack Hussein Obama… TWICE?
The bigots got outvoted then, because Democrats didn’t stay home.
At home, swearing at the TV because a Muslim was about to become president. Twice.
“Condescension”? I’d rather be accused of talking down to someone than have my message go over their heads.
The bigots were outvoted. But I didn’t talk just about bigots – I also mentioned those tolerant of bigotry. Many of those folks weren’t bigots themselves, and may have voted for Obama (since he was a far superior candidate), but they also weren’t concerned about the bigotry of Trump and his supporters (or valued opposing bigotry as less important than opposing HRC), and voted for him.
Tolerance of bigotry is probably as big a problem (and far more common) than actual bigotry.
I argue it is a bigger problem. Most racists are racist through ignorance. There is a possibility that an ethnic minority that the racist hates saves the racists life or something. Makes him take another look. May be able to come around. It is possible to put a crack in that wall of ignorance, and for it to crumble, leaving a more enlightened person in its place.
Those tolerant of bigotry will continue being tolerant of bigotry until all of the bigots are dealt with.
Sure, it’s a reason. It is not “why Trump won.” Pick a demographic. I can point to numbers that show that that demographic gave Trump the victory.
(The OP of this thread insisted that white rural America is for ever and ever, amen, going to vote Republican, and so there’s no reason to be civilized towards them. It’s a thread about white Americans, so you shouldn’t be that startled that they are the focus of the conversation in this thread.)
You’re right. More black people voting Democrat would have made a difference. More Hispanics voting Democrat would have made a difference. More [whomever] voting Democrat would have made a difference. Let’s absolutely figure out why these folks didn’t vote that way, or at all, and come up with real, functional and effective ways to sway them for the next time around.
But, as long as we surrender to enmity, and as long as we work to increase the emotional divide between the left and the right, we will perpetually be in a state of disaster or near disaster.
Trump is off the rails, but you know who else was ‘dangerous’ to minorities, women, and immigrants? Every other Republican candidate.
All my point is, is that as long as we decide that it’s not our job to figure out how to communicate with and influence this large bloc of the population, when a Republican is elected President, the rest of us will be out there calling for the world to end. Democrats cannot expect to win every election forever, no matter how much we energize black voters.
And, if you’re so dazed and confused about why we’re all so focused on white people when we should be focused on something else, start a thread about how minorities gave Trump the election. Or better yet, start a thread about how to solve that problem.
All the OP and others seem to be interested in doing is justifying saying nasty shit about and to Republicans by insisting that they’re all too stupid and evil to know what’s going on.