# Is there any reason to believe 2016 won't be a landslide victory for the Democrats? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 27, 2014, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737 "2014-09-27T19:53:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2014, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/321 "2014-10-27T21:41:21Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The “you didn’t build that”, even in context, is just an excuse by progressives to justify turning us into a collective. Conservatives have never had a problem with collective action. We just believe there’s a place for it and also places where it is inappropriate. Liberals intentionally try to blur those lines. No, this is all false. “You didn’t build that” referred to the collective actions of societies that individuals cannot accomplish – roads, bridges, education, transportation, and other infrastructure that’s necessary for any business (and especially new, small businesses) to thrive. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2014, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/322 "2014-10-27T21:50:53Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No, this is all false. “You didn’t build that” referred to the collective actions of societies that individuals cannot accomplish – roads, bridges, education, transportation, and other infrastructure that’s necessary for any business (and especially new, small businesses) to thrive. It did, and I don’t disagree with the statement in a vacuum. It’s actually the context, the politics around it, that makes it worse. Obama was aping Liz Warren, who was using the argument as a justification for more collectivism. The media reported it exactly as they should: rather than just being stenographers that time they explained why it was a big deal. It was an insight into this thinking. This is what Warren said: > [@](#): > > “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.” And then she hit her stride: > > “You built a factory out there? Good for you,” she says. “But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.” > > As for the tax implications, Warren said, “Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.” The crowd enthusiastically applauded. > **['You Didn't Build That!' in Context](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/you-didnt-build-that-in-c_b_1721794)** > > Elizabeth Warren said it better than Barack Obama. And the president's presentation wasn't helped when supporters of Mitt Romney edited his words. Sadly, lost in a squabble over "you didn't build that" was the opportunity for a more serious... Sorry, but using that argument as justification for taking a HUGE hunk out of a person’s livelihood is just wrong. The things that make businesses function well in this country cost a tiny fraction of the overall budget. The majority of the budget these days is just taking money from one group of people to give it to another group of people. There’s no way to put lipstick on that pig. Saying that she just wants business to pay it forward is especially galling. We already throw more money at our past(the elderly) than our future(the children), and Warren sponsored a bill to increase Social Security benefits. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2014, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/323 "2014-10-27T22:22:07Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > It did, and I don’t disagree with the statement in a vacuum. It’s actually the context, the politics around it, that makes it worse. Obama was aping Liz Warren, who was using the argument as a justification for more collectivism. No she wouldn’t, because you’re using “collectivism” like the right uses “socialism” and “communism” – wrongly. > [@](#): > > Sorry, but using that argument as justification for taking a HUGE hunk out of a person’s livelihood is just wrong. Using that argument to justify raising high-income taxes from 36% to 39% (or similar amounts) is entirely reasonable. This “HUGE hunk” stuff is hyperbolic nonsense. > [@](#): > > The things that make businesses function well in this country cost a tiny fraction of the overall budget. Cite? And you better include the local and state spending that accounts for a whole lot of this as well. > [@](#): > > The majority of the budget these days is just taking money from one group of people to give it to another group of people. There’s no way to put lipstick on that pig. 100% of every budget in US history was “taking money from one group of people to give it to another group of people”. That’s what budgets are – there’s no place on the budget for “money that we don’t take in and don’t spend”. > [@](#): > > Saying that she just wants business to pay it forward is especially galling. We already throw more money at our past(the elderly) than our future(the children), and Warren sponsored a bill to increase Social Security benefits. I’m sure you can muster up outrage at such typical Democratic policies, which have been Democratic policies for decades, but that doesn’t mean it’s reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2014, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/324 "2014-10-27T23:24:30Z")
BTW, here’s Clinton’s quote, which is clearly just a gaffe: [http://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-says-businesses-don-t-create-jobs-155608850.html](http://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton-says-businesses-don-t-create-jobs-155608850.html) But gaffes that reinforce what people already think about candidates are unhelpful. BUsinesses don’t create jobs? Yeah, I’m sure she didn’t mean to say that. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/325 "2014-10-28T15:10:57Z")
Progressives can’t turn us into a collective, for the simple reason that we already are a collective. Humans can’t live without being part of a collective. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/326 "2014-10-28T15:28:27Z")
Humans are both social and individual. Part of being human is deciding whether you’ll be more social or more individualistic. Humans like to form social groups, but how those groups are formed, how big they are, and how the yare governed varies greatly. The roots of the culture war are based on liberals wanting to centralize government, whereas conservatives see value in voluntary and smaller groups. And since freedom of association was created exactly for the purpose of promoting the primacy of such groups over the federal government, since those smaller groups are the basis of a healthy society. The federal government that liberals support is not only a fairly new phenomenon, it’s also completely artificial. Note for nitpickers that when I say the founders intended such groups to have primacy, I do not mean supremacy in lawmaking. I mean social primacy, that society would be organized around families, churches, associations, local governing bodies, etc, not organized around Washington DC. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/327 "2014-10-28T15:41:44Z")
[Jeb Bush](http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/jeb-bush-run-2016-son/story?id=26461466) sees the party’s prospects as so bleak - Bobby Jindal? Chris Christie? Haha - that he thinks he might have a chance at this thing after all. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/328 "2014-10-28T16:04:27Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The roots of the culture war are based on liberals wanting to centralize government, whereas conservatives see value in voluntary and smaller groups. No, or at least it depends on the issue. Being against gay people, against science, against abortion, making it harder to vote, opposing immigration, etc., has nothing to do with “centralizing government” vs “voluntary and smaller groups”. > [@](#): > > And since freedom of association was created exactly for the purpose of promoting the primacy of such groups over the federal government, since those smaller groups are the basis of a healthy society. The federal government that liberals support is not only a fairly new phenomenon, it’s also completely artificial. This is another misunderstanding of what liberals actually believe and support. Again, since you’re so bad at trying to imagine how liberals think, just ask. Instead of saying “liberals think X”, ask us how liberals approach an issue, since you almost always get it wrong. > [@](#): > > Note for nitpickers that when I say the founders intended such groups to have primacy, I do not mean supremacy in lawmaking. I mean social primacy, that society would be organized around families, churches, associations, local governing bodies, etc, not organized around Washington DC. More misunderstanding, if you’re saying liberals in general don’t also place these groups in “Social primacy”. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/329 "2014-10-28T18:15:45Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > [Jeb Bush](http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/jeb-bush-run-2016-son/story?id=26461466) sees the party’s prospects as so bleak - Bobby Jindal? Chris Christie? Haha - that he thinks he might have a chance at this thing after all. That’s because Jeb Bush’s side of the GOP civil war is losing. Perhaps if his family hadn’t given K street Republicanism a bad name, like er, K Street Republicanism… Jeb Bush was a good governor and I’d probably vote for him on that basis. We need competence after his brother and the new guy let the federal government self-regulate for the last 14 years. But I don’t agree with him about a lot of things. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/330 "2014-10-28T18:20:35Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > . We need competence after his brother and the new guy You can’t even say his name now? Are you like Woody Hayes who used to speak of that team up north? ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/331 "2014-10-28T20:13:12Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No, this is all false. “You didn’t build that” referred to the collective actions of societies that individuals cannot accomplish – roads, bridges, education, transportation, and other infrastructure that’s necessary for any business (and especially new, small businesses) to thrive. But to say “_you_ didn’t build that” implies that the business didn’t pay the same taxes to build those same roads. It implies an “us vs. them” mentality with regard to private industry. Like: we’re the good guys building roads and they’re the evil ones taking advantage and not paying into the system. Which, of course, is nonsense since businesses do pay a lot in taxes. If Progressive Democrats want us to buy into the collective mentality of society, which is certainly their right to do, isolating the rich and private industry achieves the opposite. It serves to divide. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/332 "2014-10-28T20:28:58Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > But to say “_you_ didn’t build that” implies that the business didn’t pay the same taxes to build those same roads. No, only the willful would infer any of that. Context is not your friend. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/333 "2014-10-28T20:37:39Z")
> [@Obama](#): > > Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The implication from this remark is that businesses did not contribute to the building of roads and bridges. Using the words “somebody else” is quite clear about that. To put it another way: who _did_ build that? Is it the collective? If it is the collective, are businesses not a part of the collective? Does the tax money paid by the business and its owners/employees not count? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/334 "2014-10-28T21:09:13Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > But to say “_you_ didn’t build that” implies that the business didn’t pay the same taxes to build those same roads. It implies an “us vs. them” mentality with regard to private industry. Like: we’re the good guys building roads and they’re the evil ones taking advantage and not paying into the system. Which, of course, is nonsense since businesses do pay a lot in taxes. It was inartful and bad optics. He should have said something like “you didn’t build that **on your own** ”. Earlier in the speech he said “You didn’t get there on your own.”, which in addition to the statements about infrastructure and education, make it clear that this is what he meant. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/335 "2014-10-28T21:21:26Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > The implication from this remark is that businesses did not contribute to the building of roads and bridges. Using the words “somebody else” is quite clear about that. > > To put it another way: who _did_ build that? Is it the collective? If it is the collective, are businesses not a part of the collective? Does the tax money paid by the business and its owners/employees not count? No, that is not the implication. The implication is that those roads and bridges need to be maintained and/or rebuilt today and on into the future, and we do not currently have enough money for this. So the businesses that are fighting for lower taxes or to move overseas and pay no taxes at all, knowing that these things need to be funded, are in fact abandoning their shared responsibility for the continued maintenance of our infrastructure. Roads and bridges are not a one time expense that has already been paid in full, it is a continued shared responsibility for the benefit of us now and for those who will follow behind us. If we were currently funding our infrastructure needs you may have more of a point, but we are not. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/336 "2014-10-28T21:23:37Z")
And why aren’t we? Because entitlements are taking up an increasing share of the budget. In addition, Democrats are more fond of starting new programs than funding the old ones. The Democrats had plenty of opportunity to fully fund an infrastructure bill from 2009-2010 and chose not to do it. They prioritized health care and climate change over it. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/337 "2014-10-28T21:35:03Z")
So why try to lower your taxes when you know we can’t pay for what we need? How does that help us “build it”? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/338 "2014-10-28T21:49:48Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > So why try to lower your taxes when you know we can’t pay for what we need? How does that help us “build it”? Because they DON’T WANT TO HELP BUILD IT! The GOP would be totally content to watch every bridge and road in the country crumble into rubble as long as they and their buddies don’t have to actually pay any taxes. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/339 "2014-10-28T21:54:56Z")
Because we don’t believe the government has a shortage of money. They just don’t set priorities properly. If Democrats truly considered it a priority, then they’d call for an across the board tax increase, not promise Americans that we’ll somehow pay for all the country’s needs by taxing the 1% more. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2014, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737/340 "2014-10-28T22:08:00Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If Democrats truly considered it a priority, then they’d call for an across the board tax increase… That’s…wait, what? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-reason-to-believe-2016-wont-be-a-landslide-victory-for-the-democrats/699737.md?page=18)