# Re the 2016 POTUS election 5 months later are there any "lessons" for the Dems going forward? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 15, 2017, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510 "2017-04-15T16:24:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/61 "2017-04-17T19:27:44Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Why on earth would you think the situation is a simple binary option like that? Why couldn’t it be that the candidate or her message was such that it didn’t appeal to enough voters in the states that matter instead of appealing to a bunch of voters in the larger states where each incremental vote buys you nothing towards winning the election? Because the point about which states “matter” is, in this election, a question of gamesmanship. In this instance, we know that Clinton neglected to campaign strongly (or, you know, _at all_) in the states that ended up mattering. Furthermore, we know that in Michigan at least, she lost by a fairly slim margin. Because of that we can’t assume that the voters there heard and rejected her candidacy. OTOH, we can assume that campaigning in those states was a tactical error. > [@Iggy](#): > > That is not what this study said. > > The conclusion you can draw is that the subset of voters who scored high (75th percentile) on the study’s “symbolic racism scale” showed a greater increase to vote for Trump compared to those at the 50th percentile as compared to the increase between the 50th and 75th percentile groups on the authoritativeness scale. > > This does not say anything about whether racism was the primary motivating factor at all, only that it scored a greater impact than authoritativeness. That would be true if these were the #1 and #2 factors or the #101 and #102 factors for Trump voters. I will admit that knowledge of statistics is limited, to put it politly. But the conclusion of the article, which I quoted, put it this way: > [@Thomas Woods](#): > > Moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile in the authoritarian scale made someone about 3 percent more likely to vote for Trump. The same jump on the SRS scale made someone 20 percent more likely to vote for Trump. > > Racial attitudes made a bigger difference in electing Trump than authoritarianism. Thinking it over now, Iggy, I do see what you’re saying. That said, I think it’s reasonable to conclude from this quote that Trump supporters are more likely to be motivated by racism than by authoritarianism. ---
**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 17, 2017, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/62 "2017-04-17T19:29:18Z")
Skammer wrote: “lemocratic?” The cliff is _thataway_!!! ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/63 "2017-04-17T19:35:21Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > In this instance, we know that Clinton neglected to campaign strongly (or, you know, _at all_) in the states that ended up mattering. Furthermore, we know that in Michigan at least, she lost by a fairly slim margin. > > Because of that we can’t assume that the voters there heard and rejected her candidacy. OTOH, we can assume that campaigning in those states was a tactical error. To be fair, she is probably well-pleased to have lost the presidency and the Democrats’ chances, since it didn’t mean gaining the votes of deplorables. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/64 "2017-04-17T19:46:55Z")
> [@E-DUB](#): > > Skammer wrote: “lemocratic?” > > The cliff is _thataway_!!! Or the Lemocratic Party? Count your blessings. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/65 "2017-04-17T19:56:23Z")
[quote=“Iggy, post:4, topic:784510”] Here’s a start. [ol][li]Work on the state level. State legislatures are where most of the gerrymandering happens. Only a few states pass the district drawing task to an ostensibly non-partisan group. If you don’t control the legislatures you are facing a decade of elections with an unfavorable map.[/li][li]Do not assume _any_ state that went less than D+20 in the last presidential election is a safe state. Campaign in _every single state_ that was closer than this. No blowing off Wisconsin. No half hearted effort in Michigan.[/li][li]Take to heart that if someone took the effort to raise their concerns about an issue to your campaign there are probably a dozen people with similar sentiments who think the same way but did not say anything. Do not downplay those sentiments. Look for patterns in feedback and complaints to recognize simmering sentiments in the voting public. Be damn sure you are addressing those issues.[/li][li]Campaign \*for \*your candidate. If you don’t give the public something to vote _for_ then you may be stuck relying on a turnout of voters who are motivated more by voting _against_ the other candidate. You need voters to the polls who want both to vote _for_ your candidate as well as _against_ the other candidate.[/li][li]Do not assume that you have any damn idea in 2018 what the key issues are that will drive voters come election time in 2020. These are different races. Be prepared to shift gears if needed.[/ol][/li][/QUOTE] These are really excellent. I want to stress Campaign \*for _your candidate. Dont campaign against your fellow Democrat-_ except on the issues. \* Too many Democrats bought into GOP lies and Russian & Rove propaganda and kept spreading lies, negative info and propaganda against Hillary even after she was the candidate. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/66 "2017-04-17T19:58:26Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Let the GOP Lie Machine work on \*him \*for awhile and see what happens. Hillary-hate is a conditioned behavior, not a rational one, and Booker-hate would be too. Yep. I will bet a nickel that Rove and co had a whole file full of dirty crap they were gonna spread about Bernie. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/67 "2017-04-17T19:58:45Z")
1. Let the rank-and-file choose the candidate. Don’t let the leadership choose for you. I know many Dems don’t understand that votes for Bernie or Trump were actually votes for Not-Clinton. A fair primary will get you someone your party can rally around. 2. Campaign in purple states and red and blue states on the verge of flipping. You don’t need to waste time and money in California and Texas. 3. Be very careful not to appear as hypocrites. Fair or unfair, the soundbites you made in 2012-2016 about those evil Republicans being obstructionists will come back and haunt you if you do the same in 2017-2020. 4. You have to work at the state level. The Dems are losing states in terms of Governorships and the Senate and you need to learn from 2000 and 2016 that the Presidential election is a state-by-state vote and not a popular election. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/68 "2017-04-17T19:59:30Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > 1. Get rid of caucuses. Minnesota has done this and other states should follow. > > 2. Quit thinking your loud activists are the majority of your voters. Yep. They are undemocratic for one thing. Yep. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/69 "2017-04-17T20:00:43Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > One more thing: the DNC must be neutral in the 2020 primaries. It is clear that they were in Hillary’s pocket all the way and this antagonized enough Sanders supporters that we now have a five year old boy with ADHD in the White House. No its not. This is Russian propaganda. Yes, after the Primary was no longer in doubt, they began working for Hillary. Exactly as they should. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/70 "2017-04-17T20:00:45Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > We’d really have liked to have won by a large enough margin that the electoral college wouldn’t matter. How does that work? You get 60% of the popular vote and they ignore the EVs? ---
**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 17, 2017, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/71 "2017-04-17T21:04:30Z")
St Cad wrote: “How does that work? You get 60% of the popular vote and they ignore the EVs?” Not at all, the theory is that if you get _enough_ popular votes, the electoral votes take care of themselves. It usually works. And as a Michigan resident I can tell you that Hillary’s problem here wasn’t that she “didn’t gain the votes of deplorables”. It was that they didn’t mobilize sufficient numbers of reliable Democratic voters to _overcome_ the “deplorables” that managed, some for the first time in ages, to find the polling places. That, and not convincing enough normal Republican voters that this was not a year to do their regular thing. This despite the Detroit News failing to endorse the Republican nominee for the first time in their history. This despite the lack of endorsement from the Governor. This despite the fact that much of the regular Republican organization read the same polls as the rest of us and sat on their hands. ---
**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:** [April 17, 2017, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/72 "2017-04-17T21:22:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > No its not. This is Russian propaganda. Yes, after the Primary was no longer in doubt, they began working for Hillary. Exactly as they should. The DNC did and Sanders did, but his supporters still had that bitter taste in their mouth and felt like they weren’t beaten fairly. If the DNC had been neutral in the primaries like it would have had Howard Dean been in charge, then the Sanders people would have gotten on board. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/73 "2017-04-17T21:27:13Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > Because the point about which states “matter” is, in this election, a question of gamesmanship. > > In this instance, we know that Clinton neglected to campaign strongly (or, you know, _at all_) in the states that ended up mattering. Furthermore, we know that in Michigan at least, she lost by a fairly slim margin. > > Because of that we can’t assume that the voters there heard and rejected her candidacy. OTOH, we can assume that campaigning in those states was a tactical error. You know what? You’re absolutely right. You’ve got nothing to worry about. Carry on! In fact, the Democrats should run HRC again. Third time is the charm!! ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2017, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/74 "2017-04-17T22:45:17Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > One more thing: the DNC must be neutral in the 2020 primaries. Huh? They worked hard for the Democrat. > [@](#): > > this antagonized enough Sanders supporters that we now have a five year old boy with ADHD in the White House. None of which is the responsibility of those voters themselves, of course. We’ve been over this. ---
**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:** [April 17, 2017, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/75 "2017-04-17T22:46:44Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **AK84** : > > Mrs Clinton won just under 49% of the vote. Not a majority. You’re right; I should have said “plurality”. But that just makes my point even stronger: We should have done a lot better than that. > [@](#): > > Quoth **Saint Cad** : > > How does that work? You get 60% of the popular vote and they ignore the EVs? No, you still count up the EVs, because that’s what the rules say you do, and we haven’t managed to change the rules yet. But there is absolutely no realistic situation where one candidate wins 60% of the popular vote and still loses the EC. Even in theory, that’s only possible for an extremely geographically polarized nation, but if the polarization ever got that extreme, we’d be deciding the election at Gettysburg and Shiloh again, not in the EC. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/76 "2017-04-18T03:59:23Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > The problem is most emphatically not that the democrats don’t care. The problem is that there’s a substantial portion of the electorate who get their news from news sources which are not going to report honestly or accurately on the democratic positions. Ever. FOX News is never going to give democrats a fair shake. Breitbart news is NEVER going to give democrats a fair shake. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Gateway Pundit, The Weekly Standard, this whole right-wing “alt-news” enterprise, which has formed a massive, closed circuit as “the only news you can trust” - none of them are EVER going to give the democratic party or platform a fair shake. It will always be dishonestly distorted and manipulated. (Not that the mainstream media is always better; even CNN opted for the sensationalist headline, rather than the honest truth of the matter.) > > So the question isn’t, “how do we cater to these people?”, the problem is, “how the fuck do you reach those people?” This post really illustrates the problem that the Democratic leadership has. In their view, if anyone isn’t supporting them, it must be because that person is getting their news from right-wing sources that distort the facts. And they take it for granted that if any of those people would just read a good liberal news source, then they would shift to voting for the Democrats. But this is not true, and moreover believing it hurts the Democrats because it means that they don’t know what’s believed by the exact voters that they need to reach and convert. Those who run campaigns and plot strategy for the Democrats should read _The Weekly Standard_. And also _The National Review_ and _The Wall Street Journal_ and Instapundit. And they should also watch some Fox News and listen to some Rush Limbaugh. That way they would know what is motivating Republican voters to vote Republican. As it is, there are a ton of issues that are a huge deal among conservatives, and are a major motivation of why they consistently go to the polls to vote for Republicans, which are totally ignored by both the Democratic Party’s official voice, and by the liberal media outlets that Republican voters strongly associated with the Democratic Party. As just one example, the scandal of the IRS illegally targeting conservative organizations and then for years stonewalling the investigation into the matter and refusing to hand over evidence. This has been an almost daily topic on conservative media for years, while the Democrats seems to think that if they just refuse to ever mention it, it will go away. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/77 "2017-04-18T05:24:07Z")
What they used to do was assign monitors for just that purpose, to keep track of Limbaugh, Hannity, that ilk. Given the incidence of mental breakdowns, depression and drug addiction, it became known as “Riding the Disorient Express”. Also, those wacky goings-on are _reflected_ in sane media, like _Daily Show_, etc. So, we can gaze upon the snaked-haired bitch without becoming permanently statuesque. Further, we do already kinda know what they think, they think he’s telling them the truth. What are we gonna say to change their minds? All we got is reason and facts. What good is that for a homeopathic intelligence? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/78 "2017-04-18T05:29:32Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Forgive me, but isn’t that basically the case with you guys and Ariel Sharon? Sharon’s a special case. His years in the political wilderness caused most of teh hatred against him to die out, except among the hard-core left, and he won his elections by veering toward the center instead of by riling up his base. But that’s \*definitely \*the case with Bibi Netanyahu, especially considering the series of nonentities the opposition insists on sending out against him. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/79 "2017-04-18T12:30:05Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Even if it’s bullshit, FBI investigations aren’t good for candidates. Don’t just gloss over that. Well, _both_ candidates were being investigated by the FBI. But the FBI thought it would be tasteless to mention that Trump campaign/Russia thing. My answer: Get out the vote. In 2018 & 2020. Ignore “friendly suggestions” from known Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/80 "2017-04-18T12:52:03Z")
Back in the 80s/90s, I remember that Democrats were often called “soft on defense.” They’ve managed to shake that label. I don’t see it as much, if at all, anymore. These days it seems to be “soft on illegal immigration.” I think the Democrats need to shake that label. The wall is a stupendously bad idea, but there’s a lot of strong sentiment against illegal immigration because, right or wrong, it is viewed as damaging the economy for the little guy. And ultimately it always boils down to the economy. Of course, I’m not sure how they do it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510.md?page=5)