# 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:** 5
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/81 "2017-04-18T16:19:57Z")
Get off your high-horse. Improve your presence in real life. Anytime someone comes across one of you, you are very odd, and unable to relate to the people you think you are trying to help. They notice. You always give off the vibe of a veterinarian’s assistant tending to a sick dog. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/82 "2017-04-18T16:42:22Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > 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. This post really illustrates the problem that republicans have. In their view, if anyone is criticizing them, it must be because that person is condescending and not aware of what’s in “their” media. Have you ever watched Hannity on a night where there’s a lot going on in trump world? It’s a parallel universe. This is not hard to see happening. I’m talking about the days news cycle, not year old stuff and staler. Do you really think that CNN doesn’t talk about IRS abuse against conservatives every day because they are “liberal”? ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/83 "2017-04-18T17:02:20Z")
Has some portion of the Left begun openly saying that if democracy produced Trump and the Republicans, than democracy should be abolished? ---
**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, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/84 "2017-04-18T17:05:56Z")
That’s an interesting question! Have you got an interesting answer? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/85 "2017-04-18T17:38:59Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > 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? The percentage of people who [think Trump is honest](http://www.gallup.com/poll/208640/majority-no-longer-thinks-trump-keeps-promises.aspx?g_source=Politics&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles) has been falling steadilly, and is now down around 36%. People are definitely catching on. He’s still getting a surprising amount of support (around 40%), but 40% approval is a disaster for a president in his first 100 days. ---
**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, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/86 "2017-04-18T18:12:43Z")
True, and good news, a rare combination these days. But even here, in the Olympian heights of intelligence and probity, there remain a rigid cluster that will not be moved by reason or fact. Roughly, twenty percent of the US population, is my personal WAG. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/87 "2017-04-18T18:59:35Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > The percentage of people who [think Trump is honest](http://www.gallup.com/poll/208640/majority-no-longer-thinks-trump-keeps-promises.aspx?g_source=Politics&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles) has been falling steadilly, and is now down around 36%. People are definitely catching on. He’s still getting a surprising amount of support (around 40%), but 40% approval is a disaster for a president in his first 100 days. My theory is that Trump’s low approval rating is largely a symptom of our current hyper-partisan environment. Do you think that HRC would have a significantly better approval rating if she had won? I don’t. ---
**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, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/88 "2017-04-18T19:02:48Z")
Well, yes, that “hyper-partisan environment” thing is a definite problem, and we appreciate your efforts to resolve it. Such as they are. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/89 "2017-04-18T19:14:37Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > My theory is that Trump’s low approval rating is largely a symptom of our current hyper-partisan environment. Do you think that HRC would have a significantly better approval rating if she had won? I don’t. I think the fact that his rating is decreasing is evidence against your theory, unless you think the country has somehow become significantly more partisan in the past 87 days. Notice, for example, that both self-identified “Conservatives” and “Republicans” have lower opinions of Trump than they did in February. I suspect that’s less due to partisanship, and more due to the fact that Trump is repeatedly proving his incompetence. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/90 "2017-04-18T19:38:21Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > That’s an interesting question! Have you got an interesting answer? No; I was hoping someone else did. ---
**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, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/91 "2017-04-18T20:27:50Z")
Well, OK, of course there are! We of the left includes a wide array of humans, some of whom, statistics show, are nuts. There is probably a Kim Jong Il fan club or a group of persons who think Karl Marx was Jesus. I have personally witnessed a Stalinist and a Maoist arguing over who represented the “real” Communism. There are likely hundreds, perhaps thousands of such people. On the other hand, you have people who voted for and support Il Douche. 'Nuff sed. ---
**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 18, 2017, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/92 "2017-04-18T20:57:47Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > My theory is that Trump’s low approval rating is largely a symptom of our current hyper-partisan environment. Do you think that HRC would have a significantly better approval rating if she had won? I don’t. I think we reached hyper-partisan heights during the Obama administration, and he didn’t have such a low approval rating. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/93 "2017-04-18T21:16:08Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > I think the fact that his rating is decreasing is evidence against your theory, unless you think the country has somehow become significantly more partisan in the past 87 days. Notice, for example, that both self-identified “Conservatives” and “Republicans” have lower opinions of Trump than they did in February. I suspect that’s less due to partisanship, and more due to the fact that Trump is repeatedly proving his incompetence. His approval rating has been pretty much bouncing around in the low 40’s ever since he took office. I don’t think we’re enough outside of the margin of error of most approval polls to really call it a “decreasing” trend (it’s actually been on it’s way up in the last two weeks - from a low-point of 39.8 on April 3rd), but YMMV. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > I think we reached hyper-partisan heights during the Obama administration, and he didn’t have such a low approval rating. Obama had long stretches of underwater approval, but he enjoyed a “honeymoon” period at the beginning of his Presidency. Obama’s low of 39.8 on December 2, 2013 actually matches Trump’s low _exactly_. ---
**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 18, 2017, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/94 "2017-04-18T22:13:32Z")
I don’t know how folks manage to say that people who want to follow the popular vote are trying to abolish democracy, buy they do. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/95 "2017-04-18T22:23:46Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > My theory is that Trump’s low approval rating is largely a symptom of our current hyper-partisan environment. Do you think that HRC would have a significantly better approval rating if she had won? I don’t. The lower his approval ratings are the more the public are in actual concord, which is the opposite of “partisan.” Eventually, let’s say for instance if there is russian collusion traced to him, it may go all the way to “unison.” I think Clinton would have had healthy approval ratings no matter what. She was never as bad as the all the squealing about her. This is just more campaign rhetoric that doesn’t survive past election day, like donald’s promises about almost everything. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2017, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/96 "2017-04-18T23:42:37Z")
> [@BeepKillBeep](#): > > 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. Democrats shook the soft-on-defense label by…supporting $600 billion defense budgets, drone strikes, wars to topple Gaddafi, etc. Do they shake the soft-on-illegal-immigration label with deportations, punishing employers who hire illegal immigrants, etc.? Obama already deported a lot. Do they shake the pro-abortion label by curbing abortion, etc.? At a certain point they would be “shedding labels” by becoming…Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2017, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/97 "2017-04-19T00:10:59Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > No; I was hoping someone else did. That doesn’t necessarily happen when you’re Just Asking Questions, yanno. Do please tell us where you got the idea to ask that one. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2017, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/98 "2017-04-20T03:25:17Z")
[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.[/ol][/li][/QUOTE] The problem with all these great suggestions is the Democratic Party doesn’t give a single flick what we tell them will work, and this is a prime example. If you follow politics – which I have to assume you do – you’re aware of the tragically lost opportunity the Democrats had in the recent Kansas election. A Bernie-Sanders-supporting candidate closed a \>20-point lead to a single digit against a Republican incumbent who had handily won reelection last time he ran. And he did it without an iota of help from either the national or state Democratic Party. Imagine how handily he could have handed that Republican his ass if the Democrats had said “Yes” when he asked for their support. Instead we now have more excuse-making from party leaders that rings so absurd it’s astounding. > [@](#): > > “There are thousands of elections every year. Can we invest in all of them? That would require a major increase in funds.” His response fails to acknowledge that the Democratic Party has a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee devoted solely to funding and supporting candidates for the House of Representatives, of which there are not thousands of elections for every year. > > [Thompson-Estes Special Election, Democrats Won’t Support Progressives | Observer](http://observer.com/2017/04/thompson-estes-special-election-kansas-democratic-party-progressives/) > > (And no, I don’t care that it’s Trump’s SIL’s paper – dispute the content, not the source. The same quote is on WaPo but I can’t get to it past their pay wall.) Seriously, this could have been such a major turning point that it would have sparked huge turnout numbers across the country organically from the excitement of it. But just like the Democrats did to Bernie in the Primaries, they sabotaged _this_ candidate too … because Thompson was Bernie’s candidate, not Hillary’s. It was profoundly stupid. Expect more of the same over the next two years. The Democrats are wholly uninterested in Progressive policies that kept them in power for nearly a half century. Unless there’s a photo OP where Hillary can once again take credit for a policy being enacted that she had nothing whatsoever to do with, and in fact fought against ($15 minimum wage, tuition-free public college, etc.) > [@BobLibDem](#): > > 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. You must not have followed Dean on social media during the primaries. He was not only a 100% whore for Hillary, he was mean and ugly to Bernie supporters. And he was one of many superdelegates who literally said he couldn’t care less how the citizens of his state voted (overwhelmingly for Bernie, as it happens), he was doing what he damn well pleased. That’s the height of arrogance and a flip of the bird to democracy. And it happened all over the country. In fact, if you want to know the _first_ thing Democrats could do to inspire greater turnout is eliminate the undemocratic superdelegates. Why the hell should people care about voting when they know these primarily unelected cronies are just going to nominate whomever the hell they want anyway? > [@E-DUB](#): > > I don’t know how folks manage to say that people who want to follow the popular vote are trying to abolish democracy, buy they do. Because while First Past the Post sounds romantic in theory, it’s actually as undemocratic as what we have now. There may be better ways than the Electoral College, but winner-take-all isn’t one of them. Frankly I don’t want New York and California to dictate the entire county’s elected leaders. And that’s basically how Hillary “won” the (really nonexistent) popular vote: by stacking the decks in those two enormous states where all her wealthy Hollywood and Wall Street friends live and hold enormous sway. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/s7tWHJfhiyo/maxresdefault.jpg "Minority Rule: First Past the Post Voting") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo) Finally, I’m putting this here so I can refer back to it when it proves true: Unless the national Democrats start embracing Bernie’s popular policies and candidates, and especially if they run another establishment stooge who is for more war, more oil drilling, more pipelines, job-killing and democracy destroying trade deals, and against universal Medicare for all, a higher minimum wage, and tuition-freepublic universities for president again, Trump will win a second term. ---
**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 20, 2017, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/99 "2017-04-20T04:50:35Z")
Shayna wrote: “Frankly I don’t want New York and California to dictate the entire county’s elected leaders.” “New York” and “California” wouldn’t “dictate” anything. PEOPLE WOULD. In a straight up popular vote, the states would be as meaningless as as counties are presently, even though conservatives love to cite how many _counties_ trump won. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2017, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-the-2016-potus-election-5-months-later-are-there-any-lessons-for-the-dems-going-forward/784510/100 "2017-04-20T05:47:53Z")
See the link I provided that shows why that’s a ridiculous assault on democracy. [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=4) [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=6)