WaPo: There’s no such thing as a Trump Democrat (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 05, 2024, 08:21:49 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  WaPo: There’s no such thing as a Trump Democrat (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: WaPo: There’s no such thing as a Trump Democrat  (Read 4280 times)
60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED
ahugecat
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 868


« on: August 05, 2017, 12:38:22 PM »

The Washington Post was hilariously wrong about Trump in 2016. And I don't mean just wrong - I mean they told people to invest their retirement in Enron status wrong.

Whatever the WaPo says, I automatically assume the opposite.
Logged
60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED
ahugecat
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 868


« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2017, 02:21:39 PM »

That is a pretty vague statement, ahugecat. Wrong about what? Their national tracking poll was actually pretty accurate. It was off by about 1%, well within the MoE.
Where to begin?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/24/donald-trumps-chances-of-winning-are-approaching-zero/

"The election is in 15 days. And the electoral map just keeps looking grimmer and grimmer for Donald Trump."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/10/18/trump-electoral-college-victory-non-existent/

"Trump’s path to an electoral college victory isn’t narrow. It’s nonexistent." Trump was able to get 304 votes in the electoral college - 34 more than the required 270.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/09/the-wrongest-media-predictions-about-donald-trump/

The Washington Post called out other media establishments for getting everything wrong, but left out how they were wrong about Trump every step of the way.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/12/09/jeb-bush-jokes-of-trump-clinton-conspiracy-theory-heres-a-look-at-the-evidence/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/06/21/daily-202-is-trump-a-manchurian-candidate-or-maybe-the-1919-chicago-white-sox/57689ffd981b92a22d2421e1/

Before everyone thought Trump was colluding with Russia, the popular theory was Trump was colluding with Hillary Clinton to help get her elected.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/18/why-donald-trump-hasnt-locked-up-the-republican-nomination-just-yet-in-1-chart/

The Washington Post was so sure the GOP would have never gave the nomination to Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/09/why-donald-trump-might-not-debate-hillary-clinton/

They were so sure Trump would not debate Clinton.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/11/08/post-opinion-writers-predict-what-will-happen-on-election-night/

Not ONE of WaPo oped writers predicted a Trump victory.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/11/01/early-voters-predict-who-wins-this-is-good-news-for-democrats/

Talk about how early voting is good for the Democrats (in reality, early voting for Democrats was down in Florida and North Carolina - one of the reasons I was able to predict a Trump win in those states actually).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/01/donald-trump-has-1-field-office-open-in-all-of-florida-thats-a-total-disaster/

Talked about how Trump doesn't have a ground game, and that because he only has 1 office in Florida compared to 50 for Clinton he is doomed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/25/there-is-no-possible-way-donald-trumps-team-actually-believes-this-is-their-path-to-270/?utm_term=.12edd4049660

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump actually DID win.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/08/23/never-forget-the-2016-presidential-election-is-supposed-to-be-one-that-republicans-can-win/

Drumpf is doomed!

The Washington Post wasn't quite as bad as Nate Silver was, but they were up there.

So whatever the Washington Post says about Trump's chances or data, believe the exact opposite.
Logged
60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED
ahugecat
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 868


« Reply #2 on: August 05, 2017, 04:27:04 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well to be fair, I went through I think all of those (I may have missed one or two) and none were by the author of this article. Further, I'm not a big fan of the "well, they got that thing wrong, so that naturally means they will always be wrong" reasoning, which is pretty much a fallacy on its own. It was widely believed that Trump would lose, except maybe among many partisan Republicans and Trump supporters who would naturally believe he would win. October had so many surprises that it's hard for me to fault people like WaPo.

I see what you're saying but the Washington Post was consistently and hilariously wrong about Trump all throughout the election - starting from before his announcement. They weren't just wrong on 1 or 2 things but 100 or 200 things. The links I showed were just randomly grabbed from my "Favorites" list. Dana Milbank is the worst too. That guy had to literally eat paper because he was so consistently wrong about Trump (in his defense though he did go through with that promise!).

Now the Washington Post is doubling down and saying "There's no such thing as a Trump Democrat." It's like being wrong the first 200 times wasn't good enough for them, so they're going to continue being a treasure trove of stupid during the 2020 election.

People didn't want to believe someone as ridiculous as Trump could win, and all the constant drama surrounding Trump I think legitimately did put him far down in the polls, it's just that he always rebounded and was helped by Clinton having non-stop drama with her own issues. The election ended on a low note for her, which was convenient for Trump, who experienced an amazing number of scandalous revelations in October.

A lot of people - especially the WaPo - would ignore or excuse anything that would point to a Trump victory. Now they're ignoring Trump Democrats which could backfire in 2018 and/or 2020.

HOWEVER, I do think the battle for 2020 will be fought out over the 2016 third party voters. 2020 will be unlikely to get the third party turnout 2016 did (I am expecting only 2% of votes to go third party compared to 6% in 2016). So I think the Democrats can semi-"ignore" the Trump Democrats and try to get Romney-Republicans who went third party.
Logged
60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED
ahugecat
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 868


« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2017, 03:19:37 PM »

The media is promoting terrible 2020 candidates like Booker, Cuomo and Harris.

In all fairness who do the Democrats have? Clinton has wrecked that party in terms of its bench for years to come.
Logged
60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED
ahugecat
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 868


« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2017, 06:43:09 PM »

I completely agree with the concept that many of these voters went for George W. in '00/04.

How does this work when Kerry and Gore both won WI/MI/PA? Trump outperformed Bush by several points across the Midwest.

Bush came within a percentage point of flipping Wisconsin both times, came within 4 points of flipping Michigan in 2004 (5.2 points in 2000), and came within 2.5 points of flipping Pennsylvania in 2004 (4.2 points in 2000).

Now compare Obama's margins in these states in 08' and 12' and it's clear that there's a sizeable contingency of Bush-Obama-Trump voters in them.

Trump's path in PA/MI/WI was different than Bush's in 04 no?

Bush did well in the Milwuakee and Philly suburbs while Trump ran up the score in the rural areas/Erie/Scranton/etc. etc.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.038 seconds with 13 queries.