Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 06, 2016, 08:08:32 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 645
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Name one good thing about Donald Trump on: February 03, 2016, 12:23:13 am
The Apprentice was entertaining at times.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Name one good thing about Hillary Clinton on: February 03, 2016, 12:22:16 am
Her participation in this panel.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: PPP tweet, oh boy. on: February 03, 2016, 12:18:05 am
From what I've read, Trump would have done fine if he had actually had an organization. He's not fully trying for the nomination, he's just out there having fun for himself.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Sanders hadn't run on: February 03, 2016, 12:10:54 am
Of course by virtual default, but then someone else probably would have gotten in to.  People want a competition, not a coronation.

I would rather have a coronation, as long as it's for my candidate.

I disagree. I would want competition for my candidate, not only to show that they can succeed in winning elections, but also to get the full range of ideas from all sides.

When Hillary lost the Iowa caucus in 2008, my pro-Hillary friend was depressed. I asked him why. He said, "I hoped we were just going to cruise to a coronation". I scoffed at him and said, "No, this way is better, because she'll be able make a better case by winning in a competitive environment."

You don't want a truly competitive environment, but you do want some sort of challenger just to prepare you. Sanders really fits the bill - he presents a clearly visible challenge, but has little hope of actually winning the nomination

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w_96yOUzRg
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Sanders hadn't run on: February 03, 2016, 12:03:45 am
Of course by virtual default, but then someone else probably would have gotten in to.  People want a competition, not a coronation.

I would rather have a coronation, as long as it's for my candidate.

I disagree. I would want competition for my candidate, not only to show that they can succeed in winning elections, but also to get the full range of ideas from all sides.

When Hillary lost the Iowa caucus in 2008, my pro-Hillary friend was depressed. I asked him why. He said, "I hoped we were just going to cruise to a coronation". I scoffed at him and said, "No, this way is better, because she'll be able make a better case by winning in a competitive environment."

I'll never make that mistake again.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Name one good thing about Jim Gilmore on: February 02, 2016, 11:55:40 pm
Eliminated Car Tax
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Sanders hadn't run on: February 02, 2016, 11:54:37 pm
Of course by virtual default, but then someone else probably would have gotten in to.  People want a competition, not a coronation.

I would rather have a coronation, as long as it's for my candidate.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Sanders hadn't run on: February 02, 2016, 11:53:51 pm
Yes, he would have run as the progressive alternative to Clinton.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The gender gap in the Democratic primaries on: February 02, 2016, 11:39:59 pm
If you're a millennial left-of-center, your universe of information is almost entirely pro-Sanders and anti-Clinton. Millennial women are certainly more inclined to support a woman candidate, but they would have to be able to justify it to themselves at a base level before the identity advantage/disadvantage could come into play. Without *any* significant positive information stream about Clinton, there is no room for difference of opinion. No matter how much more inclined I am to support a candidate from my home state, for instance, I will not if I hear nothing positive about him. White men largely control the information streams, by virtue of holding more positions and being better informed, than any other demographic, and this is the real advantage for the white male demographic, despite being a small minority in the Democratic party. Progressives and other ideologues also hold an advantage as they tend to be better informed. (Also, there's the fact that Clinton has a tremendous tin ear for what would appeal to young people.)
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Memes about Sanders that are false. on: February 02, 2016, 11:25:32 pm
This could be much more of an effortpost, but I do not have the time at the moment to complete it, however I want to sketch out the general idea.

One prominent meme about Sanders is that he's a Eugene McCarthy/Gary Hart/Bill Bradley/Howard Dean/Barack Obama minus the blacks-style candidate. In other words, he's a youth-driven white middle class insurgent candidate who will fail to connect with people of color and the blue collar base of the Democratic party. There is some truth to this, and I outlined this thesis myself at one point in early 2015 with regard to Elizabeth Warren (this was very early in the campaign, before everyone started with it). Since then, the view has become conventional wisdom. It is being used to fuel various claims that Sanders will be inevitably crushed in places like South Carolina or Tennessee. Since then, however, the facts have changed, and as the quote commonly attributed to Keynes goes, "When the facts change, I change my mind."

Put simply, while checking every available exit poll would be required to confirm this, my impression is that none of the historically youth-driven white middle class insurgent candidates disproportionately won working-class voters. There was no particular reason for them to. Eugene McCarthy was running primary against the Vietnam war. The labor unions were going for Humphrey, and minorities wanted Kennedy. Gary Hart ran economically to the right of Walter Mondale and lost when Mondale essentially accused him of triangulation. Bill Bradley barely made a dent. Howard Dean was another anti-war candidate. Barack Obama unquestionably did disproportionately well among upper-middle class liberals. He was the third anti-war candidate on the list.

In other words, the problem with the middle class insurgent thesis is that it fails to take into account the fact that none of the other insurgencies have been based on economic populism. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, *is winning lower income Democrats.* He and Hillary are actually flipped from Obama and Hillary in 2008. Since the rise of the Reagan Democrat, it has been conventional wisdom that the poor do not respond to economically populist messages because of the  priority of social issues. However, an economically populist appeal has never been put to the voting public on the scale that Senator Sanders is. The evidence is that the working poor are responding. Sanders is polling surprisingly well in West Virginia, for example.

The takeaway is that Senator Clinton cannot rely on middle-class-insurgency thesis to take the "hick vote" and the minority vote for granted. The Democratic primary will be a race to the left, and whoever can position themselves as the more angry economic populist will be in a good position.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Iowa Caucus results thread (entrance poll @8pm ET) on: February 01, 2016, 11:39:47 pm
Great speech by Hillary.

Right, she needs to keep doing that and promising universal health care and similar Sanders-like themes. That strong voice was right. But needs even more. Needs to hammer it home like a laser.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Iowa Caucus results thread (entrance poll @8pm ET) on: February 01, 2016, 11:23:35 pm
A 74 year old joke candidate and non Democrat who never even expected himself to have a chance has just pulled 49% against a candidate literally the entire party (even Liz Warren) except for Martin O'Malley made way for. Gotta think about what that says about his message.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Iowa Caucus results thread (entrance poll @8pm ET) on: February 01, 2016, 11:16:16 pm
Regardless of who wins, I think it's clear Sanders' message is resonating more. "I'm more realistic/practical" just isn't what people want to hear, when the concerns are deeper than that. Sanders is NOT the Hart/Obama style candidate we thought he was going to be. He's winning the lower class voters unlike them. Clinton must change her message.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: NH-UMass Lowell/7 News Daily Tracking Poll Thread on: February 01, 2016, 05:42:28 pm
NH will be a bloodbath if Clinton wins in Iowa. If Sanders pulls off a miracle tonight, I'd bet on things tightening up though. NH likes to be "different".

A "miracle"? LOL. Your guy is within the MoE in the DMR poll and has the momentum. IMO he will win tonight because most of Hillarys supporters are old and decrepit 80 year olds who can't sit around for 3 hours. They support her but they won't attend the caucus. Also, yes NH likes upsets but not like this margin.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: IA-Monmouth: Clinton up 5 on: January 30, 2016, 07:43:08 pm
If only this f**** thing had been on January 4 like it was supposed to be.

If only Supreme Dark Overlord Debbie "Satan Lucifer Hades" Wasserman Schultz moved the date back!

Welcome back, by the way. Wink

Thanks IceSpear Smiley
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Iowa snowstorm coming in Monday night. on: January 30, 2016, 07:39:31 pm
Going to depress turnout for candidates with older, more sickly supporters. This could be a major issue that ends up deciding the caucus results.
17  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Opinion of affirmative consent/"Yes Means Yes" on: January 28, 2016, 10:45:26 pm
FYI, Here is the text of the actual California law.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: IA-Monmouth: Clinton up 5 on: January 28, 2016, 10:30:38 pm
If only this f**** thing had been on January 4 like it was supposed to be.
19  General Politics / Political Debate / MOVED: Was Rosalynn Carter our Hottest First Lady? on: November 11, 2015, 09:47:50 pm
This topic has been moved to Off-topic Board.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=222466.0
20  General Politics / Political Debate / MOVED: Hillary supporters smearing critics as sexist on: November 10, 2015, 03:29:18 pm
This topic has been moved to 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=222227.0
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Sanders v. Fiorina - who wins? on: September 17, 2015, 06:28:37 am
Maps?
22  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Why was Sawx banned? on: August 08, 2015, 12:15:57 pm
He seemed so mature for his age. I couldn't have imagined him threatening another poster before. I guess people are not so different underneath.
23  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Frau Merkel makes a Palestinian kid cry on national TV on: July 18, 2015, 09:29:06 pm
But why? (Antonio)

Even if it was going to be better, people didn't "prepare" for industrial capitalism in advance. Nor did people try to persuade them. It just came, and they adjusted accordingly. But you haven't explained why  the "single world-nation" is desirable in the first place.

Because I am convinced that it will reduce social ills and improve people's well-being to an extent that is outright unimaginable to this point.

Speaking as a citizen of a small Northern European country, Finland, I would say that the whole concept of a welfare state here is, in fact, to a large degree tied into the concept of nation: people are willing to accept high taxes to support public services because they view that as taking care of their own, seeing the society as an extended family. That is why even the Finnish right-wing populists are supporters of the welfare state.

That all changes, however, if the state becomes a truly multicultural society. People will cease to view the society as an extended family, as the society is no longer united by the same culture. As a result, people's willingness to accept high taxation will fall, as they will begin to ask why they have to pay into the services of persons with whom they have nothing in common. The welfare state will eventually cease to exist, as it loses its justification in a splintered society.

If the Left wants to transform the nation state into a multicultural society, they have to accept that that will, in the long term, also lead to the transformation of that state into a neoliberal society.
I never thought about it that way.  That's a very interesting insight into the difference between American and European politics.

lol not really
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary Clinton to put forth economic vision on: July 13, 2015, 06:36:44 pm
Not bold enough, IMO. Sanders is a real threat to her at this point and she needed to go big and co-opt his message. She should have called out the banks by name, and announced that she was not taking money from the top 5 New York banks. Even if those banks really are her 'friends', they are not her friends in that they're hurting her path to the nomination, and by extension the presidency.

So at the end of the day she has to decide whether she wants to be president or not and whether she's willing to actually take risks to get there. Because this tepid Hillary is just pathetic. It's almost as if there's no life pumping in there. I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up like Martha Coakley.
25  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Sex work on: July 13, 2015, 05:36:55 pm
It seems more unjust to require prostitutes to serve every client regardless of race or ethnicity than it does for other professionals.

...may I ask why you think that?

Because I don't want a woman to have to face the choice between ing a guy she doesn't want to and losing her livelihood.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 645


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines