2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII - Page 46 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-11-2016, 12:02 PM   #676
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
I suppose a demagogue and a populist are two similar things. One could make an argument, but I would be on the side of saying he's not. Not unless every firebrand populist is a demagogue.

a populist who demagogues?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:08 PM   #677
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,357
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
You see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. It goes back to what Headache and I were discussing with "white privilege" a couple pages back. Do you think the people in this country who have had a really rough go of it financially for quite a while want to hear about how great America is? It hasn't been great for them. And it's incredibly tone deaf of Clinton to talk about how great America is when so many are struggling. But as the media people who eat up her campaign talking points are so thrilled to tell us: she does not need their votes because, according to her numbers, most of them come from demographics she doesn't care about.

I read that discussion and I appreciated it. I got the point, but I'm not asking for how people feel. I'm not making a privileged argument. I know there are problems. And, making a comment on how people feel is different from how people are. Which, this was sort of the conclusion of your discussion with headache.

It was a rebuttal on Clinton's part though. Not just a declaration. If you don't think Trump's insistence that America needs to be made great again is a total overstatement, you're seeing history through rose tinted glasses. The great America Trump dreams of never existed. He just reminisces about when certain problems didn't exist but other problems did.
__________________

__________________
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:08 PM   #678
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,874
Local Time: 09:12 PM
I cannot for the life of me understand why Clinton's campaign strategy isn't to display that not only is Donald's rhetoric totally empty from the standpoint that he has no enactable plans, but also from the standpoint that his history in business is mostly a series of failures propped up by nothing other than being born wealthy. She should point out he's a fraud, not that he's "dangerous." Instead, she's preaching to the pundit class with a "what will the world think of us if we elect someone like him???" attitude. She still does not seem to understand how far apart the values of the media are from the values of the electorate.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:09 PM   #679
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,357
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
a populist who demagogues?

Instead of just defining a demagogue, why don't you actually detail how Sanders is a demagogue?
__________________
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:13 PM   #680
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,255
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Sanders lost fairly resoudningly in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania... so Sanders would actually be a terrible choice for VP.
Right, so the majority of one-tenth of this November's general election voters in those states for the Democratic primary preferring the Presidential candidate on his ticket means he would hurt them in swing states.

I really hope that was a joke. There's no connection between how a candidate does in their primaries to how they would do nationwide. Or do you really think Trump is the best candidate for the GOP?

If anything, if we look at the people that aren't actually Democratic party members that would vote for the ticket regardless, Sanders is the one that has actually got them to the polls and involved in this primary. That's exactly the sort of reason to have him on the ticket.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:15 PM   #681
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,255
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
I cannot for the life of me understand why Clinton's campaign strategy isn't to display that not only is Donald's rhetoric totally empty from the standpoint that he has no enactable plans, but also from the standpoint that his history in business is mostly a series of failures propped up by nothing other than being born wealthy. She should point out he's a fraud, not that he's "dangerous." Instead, she's preaching to the pundit class with a "what will the world think of us if we elect someone like him???" attitude. She still does not seem to understand how far apart the values of the media are from the values of the electorate.
She doesn't need to do any sort of strategy. It's in the bag. I don't know why people even pretend he's a threat to win this thing.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:19 PM   #682
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,874
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Yes, that plan has worked out so well in the past for the Democratic Party.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:21 PM   #683
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Instead of just defining a demagogue, why don't you actually detail how Sanders is a demagogue?

i thought i did? "millionaires and billionaires" and "wall street bankers" are presented as the source of all our problems.

1. vague
2. appeals to prejudices and emotions
3. appeals to lower socio-economic classes
4. no rational solutions offered, just enemies
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:22 PM   #684
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Yes, that plan has worked out so well in the past for the Democratic Party.


exactly. they've fucked this up before.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:29 PM   #685
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,255
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
exactly. they've fucked this up before.
No, they haven't. Show me where they had a consistent ten point nationwide lead for basically a year like Clinton does over Trump...hundreds and hundreds of polls. You throw in four more years of Republican voters dying and being replaced by liberal, younger ones and it only gets easier every Presidential election as the country continues to tilt to the left.

Obama led by basically the same margin in general election polls throughout 2008 and 2012...nothing really ever changed. This is a freakin' cake walk and I don't even know why people are scared.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:32 PM   #686
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
I cannot for the life of me understand why Clinton's campaign strategy isn't to display that not only is Donald's rhetoric totally empty from the standpoint that he has no enactable plans, but also from the standpoint that his history in business is mostly a series of failures propped up by nothing other than being born wealthy. She should point out he's a fraud, not that he's "dangerous." Instead, she's preaching to the pundit class with a "what will the world think of us if we elect someone like him???" attitude. She still does not seem to understand how far apart the values of the media are from the values of the electorate.
But they know he's a fraud, they just don't care. Everyone has pointed out he's a liar, a failure, and has flip flopped on every single major issue of this election, they just don't care. This is not about issues with them, this is not about if he's a fraud or not. You could put Charles Manson up there, put him in a suit, put an R behind his name, tell him to yell about the Mexicans and Muslims, and tell the people he's not "establishment" and they would vote for him.

Actually pointing out he's dangerous is the best thing she can do now. Other than that she needs to step back and let him resort to his child like antics, let him weasel his way out of debates or squash him in debates, but other than that there's not much else she can do. She needs to play it cool, don't galvanize those that might stay home, if she can do that the math is on her side.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:34 PM   #687
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,255
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i thought i did? "millionaires and billionaires" and "wall street bankers" are presented as the source of all our problems.

1. vague
2. appeals to prejudices and emotions
3. appeals to lower socio-economic classes
4. no rational solutions offered, just enemies
It's not vague. It's part of a stump speech in an era of the political soundbyte, so it's not like he has hours to go into detail on all this, nor does he need to since progressives no exatly where he stands.

And he offers plenty of solutions. Breaking up the banks, stringent restrictions on trading activity, and most importantly, heavy taxation. These are the same solutions proposed (to a lesser degree) by most Democrats.

Not so sure your lower socio-economic thing is exactly true...Clinton appeals to the poorest group of them all (black voters) while Sanders handily won the Democrats Abroad electorate which tends to be wealthy people living elsewhere.

Sanders accurately assesses a lot of our problems and if you think he's way off, then why on earth would you vote for a Democrat in the first place?
__________________
BigMacPhisto is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:39 PM   #688
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,255
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Trump has received 10.9 million primary votes. Romney received 60.9 million general election results. I rest my case. Unless you think someone as vile as Trump is going to get all 50 million of those outstanding voters that have yet to cast a ballot for him and somehow earn another 5 million plus from god-knows-where (as the share of the white vote has consistently slipped by the exact same degree every four years), then there really is no need to even remotely be worried.

If men with higher favorability ratings and better numbers in general election polls couldn't do it, why would this idiot succeed? Especially when he's already drawing groups like Latinos to register in excessively large numbers just so that they can vote against him in November.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:40 PM   #689
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,357
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
yeah, see, this is what's starting to get to me about this cycle. because i've criticized Sanders, i'm now filled with "Clinton bias" -- as if preferring one candidate to another after careful consideration means one is incapable of clear thinking. when you do this, you sound like a conservative pundit claiming "media bias." it's feeling like the "true progressive" card is being played in moments like these.
You can make irrational claims like this about my post to you, but all I did was say you're portraying a bias towards your preferred candidate. I'd say the same thing if you were targeting Clinton over Benghazi or some garbage. Those are the conservative pundits. They're not negotiable with. I'm not out to get Clinton. It's you who is out after Sanders. Attempting to equate his approach as fear mongering is not right -- it's not what he's doing.

Quote:
Sanders has consistently said that the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few is the root cause of all of America's problems. he blames the banks, and the "millionaires and billionaires." that's non-specific, he's offered no real solution beyond taxes, and it's a message designed to appeal to lower socio-economic classes (and their sympathizers). that IS the definition of a demagogue.
And that's not fear mongering. I'm not even debating the demagoguery. Call it what you want, that's fine. But it's not fear mongering.

Quote:
i have searched myself, deeply, as to why i can't get on the Sanders train this election cycle. i obviously admire Obama, and have never loved HRC, especially in 2008. but as this campaign wears on, and i increasingly come to the realization that Bernie is scapegoating me by virtue of vowing to raise my taxes and tax me at the same rate as people who make double or triple my salary, and for him to say that i'm the problem, somehow, is really irritating. i agree with progressive taxation. i think single payer is better. i believe in regulation. but i also find myself right in that income bracket that's going to be squeezed the most, and also feel the most pain because i look rich on paper to Sanders -- who lumps me in, through his tax plan, as a "millionaire and billionaire" -- even if reality is vastly different.
And I have similar concerns with Sanders.

Quote:
finally, i am quite sympathetic to people who have worked for the Democratic party for years, who have worked to win the Senate, the Congress, to put up viable candidates so we can have a national party that can compete with the organized and disciplined Republicans, and then a candidate for their party's nomination turns around and calls them "establishment" and pretends that they are the enemy.
And I wasn't debating whether or not it was a stupid concept. I'm "pro establishment" on both sides.


Quote:
i'm not comparing what their blaming, i am comparing how they are appealing to voters. through fear and loathing of a vague, all-powerful group of people who are stealing their futures from them. we're talking blueprints, not specifics.

And while you might be saying that, I'm saying that I don't agree whatsoever. That's not Trump's main point, and it's not fear mongering.
__________________
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 05-11-2016, 12:42 PM   #690
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
It's not vague. It's part of a stump speech in an era of the political soundbyte, so it's not like he has hours to go into detail on all this, nor does he need to since progressives no exatly where he stands.

And he offers plenty of solutions. Breaking up the banks, stringent restrictions on trading activity, and most importantly, heavy taxation. These are the same solutions proposed (to a lesser degree) by most Democrats.

Not so sure your lower socio-economic thing is exactly true...Clinton appeals to the poorest group of them all (black voters) while Sanders handily won the Democrats Abroad electorate which tends to be wealthy people living elsewhere.

Sanders accurately assesses a lot of our problems and if you think he's way off, then why on earth would you vote for a Democrat in the first place?


it's the limitation of Sanders' view of the problems that gets me. i don't see any of his solutions as either realistic, in concept, or detailed, in execution. not even he knows how to "break up the banks." heavy taxation sounds nice, to some, but get that through Congress and not suffer heavy losses in the 2018 midterms.

your analysis of poor black voters and rich Americans abroad is pretty limited and rooted in stereotypes. the language he uses -- "millionaires and billionaires" -- is indeed pitched to appeal to lower socio-economic brackets, but those aren't the only people who would find that message resounding. there are many who make plenty of money who choose to ideologically align themselves with those below them in income -- is anyone more concerned with the working classes than academia? a lot of this is cultural positioning, and progressives playing more-progressive-than-thou. which can become really patronizing.

i think you're right that what Sanders is proposing isn't actually radical. many Democrats DO agree with him, they just think it needs to be implemented slowly, cautiously, and with specifics. there's not that much daylight, really, between Clinton and Sanders on policy, so what he's done is try to die her to, again, the "millionaires and billionaires" and the "Wall Street bankers" who, god forbid, have given her money. (they gave Obama money too).

this, more than anything, is what should give Democrats hope. whoever Wall Street backs tends to be who wins. they backed W, and then they backed Obama. we could argue for purity and assume that any politician with the support of Wall Street is the enemy, but then we'd never have had Barack Obama.

but, still.

John Kerry
Al Gore
Martha Coakley
Michael Dukakis

it's a terrifying list.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com