US Politics XIV: Vote for Pedro

[Irvine511]

yes, definitely, it's a distraction and a way to try to run against AOC in 2020 by tying her to Nancy Pelosi.

it's strategy, but i don't think it's a good one -- it comes at a cost. every time he goes full racist, more white women in suburbia will decide to stay home or vote Democrat. he's not trying to expand his base, he's trying to excite them so they show up ... but there's an equal and opposite reaction.

i don't want to be overly optimistic, but in a time of what seems like unstoppable economic momentum, an incumbent should sail to reelection. Trump is still more likely to lose than win.

i found this analysis interesting:

With 16 Months to go, Negative Partisanship Predicts the 2020 Presidential Election - Judy Ford Wason Center for Public Policy - Christopher Newport University

key analysis:

Barring a shock to the system, Democrats recapture the presidency. The leaking of the Trump campaign’s internal polling has somewhat softened the blow of this forecast, as that polling reaffirms what my model already knew: Trump’s 2016 path to the White House, which was the political equivalent of getting dealt a Royal Flush in poker, is probably not replicable in 2020 with an agitated Democratic electorate. And that is really bad news for Donald Trump because the Blue Wall of the Midwest was then, and is now, the ONLY viable path for Trump to win the White House.

[...]

Trump’s second problem is that along with a turnout surge of Democrats that in many states like Virginia is simply larger than the turnout surges of Republicans because of demographics, he is deeply unpopular among Independents because of all the abnormal, norm-breaking and according to the Mueller Report, even illegal things, he does as president. This has left him with , who largely broke against Republicans in the 2018 midterms as my theory predicted. In a follow-up piece to this forecast, I will show that much of this swing among Independents is actually the product of their own turnout surge, which brought more left-leaning Independents out to the polls by the same negative partisanship mechanisms that moved their partisan counterparts. This is why even the Democrat’s sharp drift to the left as they chase their party’s nomination, following the Republicans down the path of ideological polarization won’t have the impact on the vote choice of Independents Republicans are hoping for in 2018.

At the end of the day, Independents will be asked to weigh what Democrats might do against what Republicans, particularly Trump, are doing; the reverse situation from 2016 when Democrats suffered from the referendum effect among Independents. Even if the Democrat’s nominee is unabashedly liberal, it is not likely Trump can win a referendum among college-educated Independent voters without a dramatic transformation in both tone and style.

 

[Irvine511]

this analysis also alleviates some of my worries about the drift leftward ... i still think a bulletproof D nominee would be of the more moderate variety, and there absolutely must be a woman and/or minority on the ticket, but the above was nice to read.

 

[anitram]

this analysis also alleviates some of my worries about the drift leftward ... i still think a bulletproof D nominee would be of the more moderate variety, and there absolutely must be a woman and/or minority on the ticket, but the above was nice to read.

Who, in your view, of the candidates with a realistic shot of being the nominee, are of the "more moderate variety"? Does that not only leave us with Biden? Obviously Warren and Sanders are not it. I would say that Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg are probably a bit left of moderate (isn't he the only one actually talking about packing the SCOTUS?). But the only other more moderate candidates have no shot at all.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Everyone knows that Trump went full Klan just to get the Epstein connection out of the news, right?

And we all know why Trump had a falling out with Epstein 20 years ago, right? I mean, it's fairly obvious if you do the math...

Definitely. I'm also thinking this is a reaction to his failed attempt to get that citizenship question on the 2020 census. He blew that big gift to his base, so he's gotta still prove to them that he's in their corner and fighting against those "scary minorities".

As for 2020 predictions, I'm hesitant to get my hopes up, 'cause, well, 2016 and all. Especially when people are trying to make predictions this far out. But I'm all for any signs that the tide is turning against Trump where I can get them. And I do think that the Democrats have a good shot, regardless of how liberal or moderate they are, so long as they come out and make it clear what they actually stand for. Put that up against Trump's flailing and whining and the choice should be pretty clear to most voters at the end of the day.

 

[anitram]

NBC released some ancient videos from the 90s of Trump and Epstein having a great old time together at Mar-a-Lago. You know, the Epstein that Trump was "never a fan of".

 

[anitram]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...merican-offensive-partisan-divide/1748737001/

More than two-thirds of those aware of the controversy, 68%, called Trump's tweets offensive. Among Republicans alone, however, 57% said they agreed with tweets that told the congresswomen to go back to their "original" countries, and a third "strongly" agreed with them.

...

Three-fourths of the women polled called his tweets offensive.

Women will decide this election, one way or another.

 

[Irvine511]

Who, in your view, of the candidates with a realistic shot of being the nominee, are of the "more moderate variety"? Does that not only leave us with Biden? Obviously Warren and Sanders are not it. I would say that Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg are probably a bit left of moderate (isn't he the only one actually talking about packing the SCOTUS?). But the only other more moderate candidates have no shot at all.

it sort of depends on the issue, as some issues are more important than others.

for me, a "medicare for all" stance is, right now, a political loser -- 250m Americans have health insurance that they like a whole lot more than not having it, and the promise of something (maybe?) better is too much of a risk at this particular point in history. we know health care is a big reason why the D's cleaned house in 2018, i see no reason to screw up a big time winning issue with them.

the D's also badly need a coherent immigration policy. one that can't be framed as "open borders" -- especially when you're proposing giving health care to people who cross the line. this isn't so much what i personally believe and more what i believe to be politically smart.

it's an election that is going to be about fear, first and foremost. that's what Trump has and that's what he inspires in people. as i mentioned earlier, i don't think it's going to be enough, but i think lessening his ability to inspire fear on the biggest issues of the moment (health care, immigration) will help the candidate win the middle.

as i've said before, there isn't a left wing "base" in the way that there is a right wing "base." the left wins when it wins the middle, and it will by presenting reasonable solutions to real issues that affect people. most people in the middle are disgusted with Trump and find him personally embarrassing ... BUT they can't be scared into voting for him because someone is going to take away the health care that they feel reasonably good about. we are talking about winning reasonably comfortable suburban voters -- the people who show up on Tuesday.

i also think star power is a big deal. Hillary didn't have that. B. Clinton and Obama had that in spades. it's said that Democrats fall in love, and Republicans fall in line. the personal qualities are what captivates, voting for president is about solidifying one's cultural identity. what kind of person votes for candidate X? that's an important consideration.

if i had to name names, i'd say someone who falls between Biden and Warren, with Harris and Buttigeig seeming to fall in that space at the moment.

but it's early. positions are going to shift and evolve.

 

[Irvine511]

He blew that big gift to his base, so he's gotta still prove to them that he's in their corner and fighting against those "scary minorities".

he's not getting his wall, either. that's why he's imprisoning children.

other than tax cuts and judges, he has very little to show.

 

[anitram]

if i had to name names, i'd say someone who falls between Biden and Warren, with Harris and Buttigeig seeming to fall in that space at the moment.

but it's early. positions are going to shift and evolve.

For sure.

Buttigieg is DOA except as a VP candidate attached to a P candidate who can carry the minority vote. He literally polls almost zero with AAs, and without AA women, the Dems are done. I think in truth, Harris is his only hope with Warren his second best chance. Biden, if he makes it through the primary absolutely 100% has to pick a woman so he won't carry Buttigieg along with him. Bernie I think is done, but he also can't afford to bring Buttigieg along.

 

[BEAL]

I don’t think any of it matters any more. Seeing what this country has become (or always has been, just out in the open again) has left a lot of doubt that the Dems can organize and beat hate/fear

There’s nothing to secure the elections, and like all the previous elections it comes down to a few states.

Doesn’t matter if California has 400% turnout. It’s up to PA, WI, OH, FL

It’s going to take a monster effort that we’ve never seen before

 

[LuckyNumber7]

It’s only Wisconsin now because it wasn’t Wisconsin until 2016. Sort of like NC and VA before that.

Everything matters right now. Typically though, if Ohio falls, Florida falls, and the repubes win.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

This fucking monster won by threading a needle inside a needle.

It wasn't the rural vote, the white nationalist vote, or anything like that.

He won with the "both of these candidates are assholes so I'm voting for a change" vote.

With 4 years of seeing what we're seeing from him, if he wins again? We're fucked. It means hatred has once again become acceptable in the mainstream.

I shudder to think about what this man is capable of when he doesn't have to worry about reelection.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Everyone knows that Trump went full Klan just to get the Epstein connection out of the news, right?

And we all know why Trump had a falling out with Epstein 20 years ago, right? I mean, it's fairly obvious if you do the math...

The answer to #2, btw, is that Epstein came on to Ivanka.

Best buds don't steal each other's girl.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

I shudder to think what he’ll do if he doesn’t win re-election. Complain for 4 years about a conspiracy and run in 2024 as a more senile version of his current self.

 

[BEAL]

He’ll have his own show or tv network

Hell continue to hold events because it’s the best thing for his ego

 

[DaveC]

since when are people allowed to run for president or host tv shows from inside federal prison?

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

since when are people allowed to run for president or host tv shows from inside federal prison?

Yea things will get uglier over the next couple of years, regardless of who wins in 2020.

If Trump wins, he'll feel he has a mandate - as will the new Trumpian GOP. Who knows where that could take us.

If he loses, there are obvious federal charges he's facing. What will happen if we put this guy in jail? Will his base go quietly? Sure it's only 20-30% of the electorate, but that's a well armed 20-30%. We could see a return to the early 90s of Ruby Ridge / Oklahoma City.

My thought would be that if Trump loses, he resigns before January and Pence issues a blanket pardon for all federal crimes. It would then be up to New York.

 

[Irvine511]

There is a straight line between “lock her up” to “send her back” to “Jews will not replace us.”

That anti-Omar rally from last night is positively unnerving.

Genuinely worried about her safety.

 

[DaveC]

what a strange coincidence it is that all these aggressive trumpist chants just so happen to all have the word "HER" in the middle, isn't it?

 

[Hewson]

The answer to #2, btw, is that Epstein came on to Ivanka.

Best buds don't steal each other's girl.

But they should have reconciled once Ivanka reached 18 (or at least once Tiff reached 18) and was no longer on Epstein's radar.

 

[anitram]

what a strange coincidence it is that all these aggressive trumpist chants just so happen to all have the word "HER" in the middle, isn't it?

Somebody on FB posted a link to a Redstate article yesterday or the day before which was all about how shrill Elizabeth Warren is and how her voice grates as much as Hillary's but then made a grand point how this isn't a woman thing, it's just THIS particular woman. Sure enough one of the first comments was "hang on, Kamala Harris' voice is JUST as irritating." You can't make this shit up.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

what a strange coincidence it is that all these aggressive trumpist chants just so happen to all have the word "HER" in the middle, isn't it?

Yep. They flipped out over a black guy being president for eight years. The thought of him being followed by a woman president to boot? Well, they just couldn't dare have that!

We need to deliver the biggest "fuck you" to these racist, sexist assholes that we possibly can, not just in 2020, but beyond.

 

[Irvine511]

guys, Candace Owens thinks the "send her back" chants were totally not racist. so they aren't.

also, Donald Trump hired a black caterer and has an Asian woman of color in his cabinet.

remember these things before you toss around hurtful slurs like "racist."

thank you.

 

[DaveC]

[tweet]1151676594294935552[/tweet]

https://twitter.com/GoP__Botched/status/1151676594294935552

 

[Jerry Dunk]

Pelosi throwing the Squad under the bus at every opportunity, only to finally "have their back" (in the most insincere way possibel) once the president is openly lobbying to get Ilhan Omar killed, is a perfect encapsulation of moderation and its utter failure to ever deal with fascism.

Centrism is a fucking problem.

 

[DaveC]

Centrism is a fucking problem.

you are so right and one of my biggest regrets ever on this forum was getting angry at you when you first started saying this several years ago.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Dave the Apologist

 

[Vlad n U 2]

Pelosi throwing the Squad under the bus at every opportunity, only to finally "have their back" (in the most insincere way possibel) once the president is openly lobbying to get Ilhan Omar killed, is a perfect encapsulation of moderation and its utter failure to ever deal with fascism.

Centrism is a fucking problem.

you are so right and one of my biggest regrets ever on this forum was getting angry at you when you first started saying this several years ago.

Not much else to say, but . With supposed colleagues like Pelosi, you don't even need enemies.

 

[dazzledbylight]

Pretty sure “tonso wirh thr” is just phone typo for “to do with the” since every weird letter is next to a correct letter/n is close to the space bar in that.

Thanks. Forgot about possible typos.

this analysis also alleviates some of my worries about the drift leftward ... i still think a bulletproof D nominee would be of the more moderate variety, and there absolutely must be a woman and/or minority on the ticket, but the above was nice to read.

Thanks for the article quotes.

Definitely. I'm also thinking this is a reaction to his failed attempt to get that citizenship question on the 2020 census. He blew that big gift to his base, so he's gotta still prove to them that he's in their corner and fighting against those "scary minorities".

As for 2020 predictions, I'm hesitant to get my hopes up, 'cause, well, 2016 and all. Especially when people are trying to make predictions this far out. But I'm all for any signs that the tide is turning against Trump where I can get them. And I do think that the Democrats have a good shot, regardless of how liberal or moderate they are, so long as they come out and make it clear what they actually stand for. Put that up against Trump's flailing and whining and the choice should be pretty clear to most voters at the end of the day.

Ah, right, the citizen question.

Didn't occur to me about ivanka, epstein . Gak. May not like the her but - no, not that.

There is a straight line between “lock her up” to “send her back” to “Jews will not replace us.”

That anti-Omar rally from last night is positively unnerving.

Genuinely worried about her safety.

Gah, nasty, dangerous stuff. Concerned for "the squad".
Omar gave a great retort back.

what a strange coincidence it is that all these aggressive trumpist chants just so happen to all have the word "HER" in the middle, isn't it?

Ohhhh, did not occur to me
. And i just binged watched Season 1 of The Handmaiden's Tale. But then, again, i did read it when it can out originally.

Somebody on FB posted a link to a Redstate article yesterday or the day before which was all about how shrill Elizabeth Warren is and how her voice grates as much as Hillary's but then made a grand point how this isn't a woman thing, it's just THIS particular woman. Sure enough one of the first comments was "hang on, Kamala Harris' voice is JUST as irritating." You can't make this shit up.

Blargh, sexist pigs.

Yep. They flipped out over a black guy being president for eight years. The thought of him being followed by a woman president to boot? Well, they just couldn't dare have that!

We need to deliver the biggest "fuck you" to these racist, sexist assholes that we possibly can, not just in 2020, but beyond.

THIS!

Unless i'm terribly sick (hopefuly not, no obvious reasons ,currently) I'll do all I can to GOTV! And volunteer before election day. Both I've done in the past.

 

[dazzledbylight]

Oh, and BTW...


"You don't like it (America), you can leave" ?

Aaahhh- echoes of the "good ole days" of
"America, love it or leave it" in the Nixon Years.
From the hard hats etc to particularly Spiro Agnew (bleah).

Trust me, those times were about as crazee as these times. Was in my mid-teens and politically active.