Originally posted by Snake Plissken
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Someone Has To Do It: US Elections 2020
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View PostLiterally whoever gets chosen from the massive field is going to be described by some people as an uninspiring turn-off who's not sufficiently left-wing/radical.
Comment
-
Richard Ojeda interests me. Military background, populist tendencies. Insanely, he voted for Trump in 2016 (!) which might give him leverage with some 'problem demographics' (angry old white guys); or it might lead to him being crucified. Probably the latter.
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Awesome Berbaslug!!! View PostThen people will start to blame you for not delivering change, so they all go and vote for a Proper Nazi, because Swing voters in american presidential elections are fucking idiots.
It would have given them an electoral majority for a generation.
Instead they went for Romneycare.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
From Taibbi:
The metric pundits usually employ is, “Which Democrat could most easily pass for a Republican?” and vice-versa.
“Electability” tends to come up most in election seasons when the incumbent president is violently unpopular with minority-party voters. This is why people should be cautious now. With Democratic voters so anguished by Trump’s presidency they’ll pick anyone they think is the best bet to win, be on the lookout for experts pretending to know the unknowable — how the broad mean of voters will behave nearly two years from now.
"Sure, I like Bernie's [or Kucinich, or any other left-wing candidate's] policies, but they just can't win in a general election."
The rules have been torn up. "Realistic" doesn't matter anymore. Respectability/civility politics don't matter anymore. The future of the fucking world is in the balance, and we'll probably all die horrible deaths in our lifetime anyway, but let's try to do something about it now so we have a chance of stopping that, and fuck with David Gergen thinks about it.
No establishment Democrat would have dared to suggest a 70% tax on income over $10 million. AOC said it, and guess what? 59% of people agree with her. 57% of Southerners, and even 45% of Republicans!
Ideas that would be considered "unrealistic" and too radical by the establishment Democratic party consistently poll well (including universal healthcare, long before Obama was president). The party just never has the guts to ever run on them. Instead they roll out their big policy ideas from a pre-negotiated, dull position. Look at Castro calling for free college--for two years only. I'm sure that would even have to be means tested with some godawful idea like you must take at least one coding class and you'll have to submit all of your essays to the Dept. of Education via turnitin.com so they make sure that you aren't plagiarizing your work. And we'll still see Democratic candidates who won't call for Medicare for All, but will talk about wanting to make "healthcare affordable and accesible to everyone."Last edited by Incandenza; 16-01-2019, 14:12.
Comment
-
Look at Castro calling for free college--for two years only.
So that's not even free for the first two years. The first two years should be "accessible and affordable". Does that mean he wants the final years to be inaccessible and unaffordable?
Comment
-
The electability thing means different things to different people, of course. But I get pretty animated when people try and fight the last election, and try and fight it on the Republicans' terms. When the sole focus becomes finding ways to win white, working class, non-college educated people in 4 rust-belt states who moved from Democrat to Republican in 2016. The idea that we have to find a candidate that appeals to this group of perhaps a million people at the expense of everyone else is an idea that drives me nuts.
So when I see Ojeda's name out there purely because he's a rust-belt populist who came close-ish in a West Virginia house election, it bothers me. Fortunately, Ojeda's going nowhere. The same for Buttegieg. Sherrod Brown's hypothetical candidacy (and he's on a tour of New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada, so it's not really that hypothetical) is based on exactly that metric, too: "He talks about workers, and he won in a rusty-belt state".
And, to a large extent, that's what's driving support for Biden, despite him being ancient, and despite the Anita Hill stuff. Uncle Joe Is From Scranton And Used To Get The Train remains the Biden pitch. He is supposedly the White Working Class Whisperer.
I've even heard a lot of Sanders talk based on the same thing. I think that's unfair on Sanders, whose pitch is much wider. But the media still focus on him as being able to win those working class whites, even though his support seems to come much more from millennials and the college educated.
I find this whole thing grating, and patronising, and impractical, and stupid.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Wouter D View Post
This statement is making my head hurt.
Comment
-
The electability thing means different things to different people, of course. But I get pretty animated when people try and fight the last election, and try and fight it on the Republicans' terms. When the sole focus becomes finding ways to win white, working class, non-college educated people in 4 rust-belt states who moved from Democrat to Republican in 2016. The idea that we have to find a candidate that appeals to this group of perhaps a million people at the expense of everyone else is an idea that drives me nuts.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
How about just having good policies rather than creating policies (or having candidates) theoretically aimed at one demographic. Why not assume that they're actually smart enough to support good policy, rather than assuming we have to pander to them in one way or another.
Comment
-
Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View PostHow about just having good policies rather than creating policies (or having candidates) theoretically aimed at one demographic. Why not assume that they're actually smart enough to support good policy, rather than assuming we have to pander to them in one way or another.
Comment
-
There's also the fact that a significant majority of the Americans who anyone from the rest of the world would identify as "working class" a) would never self-identify as such and b) have been voting against their economic interests for decades.
The first half of that is even true for people of colour, who comprise a majority of that population.
And what SB said in each of his last two posts.
Comment
-
Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View PostHow about just having good policies rather than creating policies (or having candidates) theoretically aimed at one demographic. Why not assume that they're actually smart enough to support good policy, rather than assuming we have to pander to them in one way or another.
Comment
-
That one from Hawai'i is not going to win.
(And this, and the other thread is back to normal. Thanks. Where's the thread for minor glitches?)
*Found it.Last edited by Gerontophile; 16-01-2019, 17:13.
Comment
Comment