- Boards
- Current Events
- Will Democrats be able to win back the Obama-Trump Rust Belt Democrat voters?
|
Topic - Results (50 votes)
Yes
64%
32
No
36%
18
With folks as of late labeling President Trump's supporters in a pigeonhole as vile racists after this past weekend's incident in Virginia, people cannot forgot those white voters that did help propel Trump to the White House happened to have voted for a black man twice and happened to be/have been lifelong Democrats.
Up the hammers & down the nails! https://rateyourmusic.com/~RoadsterUFO
|
|
I'd say at this point all Democrats would have to do is run a breathing candidate.
Aeris dies if she takes more damage than her current HP - Panthera
http://signavatar.com/26999_s.png |
|
BLAKUboy posted...
I'd say at this point all Democrats would have to do is run a breathing candidate. Even a cardboard cutout would win at this point.
I was a God, Valeria. I found it...beneath me. - Dr. Doom
http://i.imgur.com/9gYddqW.jpg |
|
Were_Wyrm posted...
BLAKUboy posted...I'd say at this point all Democrats would have to do is run a breathing candidate. Why is that? Hillary still couldn't win after grab them by the meow meow.
Up the hammers & down the nails! https://rateyourmusic.com/~RoadsterUFO
|
|
Democrats only real problem is if they can get their people to vote. Thus the more horrible Trump is, the better off they are, regardless of whether or not they run a bad candidate. It would be much better for them to run a good candidate, but the issue is the primaries. Democrats tend to hate each other after Primaries.
"I'm not racist but, BLM sure did make me racist." -Skasa
I'm just here to offer you advice, take it or leave it. |
|
BLAKUboy posted...
I'd say at this point all Democrats would have to do is run a breathing candidate. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they ran a candidate that literally wasn't breathing, DNC is corrupt and stupid as f***. If anyone can find a way to lose to Trump again...it's them.
I'm Mary Poppins y'all.
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/665/328/d75.gif |
|
RoadsterUFO posted...
Were_Wyrm posted...BLAKUboy posted...I'd say at this point all Democrats would have to do is run a breathing candidate. Because a cardboard cutout > Hillary
I was a God, Valeria. I found it...beneath me. - Dr. Doom
http://i.imgur.com/9gYddqW.jpg |
|
Democrat voters pretty clearly show up or don't show up based on an emotional reaction towards the candidates, whereas Republican voters are far more consistent. For example, compare the Democratic turnouts to a charismatic candidate like Obama versus ho-hum candidates like Hillary or John Kerry.
The Democrats need to run a candidate that excites its party, otherwise it has no chance. As ridiculous as it sounds, someone like The Rock probably is the best candidate they can field in 2020.
- The Admiral
|
|
Were_Wyrm posted...
Because a cardboard cutout > Hillary That's not untrue.
Aeris dies if she takes more damage than her current HP - Panthera
http://signavatar.com/26999_s.png |
|
Hillary lost a ton of union tadesmen Democrat support because she offered us literally nothing. I still voted for her but I know a large majority didn't. That was a huge blow for her considering how much support and money we usually give them.
~A little nonsense, now and then, is relished by the wisest men ~
TWSSted since~ 3/27/12 https://i.imgur.com/zlaENmx.png |
|
The Admiral posted...
Democrat voters pretty clearly show up or don't show up based on an emotional reaction towards the candidates, whereas Republican voters are far more consistent. For example, compare the Democratic turnouts a charismatic candidate like Obama versus ho-hum candidates like Hillary or John Kerry. The Rock is a registered Republican.
Up the hammers & down the nails! https://rateyourmusic.com/~RoadsterUFO
|
|
The Admiral posted...
Democrat voters pretty clearly show up or don't show up based on an emotional reaction towards the candidates, whereas Republican voters are far more consistent. For example, compare the Democratic turnouts a charismatic candidate like Obama versus ho-hum candidates like Hillary or John Kerry. Probably wouldn't vote if the Rock was our candidate. I want a boring politician whose expertise is policy and coalition building.
"I'm not racist but, BLM sure did make me racist." -Skasa
I'm just here to offer you advice, take it or leave it. |
|
Trigg3rH4ppy posted...
Hillary lost a ton of union tadesmen Democrat support because she offered us literally nothing. I still voted for her but I know a large majority didn't. That was a huge blow for her considering how much support and money we usually give them. I mean. She could have just lied to them and said she's bring back jobs via isolationism. But she wasn't going to do that, and neither would Trump or Bernie. (Bernie might try, but he'd fail).
"I'm not racist but, BLM sure did make me racist." -Skasa
I'm just here to offer you advice, take it or leave it. |
|
AdviceMan posted...
Trigg3rH4ppy posted...Hillary lost a ton of union tadesmen Democrat support because she offered us literally nothing. I still voted for her but I know a large majority didn't. That was a huge blow for her considering how much support and money we usually give them. Hillary had planned the largest job creation program since World War 2, with her guaranteed No-Fly Zone in Syria she would create countless jobs for the military with World War 3 against Russia.
Up the hammers & down the nails! https://rateyourmusic.com/~RoadsterUFO
|
|
Admiral's right, the dems need to have a candidate that excites them. if they run someone like Booker, I think that there's a solid chance at losing 2020 unless Trump loses his "grumbling holding their nose" votes
|
|
The dems could take the tact of running someone likeable and moderate, lots of republicans hated voting for Trump or voted third party in 2016, running someone like that could get some republicans to do a one time democrat vote to get rid of Trump.
I'm a lifelong republican that voted third party in 2016, but at this point I'd strongly consider voting for the democrat in 2020 if they aren't completely horrible. I can't be entirely alone in that feeling. >_>
--
- |
|
I think they can get the Rust Belt "Democrats" to vote for them in the next election, but I think that that is going to be a group that essentially switches allegiances every election. Trump hasn't (and doesn't seem like he is on his way too) helped out that region at all, so they'll go behind whoever promises them that THEY will be the ones to help the Rust Belt.
It's the problem with people who are primarily "anti-establishment" is that eventually the people you support become establishment. |
|
The Top Crusader posted...
The dems could take the tact of running someone likeable and moderate, lots of republicans hated voting for Trump or voted third party in 2016, running someone like that could get some republicans to do a one time democrat vote to get rid of Trump. The problem I have with this is that the Democrats have been running moderates for awhile. That's why Sanders had such raw support, he was further Left than many of us had expected from Democrats (his independent status, notwithstanding) For moderate Republican voters, a moderate Democrat is really just more of a centrist than a Democrat. And at that point, why would Democrats get behind a candidate like that? |
|
KarmaMuffin posted...
The Top Crusader posted...The dems could take the tact of running someone likeable and moderate, lots of republicans hated voting for Trump or voted third party in 2016, running someone like that could get some republicans to do a one time democrat vote to get rid of Trump. Democrats are fine with moderate democrats. Obama is a moderate democrat. Leftists are not.
"I'm not racist but, BLM sure did make me racist." -Skasa
I'm just here to offer you advice, take it or leave it. |
|
KarmaMuffin posted...
That's why Sanders had such raw support, he was further Left than many of us had expected from Democrats (his independent status, notwithstanding) Sanders got plenty of support from people who supported Trump, i.e. Rust Belt cultural conservatives who don't want trade deals and want programs that they believe help their region. Yes, he also got support from the far left who had more ideologically in common with him, but it's incorrect to act like there are large swaths of voters who vote Republican because no Democrat is far enough left for them. |
|
KarmaMuffin posted...
The Top Crusader posted...The dems could take the tact of running someone likeable and moderate, lots of republicans hated voting for Trump or voted third party in 2016, running someone like that could get some republicans to do a one time democrat vote to get rid of Trump. I lean libertarian, but I would've considered voting for Jim Webb only out of the candidates that ran for the Dem nomination. I would've voted for Rand Paul had he gotten the GOP nomination. If Gary Johnson wasn't on the ballot I would've left it blank. If I had a gun to my head, I'd only considering voting for Trump on the basis that Hillary's far more bat s*** crazy with how she wanted that No-Fly Zone in Syria. I dislike Trump, but I also dislike going into war with a country that has as many nuclear weapons as Russia does.
Up the hammers & down the nails! https://rateyourmusic.com/~RoadsterUFO
|
|
KarmaMuffin posted...
The Top Crusader posted...The dems could take the tact of running someone likeable and moderate, lots of republicans hated voting for Trump or voted third party in 2016, running someone like that could get some republicans to do a one time democrat vote to get rid of Trump. I'd definitely consider Hillary a moderate but her unlikeability was through the roof (or floor?). Obama had that "nice guy" appeal, although I have a hard time calling him entirely moderate, at least compared to the Clintons, which may not be saying much since Bill was practically a Republican in hindsight.
--
- |
|
Anteaterking posted...
Yes, he also got support from the far left who had more ideologically in common with him, but it's incorrect to act like there are large swaths of voters who vote Republican because no Democrat is far enough left for them. There are a whole bunch of people who stay home. Given the choice between "more of the same" and "this f***ing clown," they opt not to wait in line. Thousands of people in Michigan voted, but left the presidential choice blank.
kin to all that throbs
|
|
AdviceMan posted...
Democrats are fine with moderate democrats. Obama is a moderate democrat. Leftists are not. I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. What Democrats see as a moderate dem, i.e. Obama, they are fine with. A Republican typically does not see Obama as a moderate dem. Anteaterking posted... Yes, he also got support from the far left who had more ideologically in common with him, but it's incorrect to act like there are large swaths of voters who vote Republican because no Democrat is far enough left for them. I wasn't trying ti imply that. |
|
Antifar posted...
Anteaterking posted...Yes, he also got support from the far left who had more ideologically in common with him, but it's incorrect to act like there are large swaths of voters who vote Republican because no Democrat is far enough left for them. But are those Rust Belt Democrats or far left voters? |
|
The Top Crusader posted...
KarmaMuffin posted...The Top Crusader posted...The dems could take the tact of running someone likeable and moderate, lots of republicans hated voting for Trump or voted third party in 2016, running someone like that could get some republicans to do a one time democrat vote to get rid of Trump. Hillary is left of Obama. Bill might not be, would have to check that out, but Hillary is. Those Rust Belt Democrats did not support Bernie because he was really far left. They supported him because he was likable, and he said he'd do something for them with trade deals.
"I'm not racist but, BLM sure did make me racist." -Skasa
I'm just here to offer you advice, take it or leave it. |
|
Antifar posted...
There are a whole bunch of people who stay home. Given the choice between "more of the same" and "this f***ing clown," they opt not to wait in line. Thousands of people in Michigan voted, but left the presidential choice blank. I wonder how many of them would have voted for Clinton but chose not to assuming she'd win anyway admittedly this is anecdotal, but I have friends who chose not to vote because they felt their conscience couldn't take voting for Clinton, while admitting they hoped she'd win instead of Trump |
|
AdviceMan posted...
Bill might not be, would have to check that out, but Hillary is. it's also harder to compare the two given the time periods involved not just the 20 odd years between them, but also that Clinton basically turned the party around from the days of Carter |
|
Looking at how much of Trump support came down to identity politics, I think the Dems need to go with a traditional WASP-y looking white guy like an Eric Garcetti. Part of Hilary's loss is many people thinking she was a social move to force a woman into the white house. Uncomfortable to admit, but it was a big part of their dislike. If the Dems try and double down with someone like Kamala Harris, that could still torpedo them because there are racists/sexists everywhere, not just rustbelt/southern whites.
"Rest of league playing checkers, Chargers playing E-Sports." Drug_Smoker.
|
|
Antifar posted...
Anteaterking posted... Certainly, but it does affect how you approach the question of "How can we do better than Hillary in 2020?" Emulating the wrong part of Bernie's appeal at the expense of the other part is not necessarily a step in a better direction strategy wise. (To be clear, this is from a game theoretic perspective on it. I would prefer the party to move further left because I agree with those policies, not out of any calculus of electoral outcomes) |
|
Antifar posted...
Teen Girl Squad posted...If the Dems try and double down with someone like Kamala Harris, that could still torpedo them because there are racists/sexists everywhere, not just rustbelt/southern whites. To be fair, that was a different America. Alt-Right has been recruiting hard...
We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.
|
|
The Deadpool posted...
Antifar posted...Teen Girl Squad posted...If the Dems try and double down with someone like Kamala Harris, that could still torpedo them because there are racists/sexists everywhere, not just rustbelt/southern whites. I'm not saying that a female/nonwhite has no chance, but if I were a strategist, its clear that the race/sex/identity/gender SJW issues is a real, emotional thorn for a lot of people (even for dem voters) and thats not a battle I'm willing to fight if I can avoid it. Obama didn't magically fix race relations so I'm not trying to get social brownie points. No policy change is going to fix that. Rather, I try to take advantage of a weak GOP who has almost no one credible (they couldn't even field someone better than Trump). If you could swing it hard enough to get a Dem supermajority, then, unlike the incompetent GOP, you can ram-rod actual, solid legislation through and make real lasting change.
"Rest of league playing checkers, Chargers playing E-Sports." Drug_Smoker.
|
|
ZMythos posted...
Hillary was as "moderate" as they come. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/hillary_clinton/300022 |
|
ZMythos posted...
Hillary was as "moderate" as they come. Hillary was a progressive neocon. The worst of the left and the worst of the right into one candidate.
Up the hammers & down the nails! https://rateyourmusic.com/~RoadsterUFO
|
|
Teen Girl Squad posted...
I'm not saying that a female/nonwhite has no chance, but if I were a strategist, its clear that the race/sex/identity/gender SJW issues is a real, emotional thorn for a lot of people (even for dem voters) and thats not a battle I'm willing to fight if I can avoid it. I'm not saying you're wrong. But I don't believe in backing down from a fight just because it's hard. I'm not saying it has to be a non-white male. But I wouldn't try to force it to be a white male just because it'd make things easier. America is not supposed to be the country that does hunts because they're easy, remember?
We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.
|
|
Anteaterking posted...
ZMythos posted...Hillary was as "moderate" as they come. 2010 was a different political landscape from 2016.
We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.
|
|
The Deadpool posted...
Teen Girl Squad posted...I'm not saying that a female/nonwhite has no chance, but if I were a strategist, its clear that the race/sex/identity/gender SJW issues is a real, emotional thorn for a lot of people (even for dem voters) and thats not a battle I'm willing to fight if I can avoid it. That kind of thinking is why I dislike politics in many ways. Every two to four years everyone is trying to magically fix everything at once and fight for every justice they can think of. I'm a pragmatist. I want to chase big wins not likely to be overturned every few years. 'Easy' wins like legalizing MJ (lower crime rates, less drug crime, more tax revenue, more legal job revenue, less court congestion) and long terms wins (nationalizing health care/or some variant there of which is hard to repeal once instituted) rather than fighting ideological battles that will take generations to fully solve.
"Rest of league playing checkers, Chargers playing E-Sports." Drug_Smoker.
|
|
Teen Girl Squad posted...
The Deadpool posted...Teen Girl Squad posted...I'm not saying that a female/nonwhite has no chance, but if I were a strategist, its clear that the race/sex/identity/gender SJW issues is a real, emotional thorn for a lot of people (even for dem voters) and thats not a battle I'm willing to fight if I can avoid it. You say it like it's a zero-sum game. We need easy wins and long term wins and ideological battles to be fought. Progress in some of them may be incremental, but we shouldn't sacrifice one for the other.
We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.
|
|
The Deadpool posted...
Teen Girl Squad posted...The Deadpool posted...Teen Girl Squad posted...I'm not saying that a female/nonwhite has no chance, but if I were a strategist, its clear that the race/sex/identity/gender SJW issues is a real, emotional thorn for a lot of people (even for dem voters) and thats not a battle I'm willing to fight if I can avoid it. I agree. But in this current climate, I don't think this is the fight to fight. Ending the failed war on drugs and proper healthcare/cutting costs are moral issues as well but aren't the powderkeg this is. I'm just saying that the idea of running a candidate(s) with a primary selling point of "F trump, were here for progress" is potentially a poor strategy.
"Rest of league playing checkers, Chargers playing E-Sports." Drug_Smoker.
|
|
Teen Girl Squad posted...
"F trump, were here for progress" is potentially a poor strategy. Sure. You don't want the other person to be the focus of your campaign. But you implied you wanted them to lean towards a white male just to make the win easier... And I think that's the wrong way to go. You shouldn't waver on your ideals just to be more palatable. The Democratic Party agrees with you. Even Bernie God Damned Sanders think they need to let up on some of their ideals just to get people elected. First up seems to be abortions but who knows where they'll end... It's counter productive. Don't stand against something, stand FOR something. Be earnest and unapologetic about it.
We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.
|
- Boards
- Current Events
- Will Democrats be able to win back the Obama-Trump Rust Belt Democrat voters?
- Boards
- Current Events
- Will Democrats be able to win back the Obama-Trump Rust Belt Democrat voters?
The Deadpool posted...Teen Girl Squad posted...
"F trump, were here for progress" is potentially a poor strategy.
Sure. You don't want the other person to be the focus of your campaign.
But you implied you wanted them to lean towards a white male just to make the win easier... And I think that's the wrong way to go. You shouldn't waver on your ideals just to be more palatable.
The Democratic Party agrees with you. Even Bernie God Damned Sanders think they need to let up on some of their ideals just to get people elected. First up seems to be abortions but who knows where they'll end...
It's counter productive. Don't stand against something, stand FOR something. Be earnest and unapologetic about it.
Honestly, knowing a lot of conservatives, the only real issue they should compromise on is gun regulation. Short of maybe abortion, its easily the biggest single issue voter block with conservatives. A moderate "pro-gun" would be an almost unbeatable ticket. Given declining violence rates, even in pro-gun states, the negative externalize (a marginal increase in potential violence) would be offset by fewer people drawn to drug crime and bad healthcare. Tough thing is that weapon violence is so visceral that the left may not like it but I doubt they are going to swing votes to this GOP anytime soon. Heck sell it as anti-tyrant if you really want a dig. I'm no strategist."Rest of league playing checkers, Chargers playing E-Sports." Drug_Smoker.Democrats aren't anti-gun. That's just something the NRA tells people to scare them.
Obama was weaker on gun control than Bush Jr. Actually received extremely low grades on all aspects from gun control advocacy groups.
Democrats are in favor of some semblance of gun control, which most of the country agrees with it.We are living in a world today where lemonade is made from artificial flavors and furniture polish is made from real lemons.The Deadpool posted...Democrats aren't anti-gun. That's just something the NRA tells people to scare them.
Obama was weaker on gun control than Bush Jr. Actually received extremely low grades on all aspects from gun control advocacy groups.
Democrats are in favor of some semblance of gun control, which most of the country agrees with it.
But the perception exists, which is why you need to be "pro-gun" not just "weaker on gun control." Trump proved how much perception can overcome reality. Compromising on abortion is a fool's errand. The vast majority of pro-lifers are religious and like how they powerfully self-identifying with religion, they also are the core Republicans (capital R) at heart. They vote anything with an R next to it. A lot of 'conservatives' and 'libertarians' (aka not Republicans) who don't identify as strongly with the social parts of the party, are a little more flexible, and gun rights is big for them."Rest of league playing checkers, Chargers playing E-Sports." Drug_Smoker.- Boards
- Current Events
- Will Democrats be able to win back the Obama-Trump Rust Belt Democrat voters?
No comments:
Post a Comment