That it’s not just latinos or Orthodox Jews.
So you’re saying that somehow validates Trump? (Cuz I see it more instead as a lot of groups of people being less excited about Clinton than they were about Obama).
Fox News was telling them that liberals were telling them that.
8 Likes
I agree with you, I’m not really sure how I gave a different impression. The surprise to me, and to I imagine the polls, is that people don’t come out to vote against regressive social issues (and voting against regressive social issues is a lot different than voting for progressive social issues).
1 Like
This is true, but it’s also Monday-morning-quarterbacking, “well, she shoulda done this…”
You say that as if it’s a bad thing to figure out what went wrong so as to avoid future mistakes. A lot of people could see the problems with Clinton, but the dem establishment insisted on ramming her through and screwing Sanders. Let’s fight now for real progressive pols and policies, and get away from what so many Trump voters saw as elitist, out-of-touch power-grabbing.
As for polls, a lot of the error is attributable to people being shamed into staying quiet about disdain for Clinton/support for Trump. Many said one thing to pollsters and did another thing in the voting booth. The mistake of that counterproductive blame is on the Dem establishment and Clinton.
4 Likes
The DNC is to blame for why the Democrats lost, however there was enough people not voting that anyone else could have won if they actually voted (in unison for this hypothetical). Trump winning 50% the vote is a lot different than 25.1%
The mistake is blaming those people who didn’t vote for Hillary not being president.
I’m kicking dirt over nothing. When I say racism absolutely played a role, that’s what I mean.
Did I say that? I didn’t even mean to imply that, because I don’t believe it.
I do face them. I face them more than you know. I’m a disabled man of ambiguous sexual orientation, so I’m not exactly welcoming a Trump presidency. The reasons I just barely voted for Hillary is that I don’t think she does enough for progressive issues, whether they affect me personally or not. I was less of a third party this election than most, because I clearly wanted Trump to lose, but didn’t feel like playing the Lesser Of Two Evils game unless I absolutely had to. And I absolutely had to.
It matters the most. I voted for him in the primary. Saying he is my candidate of choice is an understatement. He represents my values, and would have had a better chance of beating Trump.
My “holier than thou lecturing” could have saved a lot of people a lot of trouble had the right people heard it. Hillary Clinton, who is basically a limousine liberal without the liberal, was the wrong choice for nomination, and would only alienate people. It turns out she did. Not that it matters, because the next Democratic nominee will also be a neoliberal Republican-lite who will only give people like me what we want if some rich person coincidentally decides to lobby for it. People like me are invisible to people like them.
Are you serious?!? I was the guy who literally got laughed out of the room when I asked about gay marriage at a Democratic Party event in 2004. Yes Democratic, yes 2004, and yes they thought I was crazy for bringing the subject up. They are the ones who need to move forward, not me.
I have been voting third party for the past 20 years. The Democratic Party is far right as far as I’m concerned, and I would only vote for them to prevent a fascistic madman from being elected from the other side. Besides, what’s wrong with voting for a third party unless I’m catered to? That’s democracy! My grandparents came to this country during WWII so i could do precisely that. Do you want me to vote for a party that’s working against my best interests, and that thinks people like me don’t deserve equal rights?
3 Likes
Don’t blame us! Black folks overwhelmingly voted in our self interest. It’s white women who didn’t.
2 Likes
Presently we have no politics of class solidarity. As a consequence, the politics of ethno-nationalism replace them. But there are no politics that can combat ethno-nationalism but the politics of class solidarity. There are none but a politics that countenances rage and accept the plain truth that America is Not Already Great and that America is not wholly good. To merely wish away this rage is the politics of oughts. To merely condemn its most vulgar elements is the politics of failure. Either we can affirm the dignity of all people or we can leave them to the seduction of demagoguery. We must tell them that they have been misled, been turned against their brothers and sisters by those who would rather see us fight amongst ourselves than fight against the powerful, or we must consign ourselves to the barbarism that Donald Trump has brought us.
4 Likes
I don’t expect you to accept it. It is a problem.
Same as me, which is why I don’t pay attention to the news actors or news comedians, why I show up at the polls to vote the bums out and to vote good local people in in the state-level races. These objectionable people should be ignored and ignored hard.
I’m not laying the blame at your feet. I never intended to do so. I’m not trying to make this about you or about any other individual in particular. I’m very sorry for taking it out on you.
2 Likes
Fair point. I don’t want this to ever happen again, and that’s what I’m concerned with at the moment, but first we’re going to have to dig ourselves out from this mess, starting before it does.
It won’t be histrionic exaggeration in hindsight, I can promise you that much.
That’s just my default setting right now. Apologies, trying and failing to keep it down.
3 Likes
4 Likes
Not at all, I agree it’s better to know why it went wrong.
I’m not sure there is any way to prove this was that big a factor. It seems logical but is also borderline conspiracy stuff if it occurred on such a huge scale. I would guess it’s more likely statistical margin error: 2% in swing states could mean +2 for Trump and -2 for Clinton (and Trump won NC and PA by less than 100,000, and MI by only around 12,000 votes.)
3 Likes
People who use motte-and-bailey arguments. You can have a middle class income and still be worried for your livelihood (especially if you’re in a rural area). People will vote for their interests, or for nobody if nobody appeals to their interests. “America is already great” is not an inspiring slogan if you’re used to politicians ignoring you. Following up with “I’m with her” is similarly tone deaf from that perspective.
4 Likes
We are all hurting here. Can we come together and figure this out rather than take it out on each other. I enjoy your comments here and it would be nice if we could try and understand each other rather than talking past each other.[quote=“LearnedCoward, post:90, topic:89213”]
That’s just my default setting right now. Apologies, trying and failing to keep it down.
[/quote]
I understand that impulse, because you’re angry. But we got to rise above here and not hurt each other in the process.
6 Likes
Sorry for talking past you.
6 Likes
It’s okay. I am sorry if I was also talking past you. I appreciate your contributions here and I hope that you’re feeling okay (as can be expected).
7 Likes
Thank you, I’ll be fine. I hope you’re feeling okay too.
4 Likes
16 Likes
America isn’t already great, either. It just doesn’t suck as bad as it could. I’m not okay with the Obama/Clinton status quo, and would change a lot about it if I could… but I’d change it forward, not back.
Exactly this. It should be “She’s With Me”, not “I’m With Her”.
6 Likes
