Good germans. The moment HRC has the nomination Red State will be all in for Trump and so wil the rest of them.
— John Cole (@Johngcole) March 3, 2016
Texas Lt. gov just said he and all good Republicans will support Trump if he wins. They’ll fall in line, I’m telling you.
Good Germans.
— John Cole (@Johngcole) March 2, 2016
By the way, I predict that even if Mr. Trump is the nominee, pundits and others who claim to be thoughtful conservatives will stroke their chins and declare, after a great show of careful deliberation, that he’s the better choice given Hillary’s character flaws, or something. And self-proclaimed centrists will still find a way to claim that the sides are equally bad. But both acts will look especially strained.
Google Kubler-Ross, peeps. Anyone who thinks this election is going to see enormous Republican cross-over for Hillary or Bernie to protest Trump needs their fucking head examine.
BruceFromOhio
But my unicorns promised rainbows. DID THEY LIE?
Miesekatze
Is there any blogger who spends more time yelling at his readers than Cole does?
JMG
Clinton doesn’t need a wave of crossover votes. A wave of stay-at-homes or Republicans who blank the Presidential election on their ballots will suit her book nicely.
Baud
Agree. Crossover votes are a plus, but nothing we should rely on.
MattF
I agree, OCD will prevail among the ‘undecided’. I remember, back in the day, I asked a DC journalist why the Clintons were always on the receiving end of such venom. He just shrugged.
WarMunchkin
This is such a shitshow. I want Obama forever.
John Cole
@Miesekatze: This wasn’t directed at you all, but all the people on twitter.
LAO
My dad is a major Republican — his hatred for Hillary (and he really hates her — Benghazi!!!!!) is only surpassed by his hatred of Trump. He will stay home. That is the best we can hope for I think.
Cervantes
Absolutely. The corporate media will be scrupulously fair and balanced, and as for conservative politicians and bloviators, what else are they gonna do? Of course they’ll all fall in line. Christie is just prescient, and his reward will be appointment as Secretary of Assholishness. Dump’s VP candidate will be Mitt Romney.
EconWatcher
Not sure you’re right, especially if you’re saying Trump could keep all factions of the W Bush coalition on board. Trump has been mixing in some unacceptable liberal themes, along with the racism and xenophobia, and this is the primaries. It would not be a surprise for him to attack Hillary from the left on a number of issues in the general. What will the wingnuts do then?
Moreover, with the possible exception of his enthusiastic support for torture, Trump hasn’t offered anything to the neocon wing. In fact, if I were a neocon, I’d support Hillary against Trump (it’s one of the reasons while the real me doesn’t like Hillary). I don’t see how Trump keeps the neocons on board. One–Kagan–has already officially jumped, and certainly Frum will too. Loss of neocons is a big deal.
LAO
@John Cole: I noticed, you’ve been pretty feisty on twitter the past week or so. I’m enjoying it.
Edited: Spelling is hard
JustRuss
As one of my conservative friends pointed out, Hilary’s a lying crook(according to Fox News), and Bernie’s a self-avowed socialist. Republicans will vote for any shit sandwich that wins the nomination, because no matter how bad he is, the Democrat, by definition, is worse.
Mnemosyne
This is my mantra: I don’t really care who the Democratic nominee is. I think they would both do a better job as president than anyone on the Republican side.
We need to GOTV for the general election, not because we fear the Republicans winning, but because we want to stomp them. Run up the score. Humiliate them with the size of their defeat. I want an Obama vs Keyes-like result this fall, and I’m willing to work my ass off for it. Who’s with me?
Cermet
I agree – the thugs will line up the second their betters yell for them to line up; not Germans so much as obedient but too inbreed dogs. Hillary is everything they hate except, maybe, a black man …oh, wait. WE just saw that in action. John, how in the hell did you ever manage to learn to think for yourself and escape that crazy cult?
singfoom
Nice to see Krugthulu calling out the racists straight on. I don’t think that crossover votes are going to matter either, but I don’t think they’re going to line up. Given the history of this election season, anything, really anything can happen.
I predict physical scuffles on the floor of the Republican convention involving Trump supporters and those of the other primary candidates. And most likely violence outside the convention involving Trump supporters and people protesting Trump.
Most likely Trump will march onto the stage of the convention to some Richard Wagner or Herbert Windt.
benw
@JMG: IMO neither Clinton nor Sanders needs cross-over votes or hypothetical ‘independents’ breaking toward them. I think the party that wins the general will do it by mobilizing their base. I really hope the Democrats don’t give in to the inevitable calls to run to the ‘middle’ (wherever that is) and ‘court the independents’ by meeting the crazy-ass right-wing ‘halfway.’ Fuck that noise. GOTFV!
ETA @Mnemosyne: looks like I’m with you!
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Cervantes: Welcome back stranger!
Cheers,
Scott.
Big Ol Hound
If Trump becomes president then we west coast blue states will leave the USA and become the nation of Sequoia and open our doors to all who voted a straight democratic ticket. The rest can go fuck themselves.
Brachiator
Funny, but true. I did not watch the GOP debate (too sane for that), but I listened to interviews with Southern California Republicans who watched the debate.
All of them said that there were no circumstances under which they would vote for Hillary.
Oddly enough, a couple said they would look at Sanders. But this was not enthusiastic interest.
However, back in 2008, public records showed that there were some moderate Republican women who donated to HRC’s campaign. If HRC gets the nomination, there may be some interesting gender gap reflections in the final vote
TheBuyjaysus
That was the culmination of last nights debate — after Cruz and Rubio spent their portion of the 2 hours claiming Drumpf was a con-artist, closeted liberal, lying liar, they both agreed to support him if he wins the nomination.
What’s wrong with these individuals who have to sign oaths all the time to “keep in line?”
Norquisling’s tax pledge also come to mind. And, celibacy pledges that their evangelical teenagers sign.
Good Germans indeed. Hitler comparisons are shrill, but I think we are all getting a better idea of what that dynamic actually looked like in 20’s and 30’s Germany.
Humboldtblue
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of people.
Baud
OT: Kudos to this MoJo headline writer.
Rob in CT
The best we can hope for is a few Republican voters with a semi-functional sense of decency stay home (or vote 3rd party, or write in, same thing really). Actually voting D? For HITLERY???? Hahahahahaha. There will be like 10 people who do it.
muddy
@Baud: Pulls out? That’s not manly! (h/t Carlin)
Arm The Homeless
@Miesekatze:
Not many, but it’s far preferable to anything the seizure-prone hedgehog that types your bon mots, creates.
So there is that…
Cervantes
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: I’m probably not the Cervantes you’re thinking of. There was an impostor here for a long time.
divF
@muddy: He’s denying them his essence.
Humboldtblue
@Big Ol Hound:
Be careful for what you ask for, we in the West Coast Blue States have a lot of red-colored critters out there in them woods
sheldon vogt
republicans will have to support trump in the end. it’s the politically correct thing to do.
sigaba
Rubio was on NPR this morning saying basically, Trump is the worst thing to ever happen to this country and he’d make a disasterous president, but I’m going to support him if he wins the nomination, because Hillary Clinton is an unthinkable abomination.
And as the host kept trying to get him to square his complete repudiation of Trump with his eventual support for him, and that it was completely crazy for him to support someone if he really believes all the things he’s said about him, Rubio’s response basically amounted to “I know it’s totally crazy what I’m saying! But that’s just how terrible Hillary will be.”
Eric U.
Trump may peel off some more republicans that think David Brooks is representative of the party. You can only suffer self-delusion for so long.
pamelabrown53
@John Cole: I agree with you John. Republicans have long stopped putting country first. There’s no such thing as too much raw sewage in the cesspool.
raven
@Cervantes: Is that like The Raven on the Hill?
LAO
@muddy: But it is Christian.
C.V. Danes
Exactly. I have a feeling that this election will fought as a lukewarm civil war. Brother against brother and all that. It would be worse if Bernie was the Dem candidate, because he and Trump are political polar opposites. But in wingnutville there’s little that separates Hillary and Bernie, and from the left Trump might as well be the Antichrist.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Cervantes: Oh. Ok. Well, welcome back anyway (if you’ve been away. If not, well, I’ll just say – have a nice day! ;-).
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who thinks it’s crazy that FYWP seems to allow users to have (nearly) identical ‘nyms.)
dedc79
Granted, I don’t know a whole lot of republicans, and of the ones I do know, i’m only comfortable talking politics with a subset. But out of that group, all but one are horrified/embarrassed by Trump and swear they’d never vote for him.
I’m not even going to try to convince any of them to vote for Hillary, because they’ll never be persuaded. If they don’t show up at the polls, that’s good enough.
Mr. Twister
The only people surprised by this would the MSM and the villagers. We saw last night that no matter how much they say they hate the short fingered vulgarian they hate a Democrat more.
Jeffro
@sigaba:
What I wouldn’t give for a reporter/radio host/talking head to ask Rubio (or any of the R candidates, really): “What is it about Hillary Clinton that you’re so terrified of? What is she proposing that is so off the rails crazy you’re afraid for this country?”
(Bonus points if the reporter notes that the GOP was saying the same thing about Obamacare, and the economy’s done great while adding jobs and drastically reducing the % of uninsured, etc etc)
Enhanced Voting Techinques
@TheBuyjaysus:
It’s remarkably how many people forget Germany had emperors from Charlmane until 1918.
C.V. Danes
@JMG: My concern is that Hillary will tack right to try and pick up some of these votes and, in doing so would disenfranchise the lefties. Best case is the Republicans stay home and the Dems come out strong. What we don’t want is both sides staying home.
JMG
On that arch-bastion of batshit Republicanism, CNBC, this morning I heard one of its talking heads saying many big business executives are disturbed at the economic prospect of Trump because like everybody else they have no idea what he’d do. If the donor class doesn’t donate as much to Trump, if campaign surrogates make fewer (or no) appearances on his behalf, if endangered Senate and House candidates don’t show at his rallies, their pledged “support” for him doesn’t mean much.
Just One More Canuck
@Baud: don’t you think that’s premature?
qwerty42
I think I saw a link to this on Wonkette
A dictionary. All are from Republicans (or former Republicans)
http://dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/3279/The-Rights-Trump-Lexicon.aspx
Just Some Fuckhead
@Miesekatze:
Because every damn one of them is hard of hearing.
LAO
Slightly off topic — but Trump related. Who else here hates Bobby Jindal? http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/jindal-obama-caused-trump-by-being-too-mature.html
redshirt
@LAO: My father is precisely the same. He even said he might vote for Biden if he were to run. That’s a previously heretical thought.
He certainly won’t vote for Clinton or Sanders, but he said he won’t vote for Trump if he’s the nominee. Good enough for me.
I hope there’s enough voters like this to cancel out any phenomena of new voters voting for Trump because he’ll burn it all down.
beltane
Just in, Trump will be a no-show at CPAC, and will be holding a rally in Wichita, KS instead.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
This was always going to be the case the moment Trump’s slam on McCain didn’t move the needle downward. The Republicans have always been who we think they are, and now it’s whatever Trump says they are, which is basically racist authoritarian morons. At least now they’re not pretending they’re not, or able to keep the mask from slipping once in a while. By November we’ll have had quite a good look at them, and it won’t be pretty.
PaulW
I still argue for every Democrat and every left-leaning independent voter still get the damn vote out, not just for the Presidential race to stop Trump for certain this November, but because the Senate seats are important this election, if not MORE IMPORTANT than the Presidential election this year. The Senate’s refusal to even consider a SCOTUS nominee is a clear shot across the bow for Dems and progressives to STAND UP and vote more honest Senators into office who will do their damn jobs.
Baud
@C.V. Danes:
My concern is that she’ll have to do that because enough lefties will follow up on threats not to support her if she’s the nominee.
Humboldtblue
HANK THE DOG IS NOT DEAD AND HE HAS NOT BEEN REPLACED BY A SCRUFFY, FLUFFY, IMPOSTOR.
REPEAT — HANK THE DOG IS NOT DEAD
note — there was speculation that Hank the Dog, a stray who became the mascot of the Milwaukee Brewers after showing up at a spring training field, had died and been surreptitiously replaced with a look-a-like.
Mary
I agree that we won’t see enormous Republican crossover, but there will be some. I have a very large extended family of devout Catholics who, although they are truly moderate on a lot of issues, have traditionally voted Republican. Some of them might just stay home on election day, but I think most of them will vote for Hillary. These are the type of people who viewed (incorrectly, in my view) GWB and Romney as moderate conservatives who were fit for Presidential office. They definitely do not think that about Trump, and while Hillary is almost certainly too liberal for them, I predict that they still believe she is at least up to the task. In short, I think there are people who value a candidate’s competence level as much as, if not more than, their place their views on specific issues.
Of course, statistics show that this group of people is quite small, but I feel confident that they will break for Hillary.
Jeffro
@dedc79:
Funny, it’s not really data but among my R family and friends, most all of them plan on holding their nose and vote for Trump. What is it they’re so terrified of?
– 12/16 straight years of D rule (and by a black guy and a woman, no less)?
– the fact that Hillz has been vilified by the right for over two decades and might be looking for payback?
– impending majority-minority status?
– all of the above?
Jeffro
@beltane: Wichita, hmm? Home & HQ of the Koch Brothers? How intriguing…
john fremont
@Brachiator: The gundementalists and the pro lifers will in no way crossover to vote for Hillary Clinton no matter how loathsome Trump is. I have friends and relatives already saying that on their Facebook feeds.
RareSanity
@Miesekatze:
Dunno…but I see it as going to see Chris Rock or Lewis Black do stand-up. The anger is what makes it funny.
Spinoza is my Co-pilot
Republican crossover? Not hardly. Fascists will lockstep line up with the fascist nominee (who will, of course, be Trump) like good little fascists always do, whatever handwringing is happening now. Cole and Krugman have it exactly right. And I’ll go further than that — more votes will be cast for Trump in November than Romney received in November 2012.
The crossover I am concerned about is the white conservaDem (and mostly male) vote going to Trump. This will be significant in November, I think, and make for a very tight race. Damn I hope I’m wrong and Hillary blows him away but that’s not how I see this incredible Trump phenomenon right now.
Archon
@Brachiator: The most myopic, irrational people in this country are Republicans from Southern California.
redshirt
@redshirt: Just for reference, my father cancelled christmas in 2012 after Obama’s re-election because he didn’t want to be around “us” people. And now he says he won’t vote for Trump.
He’s a Cruz supporter, btw. Ug.
beltane
@Jeffro: Everything about this is intriguing. Apparently, Trump decided to skip CPAC when he learned that Cruz supporters were going to stage a walk-out of his speech, not because he is a racist but because he is not a True Conservative.
dww44
@Mnemosyne: I totally agree that it’s about the GOTV operation and I’m with you. We need an Obama level boots on the ground operation here just like there was in 2008 and to a bit lesser degree in 2012, since my red state wasn’t on the likely to vote Dem list in 2012.
redshirt
@Spinoza is my Co-pilot: I can imagine some Republican women crossover for Clinton. Can’t imagine too many men.
Mr. Twister
@Baud: Exactly, I know it’s anecdotal but lots of comments sections show that this will be the case. I think Trump has a decent chance. I guess I’ll just say that the conventional wisdom that Bernie makes the race better for Democrats may not turn out to be the case.
LAO
Trump is ill-informed, untested and a pathological liar — Nobody knows what he will do as president. That, on its own, should be disqualifying. I’m at the point of becoming unhinged — people are actual voting for him and believe he will do a better job than Hillary. It is possible that I will spend the next 8 months in a cave without internet because this is a nightmare and I walk around suppressing the urge to punch Trump supporters in the face.
Calouste
@Baud: Did they know he was even in yet?
LAO
@redshirt: LOL — my dad is not that bad — we had Hannukah that year — but he did turn his hearing aids off. (Between my mom and me, he always turns them off).
Anoniminous
@Jeffro:
It’s the most populous city in the state, thus the city with the most votes.
Frankensteinbeck
I don’t expect significant crossover votes. I don’t expect a mass defection or breakup of the Republican Party. I do expect lackluster GOP turnout, especially compared to the racist freakout of the Obama years. More importantly, I expect the low levels of support the GOP gets from Hispanics to drop to AA levels of support. I’m not placing money on it, but together that creates a real possibility of a Democratic wave election, and we should campaign our butts off in the hopes of getting it.
TheBuhJaysus
@Enhanced Voting Techinques:
Obviously, the Kaiser wasn’t that far in the rear view mirror. I referring to the perception by German intellectuals and others that Hitler was some kind of buffoon, much like the perception of Trump, while millions embraced his rhetoric and supported the idea of making Germany Great Again.
Mike J
Trump will need 70% of the white male vote.
Reagan got 63%. Romney got 62%.
Calouste
@Mr. Twister: There is a lot of damage that can be done to Sanders’ favorables that the Republicans haven’t been doing yet on purpose, and won’t be doing unless he gets the nomination.
MattF
@LAO: I can’t find a link to it just now, but my understanding is that David Axelrod has a similar theory, that 2016 voters will react against the cool and competence of the past eight years. If so, we’re pretty doomed.
Brachiator
@TheBuyjaysus:
Don’t you expect equal loyalty from Sanders supporters if Hillary wins the nomination?
@JMG
Trump ain’t no FDR, but he is coming across as a traitor to his fellow plutocrats. They are very unhappy that he is upsetting their apple cart. This is why the fools sent Romney out to bash him.
Ampersand
I have to say…I live in a red state, and I’m seeing a lot of hatred for Trump. Among those I know on the right, it’s split down the middle, with people either loving him or hating him. Most of my family is conservative, and I really don’t think they’ll vote for him. They really, really hate Hillary, but Trump is equally antithetical to what they believe. They’re horrified by what’s happening. I hesitate to get too optimistic, but, if Trump ends up being the candidate, I think that a decent percentage of the right will either stay home or vote for an “establishment” third party candidate (assuming that one can get on the ballot in a decent number of states). And if there are hijinks at the convention, it could get even better (from our point of view).
Just Some Fuckhead
You know who else conservatives fell in line behind, right?
Chyron HR
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Hillary?
mclaren
There will be enormous Republican cross-over for Hillary to protest Trump
John Cole is ignorant on this point and utterly totally completely 100% wrong.
Read it now, believe it in November when it happens.
Anoniminous
@Baud:
The members of the Socialist Worker’s Party and Communist Party were never going to vote for Hillary. The other refusniks are buried in the statistical noise, just like the PUMA Hillary dead-enders in ’08 they don’t matter.
qwerty42
@Enhanced Voting Techinques: It’s remarkably how many people forget Germany had emperors from Charlmane until 1918.
Holy Roman Empire until 1804 (?). Austrian Empire until 1867 and Austro-Hungarian Empire until 1918 (well, a “regency” in Hungary under Admiral Horthy until the end of WW2).
(Why yes, I did work on Central Europe a long time ago. Why do you ask?)
redshirt
@Just Some Fuckhead: R-Money?
Baud
@Anoniminous: I think so too, but we’ll see.
mark
Great post John. And anyone who thinks “I can’t wait until Hillz crushes Trumps in the dabate!” is a moron. She will but it won’t matter. The media is owned by Good Germans if not Nazi’s
Brachiator
@Mike J:
Not quite true. This article is averaging the national vote, which is lazy and irrelevant.
But that there may be a gender gap is very important. White males tend to vote more conservative, and if Trump is the GOP nominee, this may exacerbate this tendency.
Peale
@EconWatcher: how is it a big deal? The neocons are idea me and women who take think tank and academic position when they are out of power and advisory positions when they are in power. But if there were more than 200 of them, I’d be shocked. Are they all wealthy?
Cheap Jim, formerly Cheap Jim
@Enhanced Voting Techinques: Surely Napoleon Bonaparte forced the Empire to disband in 1806, seeing as how He occupied most of it, won at Austerlitz, and forced the Emperor to give up the crown to retain Austria.
the Conster, la Citoyenne
@Mike J:
That’s a whole lot of white guys to draw from. If only 10% of those white guys started voting for their economic self interest instead of their racial animus, that would make all the difference. All of you white guys need to talk to each other, because frankly, the rest of us are sick of this shit, and at 80+% of non-white non-males consistently voting Dem, we’re pretty much tapped out on our end.
TheBuhJaysus
@Brachiator:
I don’t think Bernie or HRC has tried to paint the other as throughly unqualified to hold the office of POTUS. That is the message coming from the #NeverTrump movement.
Turgidson
@EconWatcher:
Is it? There’s only a few dozen of them worldwide and they all live near the Beltway. Bloody Bill WRONG Kristol’s beloved Weekly Standard has a readership that could fit in a 2 car garage and he and his flunkie won’t be influencing any voters to do anything. The frightful mess the neocons have made of everything they’ve touched is one reason (of many) for Trump’s rise, I think.
Joe Falco
I’m not sure what the RSers are going to do if Trump gets the R nomination. They just go on and on and on that Trump is some kind of liberal Democrat who probably made a deal with the Clintons. And that if only Rubio would graciously drop out and join forces with Cruz then the combined powers of Cruzman and the Rube Wonder will take out Orange Face and the Hilddler once and for all.*
*(With Carson promised a cabinet position in HHS because sure, why not?)
Archon
@Mike J: I have nominally liberal white male friends who are already giving me the, “I’ll vote for Hillary over Trump but…” routine. They are gonna spend the next 8 months looking for an excuse, any excuse to vote for Donald Trump.
So I’d be surprised if Trump won 70 percent of the white male vote but I wouldn’t be shocked.
Anoniminous
@Mike J:
In short: Not Gonna Happen.
Plus, Obama won women by 12 points and Hillary will tack another 2 to 4 percent onto that. Women were 53% of the voters in 2012 and Hillary should amp that up a couple of percentage points as well. Hillary should get an increase in percentage and actual votes over Obama’s 2012 numbers.
Hillary isn’t a shoo-in but she definitely has a major advantage over any GOP candidate.
pamelabrown53
@Spinoza is my Co-pilot:
If the “white conservadem vote didn’t cross over (in large enough numbers) to vote against President Obama (2x) then why would it be different for Hillary?
Napoleon
They don’t need to vote for Hillary. Remember, mathematically 2 of their voters sitting out an election because they just can not vote for Trump = one switching. I am willing to bet they have at lease several percentage (say 2-5%) sit
Brachiator
@Frankensteinbeck:
It’s really to early to predict much of anything about turnout levels. However, if Trump is the nominee, you want to watch to see if enthusiasm for him continues.
Possible. But a large number of Latino voters are young, and young people tend to be harder to get to vote unless they are strongly motivated. Let’s see what the Democrats do to stoke the fires.
redshirt
I’m willing to bet substantial money Clinton is our next President.
That said, I agree with John in general that if Trump is the nominee, most of the R-clowns now protesting Trump will fall right in line. Look at the act by Christie and extrapolate.
It will be fascinating to watch Fox news go 180 and be full on Trump once there’s no turning back. You know they’ll do it too.
C.V. Danes
@Baud: There might be some of that, but at the end of the day I think a combination of Trump hatred and peer pressure will negate that.
sigaba
@qwerty42: But Germany wasn’t a part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. Between the Napoleonic Wars and the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian War Germany was an agglomeration of principalities and city-states vaguely lead by Prussia: the German Confederation. There was only a German Empire and German emperor after the 1870s.
Brachiator
@Ampersand:
This is interesting. Here in Southern California, I hear a lot of Trump enthusiasm. Maybe they are just louder. Some Republicans reacting to this last debate noted that they would never vote for Trump.
On the other hand, every conservative caller to a local talk radio station after Romney’s recent speech strongly defended Trump and blasted Romney.
Origuy
@Anoniminous: This is significant because Nebraska (along with Maine) is not winner-take-all in the Electoral College. Wichita’s congressional district went for Obama in 2008, giving him one of its five electoral votes.
LAO
@MattF: Ok. Now, I’m depressed enough to start drinking, Thanks Obama!
C.V. Danes
@mclaren:
Is that something we want? They might vote for Hillary, but they’re also going to be pulling the lever for their downticket Republican Neanderthal. I’d much rather they just stay home.
sigaba
@Brachiator: I live in Cal but I am blessed to rarely see any Republicans of any kind. It makes sense that Trump would be attractive to California Republicans– these are the same people who thought Arnold Schwarzenegger was a pretty good idea, and who have never repudiated or even considered revising their support of Prop 187.
Trump is the sort of Republican you vote for if you have the view that liberals run everything, and you have no sense of what a responsible Republican politician is supposed to look like. And in California this is literally the case. Democrats are responsible for everything that goes right and wrong in California because Republicans have been in internal exile ever since the mid 1990s and they constructed an entire governing strategy around holding 33%+1 state senate seats to stop any tax increases, because this was all they had and it was the only mandate they could extract from their supporters. And when that finally fell through they had nothing.
California could be the future of the US.
Calouste
@qwerty42: The Holy Roman Empire was disbanded by Napoleon in 1806. and it’s not like the Holy Roman Emperor had any control over the larger states that made up the HRE anyway (except Austria, because the Duke of Austria was also always the HREmperor from the 17th century), and only a little over the smaller ones. What is now Germany didn’t have an Emperor between 1806 and 1871.
And IIRC the HRE didn’t have an Emperor (properly crowned and anointed by the Pope) since Charles V, only an Emperor-Elect.
Mnemosyne
@Napoleon:
This. We don’t need them to cross over as long as they stay home instead.
LAO
@mclaren:
Anoniminous
@Origuy:
Slip of the mind there, you are thinking of Lincoln Nebraska. Wichita is in Kansas.
ETA: heigh ho, ho-hai, it’s back to work go I ..
WaterGirl
@Miesekatze: That’s part of Cole’s charm! I wouldn’t have it any other way. If you want to talk about authentic, we get authentic Cole, all the time. I love that and wish more people were that way.
C.V. Danes
@Archon:
And every time they say that crap, you need to look at them like the crazy idiots they are for spouting that crap.
jl
No time to read all the comments. But I’m not sure what action items Cole’s post is supposed to produce.
What does Cole mean by ‘huge’?
Democrats don’t need ‘huge’ using the common sense definition, they just need to get a bigger than average cross-over as a safety margin to swing the election. Seems safe to say that US presidential elections are almost always won at the margins. So, Democrats should try to cage every extra cross-over vote they can if Trump wins, based on the whole raft of unique Trump negatives.
Would be the same if either Rubio or Cruz wins, since both have a larger than average raft of unique negatives too.
TheBuhJaysus
I was kinda shocked last night when Chris Wallace starting throwing up graphics depicting the Medicare budget of 78B and Trumps claim of 300B worth of savings by negotiating drug prices.
I wish they would have done something similar to both Rubio’s and Cruz’s tax plans.
Cruz and his choice cut of red meat in the form of abolishing the IRS. At that point I would’ve loved to have shut down all the lights and put a spotlight on Ted and asked him how he was going to continue to fund our military?
LAO
@TheBuhJaysus: It was a hit job. You don’t actually expect Fox to fact check the “acceptable republicans.”
hamletta
@Origuy: Wichita is in Kansas, not Nebraska.
Brachiator
@john fremont:
This makes sense. But will they vote for Trump, with his loosey goosey statements about Planned Parenthood?
@Archon:
Funny! I’m not sure that I agree, but I am not going to vigorously defend Southern California Republicans.
WaterGirl
@raven: Yeah, that other guy’s a carpetbagger. :-)
beltane
@Brachiator: From what I’m seeing on the crazy parts of Twitter, Trump is unpopular with the Tea Party and other movement conservatives, but revered by what has been until now the “silent majority” of no and low-info Republican leaning voters. It goes to show that the Tea Party was never truly the populist conservative movement the media sold it as. The dynamics of this are completely unlike anything I’ve seen before. I really have no idea what to expect.
Glenn Beck, meanwhile, is at CPAC saying he’d like to stab Trump to death. Crazy times.
sigaba
@TheBuhJaysus: My understanding of Cruz’s plan is that he is going to abolish the IRS and replace it with an agency that does exactly the same thing but is staffed exclusively with conservative activists and has its regulations written by the Hertiage Foundation.
pamelabrown53
@Calouste: The fact that Bernie hasn’t been vetted and republicans are making sure they don’t do it is the main reason I am more pro-Hillary than “it doesn’t matter.
Plus, despite Bernie’s important contributions to the national discussion, I don’t see that he has the range of knowledge which confers both gravitas and competence.
I’m opening myself for a shitload of criticism by mentioning something so trivial but I just can’t see Jane Sanders as first lady. Somehow she doesn’t strike me as the second coming of Eleanor Roosevelt.
Elie
While it is always good to prepare for a tight race all the way, I do not believe it will be tight. I believe Hillary is going to slaughter Trump and we will also benefit in some down ticket races. It will be a catastrophe for the GOP. That said, the clean up will be very difficult for this country. A lot of damage has been and is being done and the Trumpites will still be furious and oppositional — so will be lots of deep work to do.
quakerinabasement
There must be a pony here somewhere…ah HA!
If Trump is elected, we’ll be able to enjoy the spectacle of an all-time low approval rating for an American president. It might even go low enough to make Congress look popular by comparison.
Hungry Joe
If even two percent of every-time GOP voters sit this one out because of Trump, that’d be — how did we used to spell that word? — huge.
Poopyman
@mclaren: Well, there you have it. You can take it to the bank.
Near-zero crossover for Hillary.
Origuy
@Anoniminous: Sigh. Thank you. TGIF.
Baud
@Elie: I like your comment best.
Elie
@pamelabrown53:
She has not received the scrutiny that she would if Bernie was chosen. She and Bernie would have no idea — it would hit them like a ton of bricks never having had that sort of malicious scrutiny. They are not battle hardened like the Clintons have had to become…
beltane
@TheBuhJaysus: I wish the media made it a regular practice to scrutinize statements made by Republican candidates the way Fox did last night. That is what they should have been doing to everyone all along. The fact that they chose this one time to “do their job” tells us they see their real job as assisting in the right-wing propaganda war against knowledge and sanity. Fuck them all.
Bob In Portland
The two latest favorability polls, from mid-February, show Clinton as -21 and -15 and Sanders is, I believe, +15 and +9.
Despite the unanimity of Clinton supporters here at BJ most Americans don’t like Hillary. And the only candidate who has lower favorability ratings is Trump, and his are changing quickly for the better. Must be his dick jokes.
Since Hillary seems to be tied or losing against Rubio or Cruz I guess the Clinton supporters should be rooting for Trump.
Or, again, maybe those statistics don’t matter either.
Keith G
I think it is too early to tell.
If Donald Trump wins the nomination and if he does some type of crawl back to an impersonation of reasonableness, then he will keep more of the Republican voters at home.
On the other hand, if Trump really and truly can’t help himself and he doubles down on his Trumpness, then I foresee some cross over voting in support of Hillary as a way to keep an unrepentantly dangerous man away from the Oval Office.
C.V. Danes
@jl:
Do they? I don’t think they need any crossover at all. I think they just need to get the people who associate with the Democrats to get their collective asses off their couches and vote.
TheBuhJaysus
@sigaba:
That’s right, with nothing but checks stapled to postcards.
Kay
@beltane:
It’s fascinating.
The fix is in! :)
Brachiator
@Anoniminous:
Actually, the question is how Clinton will do with white women voters, not all women voters.
She will also have to pull Obama like numbers with young women.
Linnaeus
@Enhanced Voting Techinques:
The Holy Roman Empire, though, wasn’t very centralized – the emperor had limited authority and the many, many subunits of the HRE exercised considerable autonomy.
Elie
@Baud:
I am very worried about the “after”… as much as winning (which of course is the first level of importance). Our country will be a while emerging from this. Maybe some new leadership for our broken hearts and spirit will emerge? We can only hope, Baud.
Turgidson
@redshirt:
Indeed, I think Rupert has already tweeted words to this effect.
John D.
@Bob In Portland: So I asked you this in the previous thread when you posted this, but you must have not seen it. So I’ll ask again.
If the favorability numbers are useful predictors of electoral success, how is Clinton leading Sanders by 50% in pledged delegates with much worse favorability numbers?
MattF
Trump has, apparently, backed off asserting that he would order the military to violate international law. This, of course, means he’s antagonizing his base.
Bob In Portland
@C.V. Danes: Because the moribund Clinton excites the voters.
Eric U.
@MattF: his base doesn’t care. Who knows what it would take to antagonize them.
WaterGirl
If we try to game this out.. we need these voters or those voters and this % will cross over this way and that % will cross over that way… then I think we’re screwed.
Obama won Iowa in 2008 because he brought in more voters than expected. As I understand it, Hillary met her goal numbers, but when you change the total N of voters, meeting your goals are irrelevant.
We have to try to get the maximum number of people to the polls, and for that we need people to understand what’s really at stake. So I hope there’s a lot more focus on message and not so much gaming of which kinds of voters we need. What we need is people who will show up and vote.
beltane
@Kay: Very smart to place control of the convention in the hands of a representative of the candidate who hates primary voters.
Somewhere, John Boehner is smiling, enjoying a drink and saying “Thank God I’m not involved in this crap.”
Poopyman
@MattF: Flip-flopper.
pamelabrown53
@Elie:
True. But neither had President Obama nor Michelle. Yet both withstood the onslaught with grace, dignity and intelligence. I have zero confidence that Bernie and spouse have the skill set coupled with the gravitas.
redshirt
@Elie: We can’t do anything about the “after”. All we can control in some small regards is the election.
We all know what the “after” will be like when Hillary wins anyways: A completely obstructive Republican party, a compliant media, and a bunch of ill-informed citizens convinced “both sides do it”.
schrodinger's cat
Totally OT:
Hindi movies are totally knocking my socks off.
First there was the Bajirao Mastani in December, then Aligarh about the ousted Marathi professor who successfully sued his employer after being fired because he was gay and now Neerja. A biopic about the flight attendant of the high jacked PanAm flight who died saving the lives of passengers. She received India highest civilian award, Ashoka Chakra, she was the youngest person and the first woman to get it. She was killed a few days before her 23 birthday.
I am not someone who usually cries at movies but this song from Neerja brought tears to my eyes.Must call mom tomorrow.
ET
While I am sure there are some Republican politicians and voters that will not vote for Trump, many of them have been weaned on the Clinton hate and that may be too strong to combat the Trump hate and either vote for Hillary or just stay silent or at home on election day. Also, many Republican voters like/respond to the “strong” boss/father figure that tells them what to do and makes them feel comfortable and will vote for Trump because they feel he give him that. Only turnout and voter counts in November will tell us anything. Until that point it is all political posturing and hot air.
FlipYrWhig
@Bob In Portland: Terry McAuliffe won the governorship of Virginia. Not by the scintillating personality of being Terry McAuliffe–erstwhile nemesis of the liberal blogosphere–but by a slog of hard work. “Exciting the voters” is highly overrated to begin with. Add to that that polling in fact _does_ suggest there are such things as passionate Hillary Clinton supporters.
redshirt
@pamelabrown53: I heard some bad dirt about Mrs. Sanders this past week. Not good First Spouse material at all.
Miss Bianca
@Kay:
ooohh…you think there’s going to be some Katherine Harris-type ratfvcking with the Republican convention getting thrown to Kasich?
C.V. Danes
@pamelabrown53:
Bernie’s job right now is to keep the heat turned up on Hillary’s left flank until such a time as Warren can come in and broker a settlement. The longer he can keep the heat dialed up, the better the bargaining position will be going into the convention. He gets to claim victory for moving Clinton to the left, and Clinton gets to go into the general with Sanders and Warren behind her.
Will some die-hard lefties be pissed and sit out the election? Sure. But the majority will follow Sanders and support Clinton as long as he gets an honerable way out and she sticks to the deal.
Napoleon
Here is my dilemma living here in Cleveland. I was going to take the week the RNC is in town and go on vacation, but now I am wondering if it will be more entertaining to hang around and watch the dumpster fire that is the Republican party roll into town.
japa21
@MattF: Nah. His base just knows he has to do that to mollify some non-true conservatives. They know he really means what he said and what he is saying now is just cover and he doesn’t mean it unless he does mean it which means he didn’t mean what he said before, but they don’t really think he means it…and about this time their heads explode.
C.V. Danes
@Bob In Portland: No, because Clinton is more likely to motivate them than capture any Republican.
Ampersand
@Brachiator:
As I said, I’m surrounded by conservatives. I’m noticing two key things that indicate whether they’re pro-Trump or anti-Trump: age and religion.
Those who are retired, or approaching retirement, want a nice, gentlemanly establishment candidate who won’t rock the boat too much (for people like them, anyway). They tend to support Rubio. A nice young man that will protect certain types of people while shooting/blowing up others. These people are more secular (relatively speaking). Meanwhile, the younger “seculars” are pro-Trump, because they feel like they can’t win in the current system. The older ones have something to protect, so they want stability, and the younger ones have either given up or are willing to try a desperate Hail Mary pass. I find the cutoff to be around 50 or so. The under-fifty Gen Xers are more likely to be pro-Trump, while the Boomers are more likely to be anti-.
Meanwhile, the religious tend to support Cruz more. This is true of both older and (relatively) younger, but it mainly applies to family types. They don’t think that Trump is a good moral example/family man. Young single guys are all about Trump, while young-but-married middle-class/almost middle-class guys support Cruz. Some of the more successful/optimistic ones support Rubio, but most of these are fundies, and they prefer Cruz.
I’m surrounded by these people every day, and I have many examples in my own family. Older, nervous people that want Rubio to be Dubya 2.0, and more religious, nuclear-family types that want Cruz to make America holy again.
Again, maybe I’m being too optimistic, but I think that a few percent from both of these groups could stay home on election day, which would be major.
Bob In Portland
@John D.: The numbers are there, at real clear politics, although there’s a new poll from March 2, a direct poll between Clinton and Trump which puts her at +5. Can’t remember if it was nationwide or just in Michigan.
How do I explain it, besides that there are still 35 states to vote and the South is more conservative (like BJ) and more tightly organized by the party?
I guess that people in America will vote for who they hate. And surprisingly, they don’t hate Cruz or Rubio as much as they hate Hillary.
beltane
Trump’s giving a rally in Michigan right now. He’s touting himself as a “common sense conservative” who is going to make corporations who outsource pay their share in taxes. He mentions Romney and the crowd jeers and boos.
This is so bizarre, part Mussolini and part Occupy Wall Street.
FlipYrWhig
@pamelabrown53:
OK, I’ll do the same. I admit it: I have enormous difficulty picturing Bernie Sanders as the person who addresses the nation after a terrorist attack or natural disaster. The absent-minded professor affect and the accent and the repetitiveness and the impatience… it’s not working for me. I can see him as a very strong cabinet member giving advice and picking an interesting staff to piece together new policies. I cannot see him handling the public face of the job.
MattF
@japa21: As in The Princess Bride poison routine.
Actually, I agree with you– Trump’s back-and-forth over David Duke and the KKK shows his way of dealing with these situations.
Citizen_X
@sigaba:
Sure, I just cursed him,
and this is craaazzyy,
but Clinton scares me,
so vote Trump maybe!
TheBuhJaysus
@beltane:
“This is so bizarre, part Mussolini and part Occupy Wall Street.”
And all real estate developer/used car salesman bullshit.
Rubio’s line about TheDonald hawking watches in Manhattan has been one of my favorite so far.
Brachiator
@beltane:
I think a number of people (including a few rare smart journalists) that the Tea Party was a phony organization meant to channel conservative unhappiness.
This does not mean that the unhappiness was not real.
The Trump lovers took the Tea Party promises seriously, and now want to punish the entire GOP for not giving them what they wanted. They also ate up all the Obama hatred that the GOP fed them.
They are not mollified by Romney. If anything, this has made them angrier. I don’t expect these people to run to the Democrats, but I have no idea what they might do if the Republicans broker the convention and dump Trump.
Elie
The multi-culti pluralism that the US had been able to kinda keep in place may be irreparably broken by the convergence of social media and our terrible media need to exploit hate and anger as a means of entertainment. This will be no easy task to figure out how to do and we may not be able to put humpty dumpty back together again — not the way it was.
redshirt
@FlipYrWhig: I’m not ashamed to admit it. Perception matters. Looks matter. Bernie doesn’t have that. He’s smart and honest and got integrity but that’s not enough to be President.
Bob In Portland
@C.V. Danes: Like she’s motivated them to come out to the polls? Oh, yeah, that doesn’t count either.
There are lots of people out there who do not like or trust Hillary, and it’s not because of Vince Foster. They don’t believe that someone who’s had somewhere between two and three billion dollars pass from the 1% to her, her hubby and their foundations may not be independent of that money. They think that Hillary will half-step when it comes to college costs, social security, more jobs, single-payer and any other number of issues.
Also, she half-lies, and that’s worse than lying. For example, the circumstances around the Commodities Futures Modernization Act. If you didn’t know the circumstances or the authors it wouldn’t bother you. But there are people who do. Also, hard to take her concerns about guns seriously when she’s part of the chain that arms ISIS. You can read up on the last here: http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/01/30/clinton-system-donor-machine-2016-election/
Kay
@Miss Bianca:
Oh, God no, I have no idea. It came from the (surprisingly robust) “we hate Kasich” group of Republicans on the internet.
He expanded Medicaid. They won’t forgive that. They’re also making fun of his “aw shucks” thing because he was in Congress for so long, and I agree with that criticism. It’s phony.
schrodinger's cat
I am not going to worry about things I cannot control, like who the low info voters will vote for. I am going to do what I can, to see that the Dem nominee get elected.
John D.
@Bob In Portland: Or, y’know, you could apply Occam’s Razor and accept that favorability numbers are not particularly good predictors of an election. Go take a look at the 1988, 1992, and 2004 elections, for example. (Dukakis +18, Bush -1 // Bush -3, Clinton -11 // Kerry +1, Bush -1)
But hey, you keep on keeping on, you crazy diamond. Maybe someday someone will believe your bullshit.
beltane
@Brachiator: It’s as though they now regard Romney the same way we do, except with the added revulsion of betrayal. The Trump supporters are like North Korea; they listen to no one and respect no one. They would even boo zombie Reagan.
Bob In Portland
Also, @C.V. Danes: Also, read this after you read the NYROB article:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/whos-funding-isis-wealthy-gulf-angel-investors-officials-say-n208006
Elie
@redshirt:
That is of course, one scenario. The other is of ongoing unrest and mini, violent civil wars in different regions of the country. Needing to quell such an instance would require different tactics unless they want to completely “go to the mattresses” — which I don’t think is their goal. Nope — I certainly don’t have a crystal ball but we need to be mindful that things might not just pick up where they left off, so to speak.
Paul in KY
@Ampersand: Sorry you have that bunch around you.
Bob In Portland
@John D.: Actually, that’s what I said, that maybe people vote for who they hate.
Keep whistlin’ “Dixie” and keep punching hippies.
Also, not my bullshit. Real Clear Politics bullshit.
benw
@redshirt:
It’s enough to get my vote, though. All that’s enough to be President is to get the votes (exception: Bush/2000).
FlipYrWhig
@Bob In Portland:
There are “lots of people” who believe all kinds of things. There are lots of people who think they’ve had an experience with an angel. The problem comes when you take one clump of people and decide their opinions really matter because you assume the size of their “lot” is much bigger than it is. And that’s what you’re doing.
SFAW
@LAO:
All of us, Katie.
Iowa Old Lady
@schrodinger’s cat: Me too. I can’t see that worrying about it changes a single thing.
Brachiator
@Ampersand:
Interesting breakdowns. So far, Rubio has not won much of anything. It will be interesting to see how he does come March 15.
In the end, the GOP will focus on hating Hillary more than ever, and will use this to try to get out the vote, no matter who the candidate might be. And both sides will dangle the importance of the Supreme Court.
This might impel some who might otherwise stay home to come out and cast a reluctant vote for the Republican candidate.
Bob In Portland
@FlipYrWhig: Well then I guess it’s settled. Time to go back and discuss MH 17 and why Kerry won’t release his information? It’s been a year and a half now.
redshirt
@Elie: The multi-cultural society you think existed prior to Trump never existed, except for people of European background. That’s relatively new, but then, no one’s proposing we kick out the Irish.
Whereas on the ground, it is happening with Africans, Latinos, and Asians, and Trump supporters can’t stop that. They can bitch all they want.
Need proof? Barack Hussein Obama.
Kylroy
@the Conster, la Citoyenne: This may shock you, but there are not in fact meetings of all white males where we determine our votes en masse. The closest thing we have would be Republican primaries, and I’m pretty sure any white males here aren’t part of them.
redshirt
@benw: Cool. Hope you vote for Clinton in the General.
Miss Bianca
@Napoleon:
Was it not your nymsake who said, “When your enemy is making a mistake, never stop laughing and eating popcorn?” Something like that, anyway…
Elie
Did y’all read and notice the mini fights in the audience of the Republican debate last night among the Trump and other supporters? They are leading their supporters to a dark place that you cannot always undo easily. We have observed this in many countries and watched it spin out of control. You cannot assume it won’t happen here. Rather than trying to defeat Trump by attacking him over and over, why not begin to call on him to take responsibility for what he is fomenting in the people who follow him? That to me should be a big part of what he is taken to task for and not just by the other candidates, but all media. He should be given the yoke of responsibility for this going forward…
Bob In Portland
@FlipYrWhig: Not “believe”, Flip. “Like”.
Unless you’re saying that people believe they don’t like Clinton, in which case I guess you guys can help her campaign by punching a few hippies and disregarding people under 30. Yeah, tell them to stay home. That’s the ticket.
pamelabrown53
@C.V. Danes:
Well as long long as Bernie “keeps up” the left flank’s heat, we have no quibble. I just hope he’s up to the task of party unification the way Hillary was with President Obama’s nomination, if Hillary wins.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: How old are you, Bob?
WereBear
I will take that any day, and thrice on a certain Tuesday.
Miss Bianca
@Kay:
Well, I have to say that Gov. Kasich scares me worse than any of the other Republican candidates out there right now. Just because he has that veneer of measure and sense that might, just might, make him look reasonable to the general electorate, even if it makes him rat poison to a certain portion of his fellows.
benw
@redshirt: I would get a broom and sweep the broken glass out of my way to vote for a Democrat in the general.
SANDERS/CLEANLINESS 2016
Enzymer
@LAO:
Oh yeah, I’ve hated Bobby for more than 20 years. The destruction of the Louisiana hospital system & grifting of the fragments to his friends is quite enough…
Rommie
Yep, until they prove otherwise. And it will be *glorious* to watch them defend Big Donald.
Bob In Portland
@FlipYrWhig: Also, I referred to Quinniapac and The Economist polls, both in mid-February. So it’s not that a majority of Americans believe in angels and don’t like Hillary. A majority of Americans don’t like Hillary. The one clump of people were two nationwide polls.
But John D. says it’s bullshit and people vote for who they hate. So punch some hippies and tell them they’re stupid and they’re wrong to not love Hillary. Good luck.
John D.
@Bob In Portland: The bullshit isn’t RCP — I totally believe they have a poll that has those favorability numbers.
I just don’t believe that it means anything useful. Otherwise we’d have had President Dukakis and President Kerry. Since that never happened, I put much less faith in those numbers than you do. I strongly suspect you do too, but are too much of an intellectual coward to stop building bullshit narratives after being called on them.
Brachiator
@beltane:
Good summation.
I don’t know if this rage can be contained. The Romney attack was strange. And utterly ignorant of who his audience was. He was suggesting that some obscenely wealthy plutocrats were more worthy than others. And although Trump’s retort was rambling and ugly, he got straight to the heart of it by noting how bullshit Romney’s 47 percent dismissal was.
I don’t think I have ever seen a more worthless “defense” of Republican values by a Republican in my life. And Romney reminded me of those old animatronic figures in the old Disneyland house of presidents or whatever.
pamelabrown53
@beltane:
“This is bizarre, part Mussolini and part Occupy Wall Street” is why I fear populism. It’s all about appealing to the mob and how they’re wronged. Once the mob is unleashed, results can be catastrophic.
redshirt
@benw: Me too. I hope we all are when it comes time to cast that vote, regardless of the passions of the primaries.
jl
@C.V. Danes:
” But the majority will follow Sanders and support Clinton as long as he gets an honerable way out and she sticks to the deal. ”
If Sanders is a man of his word, he has been announcing the honorable way out, which is that he will wage his political revolution if he does get the nomination. That waging a political revolution is as important to him as the nomination has been a standard part of his stump speech. So, both sides have had a very clear road map for quite a whle on how to unite after the convention. Should be pretty easy.
Sanders will return to a majority Senate in a nice influential position if the election goes Democratic, so he has an incentive to cut a good deal. We have to hope that is what happens. If HRC and Sanders can bring in Warren to vouch for it, that would be enough to bring in almost all of Sanders supporters. Except maybe the Sanders doofus fanboys typing screeds and insults, but probably quite a few of them are operatives from other side anyway)
C.V. Danes
@pamelabrown53: Bernie’s a good soldier. I don’t doubt that he will when the time comes.
LAO
@Bob In Portland: But John D. says it’s bullshit and people vote for who they hate. So punch some hippies and tell them they’re stupid and they’re wrong to not love Hillary
I’m not going to say that it is bullshit. But I know a lot of democrats who do not like Hillary but are committed to voting for her. Democrats that, by the way, don’t like Sanders because he comes across as naive and one-note. So I do think that people vote for people they don’t like because the alternative is worse. (Not Sanders — the republicans).
FlipYrWhig
@Bob In Portland: No no, Bob, that’s not what you were saying. You were attributing dislike for Clinton to something something Clinton Foundation Commodity Futures Modernization Act. What do you think is the number of people who know about those things and then, knowing them, care about those things? That has nothing to do with the grand reason(s) why people dislike Hillary Clinton, which is twofold. Republicans dislike Hillary Clinton because they think she’s a ball-busting feminist. Lefties dislike Hillary Clinton because they thought Bill was a Democrat-in-Name-Only, and because she voted in favor of the Iraq War. Some of them will never get over that. How many of them are there? “Lots.” Probably thousands. Still many, many, many too few to be concerned about.
glory b
OT and I don’t know if this ahs been mentioned, but the washington post (can’t link) has an article saying that a deputy chief immigration judge (responsible for training new judges) testified that he has successfully taught 3 and 4 year olds enough immigration law for them to adequately defend themselves in court.
This is part of a lawsuit by ACLU for free attorneys in immigration hearings. The ACLU lawyer said he did a double take because he was sure the judge misheard him or that he misheard the judge.
Enzymer
@Origuy:
Umm, Witchita is in Kansas…. You’re thinking Omaha.
jl
@John D.:
” I just don’t believe that [a favorability poll] means anything useful. ”
Agreed there. They just roughly indicate whether a candidate has some public perception problem today, from what the public knows today, still 8 months out from the election. Head to head national polls don’t mean much more. None of the candidates are really fully vetted yet (the press does a miserable job, just look at Trump), and most of the voting public hasn’t absorbed most of it. And it is before the back and forth of campaign attacks and responses that will only happen at the height of the election battle.
John D.
@Bob In Portland: I’m not punching any hippies, calling them stupid, or telling them they are wrong not to love Hillary.
I’ll call you stupid though. Free of charge. I’ve not said the numbers are bullshit. I’ve said your argument is bullshit. Try to improve your reading comprehension.
My thesis is as follows: Favorability numbers are poor predictors of electoral success. My evidence is the 1988, 1992 and 2004 elections. Your argument is apparently that Clinton’s favorability numbers render her unelectable. Trump has worse favorability numbers than Clinton, yet those two are massively favored to be the nominees in November. Who are people going to vote for, then, that they like? Sanders will not be one of the options, sad to say.
FlipYrWhig
@redshirt: I’d be curious to know that, too. Because it seems to me that a very large proportion — call it “lots” — of the Bernie Sanders phenomenon is made up of people my age and older (I’m 44) excitedly affiliating with The Youth Today. It’s the political equivalent of shopping in the Young Men’s section.
C.V. Danes
@Elie: We are quite a way away from open rebellion, and when it happens it will not be motivated by politics so much as anger caused by climate change induced mass migration. 25 million people from Florida alone will be abandoning their property over the next rew decades, and they will not be happy.
Jeffro
@beltane:
Yeah, the Cruz campaign is doing its part by hammering this “not a TC” bit relentlessly. It’s all they’ve got at this point.
I’ve been saying it’ll be roughly a 3-way tie come this July in Cleveland. Yeesh, it could be 4-way (plus Mitt and now Rick Perry are looking for re-consideration there too). What a circus.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: Sixty-five. I marched with the Black Panthers on election day 1968. Downtown Newark, NJ. I was a race relations instructor in the army 1972-73. Worked in the SF VAH after I got out of the service. Then the post office. From the mid-eighties until I retired in 2005 I was both a shop steward and union officer in my San Francisco branch. Since 1972 I have voted for every Democratic presidential candidate with the exception of Jimmy Carter, who conceded before I got home from work. I was a PCP (precinct committee person) here in Portland until I stepped down yesterday. Need anymore information? I’m left-handed.
There’s a fundraiser here in Portland, called “Burn one for Bernie.” One marijuana store is selling pre-rolled joints to raise money for Sanders. I bought two of them yesterday. Also, I inhale.
Jeffro
@Anoniminous:
Shhh…I’m trying out a good conspiracy here and you’re ruining it with facts and common sense.
Spinoza is my Co-pilot
@pamelabrown53: If the “white conservadem vote didn’t cross over (in large enough numbers) to vote against President Obama (2x) then why would it be different for Hillary?
Good question. I think quite a few of them did actually vote against Obama (especially in places like W VA) both in ’08 and in ’12. But that was more “voting against” than “voting for”, and I think “voting for” is a stronger motivator (leading to more votes) than “voting against”.
In this general election I expect a similar set of white male conservadems “voting against” Hillary (though likely somewhat fewer in numbers since she’s not, you know, black) but also significantly more “voting for” Trump than there was “voting for” either McCain or Romney. Enough to make a difference? I don’t know, but my guess is yes, enough to help make it a tight race, anyway, along with the fascists lining up and being “good Germans” as this post claims they will. As I said, hope I’m wrong, but sadly I see a large percentage of my fellow older white males (whatever current party registration) as too-easy marks for Trump’s demagoguery. He’s much more “their guy” than Romney ever could be.
beltane
One possible positive effect of all this is that we are seeing the limits of what Unlimited Corporate Cash can buy. The conservative establishment got as much with the billions it dumped in PACs as they did with the billions they dumped into Iraq.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Clearly. Do you exhale? is the question.
Jeffro
@Anoniminous:
I tend to agree with this, as it helps me manage my stress level and also has the benefit of being true (for all the reasons you noted). I think some of it will be a wash – increased female %, decreased male %; some anti-Trump crossovers, some additional GOP anti-Hillary turnout.
I really do think we’ll see Sanders trying to help with young voter GOTV, and Obama doing the same for minority GOTV. Seeing them all together in Philly – heck, seeing the Dems largely unified, period – is going to be a major boost compared to the Flaming Cycle of Grief that is the GOP
glory b
@Big Ol Hound: Okay, I’m in!
Now for that Mad Max trip from Pennsylvania……
Jeffro
@redshirt:
That’s a smart bet.
We Dems tend to forget, most of us ‘fall in line’, too – we just happen to have candidates with actual, sensible policies and decent character.
All things considered, I like our chances and I’d MUCH rather be us than them!
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: Cool. Awesome background. But Nader taught you nothing? McGovern taught you nothing? Dukakis taught you nothing?
Honest answer: Would you rather a Republican win then compromise your sense of morals?
Bob In Portland
@FlipYrWhig: I said that the last two nationwide polls on the subject said that Hillary is disliked by a majority of Americans. I did not say that a majority of Americans dislike her because her half-lie about the commodity deregulation. When most people from South Carolina don’t even know Sanders’ name I’m going to guess that they probably aren’t going to know the intricacies of Bill Clinton’s sleight of hand in 2000. And even though I posted two articles I’m pretty sure no one here is going to read them, so let them stay “something something” in your mind.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@John D.: @pamelabrown53:
I work with an ammosexual who believes we need a revolution. I asked him how he thought that would work out given i also own guns an do not agree With his choices for leader and millions more who diagree with both of us. He told Me the military would come in on his side. He didn’t like it when I asked why id they had that power they wouldn’t put a general in charge. After 30 minutes of arguing he could see he lives in a fantasy land but he is not moving
chopper
i think the GOP will generally rally behind drumpf (tho i do think there will be some who can’t bring themselves to pull the lever for him), but it isn’t going to happen when clinton gets the nom. they can do math from time to time, they know as well as we do that clinton basically already has it.
right now the party is trying to come up with a way to take it away from drumpf. if that doesn’t come to pass and it’s clearly all his, that’s when goopers are really going to start getting in line. right now they’re at the ‘bargaining’ stage.
TheBuhJaysus
@Brachiator:
Regarding Romney’s moment back in the spotlight, Colbert had a funny segment on it:
http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/03/watch-colbert-on-mitt-romney-and-the-gops-war-on-t.html
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@redshirt:blob is a Putin fanboi ignore him he left reality years ago
moops
The most likely outcome is one that most of you are not going to like.
Trump will run and lose to Clinton, by a larger margin than the usual 48-52 deal. Probably a 40-60 loss, which in US politics is being crushed. The billionaires will spend much more on other races and keep the other branches in their control. The pundits and establishment GOP will cluck “told you so, stupid base”. They will not grow or change their views and the next primaries will try and find their new G W Bush to run against Clinton in 2020 and likely retake the White House. The 2020 GOP candidate will have a traditional skill in dog whistle racism that is deniable and left unreported in the MSM and they will finally make inroads with minorities since the overt racists will be told to shut their dam mouths (sort of like how all the Democrat bloggers treat Naderites).
I would rank this outcome as the most likely and I’m surprised it just doesn’t get mentioned.
If Trump is the nominee, the party is going to throw the presidential race to save the party. Party *always* comes before country, and it is the only way they are getting rid of this loose cannon now.
I said most of this in the throw away thread, but as I think about it the rest of the dots line up. While Jeb was a contender they had a guy to try and push past Hillary. Now that the chosen man is out the whole narrative requires a huge active effort from everyone to ensure a clear message from the Establishment to the Base. Media, Politicians, Pundits, everyone has to make it clear that Trump is a Bad Idea. So that when Trump shits the bed they will take the Base’s nose and rub it in there and teach it the lesson. To make that lesson credible they have to start the narrative now so that I Told You So is there nice and thick. This is about the Party setting up the chance to reassert their dominance over their Base again.
They will let them pack their backpack with comics and snack foods and walk out the door “I’m never coming back!” “I know son, I’m not stopping you. There’s the door”
Kay
@Miss Bianca:
He does and he’s smart. He doesn’t alienate huge groups of people and he cuts his losses with unpopular conservative policy- just jettisons it if it doesn’t work to his advantage.
I think I’d rather have Trump than him. If he loses the OH primary he’s out and Trump is a little ahead right now so we’ll see. I haven’t seen any organizing activity here for any of the GOP candidates. Democrats wouldn’t bother with our current race (it’s a 60/40 R county) but I would think Republicans would. I actually swore in the new GOP Board of Elections member a week or so ago. I have no idea why he came to me- any lawyer can swear them in. I was so surprised I had to ask him repeat what he wanted, even though he handed me the form with the oath and I’m familiar with it and have done it before. I was tempted to ask him if the county Party had any plans to back any of the GOP candidates but the whole thing was so odd I just didn’t. 98% of lawyers in this town are Republicans and he drops in on me :)
Callisto
@John D.:
One thing at least this primary is teaching us all is that favorability numbers don’t seem to matter anywhere near as much as conventional wisdom had previously posited.
Bob In Portland
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Besides politics, what else are you foolish about? Foolish enough to believe someone who says they didn’t inhale?
No, actually, if you are happy with Clinton and are sure that she’s going to win, why do so many of you get upset when I point out that a majority of the country doesn’t like her?
You know the likeability polls. You’ve seen them. You can’t deny them, you can only say that they mean nothing, and John D. already did, which gets me to wondering why pollsters even ask the question.
jl
@Jeffro: It is smart bet that the pols will fall in line, at least in public. What they do with their money and resources is another thing.
It seems to me that aggressively trying to go for usual GOP crossover voters who might vote for HRC instead of Trump in this election is no-brainer. The usual problem is that the Dems do some BS ideological triangulation that hurts them as much as help.
But against Trump, how would you go for crossover? Point out that Trump is con-man and possibly a crook who stays just inside the law in ways beyond even the usual GOP grifter candidate. Enthusiastically agree with Trump not to meddle with social insurance, and point out the Democratic Party has been far more reliable on that score than any Republican, and voting for Trump would be relying on his dodgy promise, while returning a GOP that doesn’t believe any of it to power. Pointing out that the Democrats have a far more credible record on jobs and infrastructure than the GOP and again, relying on Trump will be relying on his dodgy word and returning GOP to power who hates that part of Trump’s platform.
These all seem no-brainers to me. That would all be going after people who are listening to Trump’s populist message and tuning out his racist message. Probably not that many, but in swing states, if the cost is nearly zero to try to get them, then should try.
Edit: I guess I should add that I think going in Webb direction and pulling his silly ‘he-man but egghead’ white ethnic appeals about Scots-Irish heritage and perceived grievance is idiotic. No one cares or believes that nonsense, as Webb’s candidacy showed. Trying to ‘reach out’ to Trump voters that we understand their white ethnic pain would be ridiculous. The ones who are on board with Trump on the racism will vote for Trump. They want the real thing, straight up and won’t be fooled by panders.
Bob In Portland
@Callisto: Or it’s a commentary on how out of touch the two political parties are with their constituents. Or that the two parties don’t actually represent their constituents.
hueyplong
Bob in Portland and his hippie punching obsession is so March 3.
This is March 4. March 4 is Raven Onthehill “Hillary is a GOP Mole” (or “there isn’t a nickel’s worth of difference”) Day.
But fear not, Bob, I’ve had instilled in me a nagging fear that my complaisance and refusal to acknowledge plainly posted, ominous primary turnout numbers will result in a crushing defeat due to a 40% reduction in Democratic turnout. Had a nightmare about it last night.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
Jeffro:
I’d sort of agree with you except i can’t think of a dem nominee as insane and obnoxious as Drumpf. Or one as out of touch as Willard or as inexperienced and unprepared as dumbellU. I could see some dems romanced by McCain he at least could make a case for himself if you didn’t look too close.
Germy
If Trump loses the nomination, or wins the nomination and loses the general, what happens to his fans? Where does all that energy go?
Will they be smashing things in the streets?
Miss Bianca
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
You mean…you actually got him to *see* he lives in a fantasy land? Color *me* impressed. The ammosexuals I know just tend to huff and puff and glare at me. Just glad they’re not shooting at me yet.
pamelabrown53
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
You must have awesome persuasive powers if you were able to talk down an “ammosexual” to better than a draw. Good on ya. Keep up the good work: one person at a time.
Peale
@C.V. Danes: yep. And they’ll be blaming us for not stopping them from buying SUVs 30 years earlier and voting for whomever big oil tells them to vote for.
John D.
@Bob In Portland: For God’s sake, Bob, my words are right there.
I did not say they “mean nothing”. I said “they are poor predictors of electoral success.” I stand by that statement. This is why I take the tone with you that I do, because you just fucking lie constantly about what people say.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: You’re essentially repeating Republican talking points. What does 30 years of Republican attacks mean to you? Nothing, obviously, because you’ve bought them.
Are you actually a Sanders supporter? Because I’ve seen very little you’ve said in that regard. And do you really think Sanders positive polls – which apparently mean so much to you – would hold up under the weight of a Republican onslaught?
Bob In Portland
@moops: Hillary is certainly the most likely candidate. I think the polls will be closer than you think. Last I looked, the only candidate that Hillary is favored to defeat is Trump, and if the Republicans who don’t like her while supporting Cruz or Rubio have to choose between Clinton or Trump, a good portion of them will vote for Trump. So far, independents vote for Bernie by a wide margin. Some of them probably aren’t going to embrace Clinton.
It’s one thing to vote for someone you dislike if she’s the candidate of your party, quite another if she isn’t.
But, hey, John D. says it’s bullshit, so you’re probably right. Onward to victory.
Bob In Portland
@John D.: Great. So don’t you worry your head.
trollhattan
@redshirt:
Like I said yesterday, srv on lithium, sockpuppeting with gusto.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: You certainly place a great deal of faith in polls.
Peale
@C.V. Danes: his most “enthusiastic” supporters, though, not so much in the medal earning soldiering department. I think that’s what irks me about them. They want us to believe that they are good soldiers and be rewarded as such, but I’ve watched them go awol too many times to think that they should promoted to ranks where they give the orders.
chopper
@redshirt:
i’ve mentioned this sort of thing a bunch of times. people have been hanging out in the background radiation of mainstream media clinton hate for so long it’s affected plenty of democrats and liberals as well. it’s insane the amount of RW talking point bullshit you hear out of people who consider themselves liberals. i know democrats who still bring up fucking whitewater. whitewater. for real.
Miss Bianca
@Kay:
Agreed. What do you think his chances are at winning? I’ve seen those polls suggesting that he might actually lose to Trump. Yow, that would have to hurt.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: Yes, I’m a Sanders supporter. Ask Cole and I’ll write something for Balloon Juice why I support him if you want to hear more.
Reread my short bio. I am not a Republican. Never have been.
Didn’t you see me at that civil rights march?
chopper
@redshirt:
we all know how incredibly predictive general election polls are 8 months before the election.
redshirt
@trollhattan: Possibly. But then I remember that there were and are still hard core Naderites out there. It fascinates me because they have the right instincts, overall, yet seemingly lack any common sense.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: So why are you seemingly so vested in attacking a Democrat?
Brachiator
@TheBuhJaysus:
Fair point. And you don’t have the Democrats trying emphatically to sabotage Bernie’s campaign.
PaulW
Just a reminder to Floridians there’s Early Voting right now across the state, so if you’re a registered Party person – no NPAs sad to say, these are Closed Primaries – you need to put in your vote.
jl
@Kay:
” 98% of lawyers in this town are Republicans and he drops in on me ”
Only way to maintain neutrality among the feuding GOP primary clans? If he went to a prominent GOPer he would have to be sworn in by a Cruz, Rubio or Trump partisan, and be marked?
Chyron HR
@Bob In Portland:
Were you the guy in the photo at Selma that they keep trying to pretend was Bernie?
Peale
@Kay: because he knew that if he came to you, you wouldn’t start spouting off about your latest UN Secret Muslim conspiracy theory for 45 minutes. He was busy and knew you wouldn’t hold him up.
redshirt
@chopper:
Indeed. I know this is not precisely your point, but my very Republican father just offhandedly mentioned that Hillary is a murderer, among her many flaws, and then moved on. I said nothing – what’s the point – but it amazes me how influential the non-stop propaganda we’ve all been exposed too since the advent of 24/7 news has been in shaping out current climate. Politicians come and go, but the talking points, always Republican, live on.
GregB
@Germy:
That is a great question to ponder. Their rage is being perpetually stoked. It’s gonna blow.
moops
@Germy:
See my post above. Trump’s defeat is how the GOP is going to bring the Base to heal.
The idiotic admonishments from Romney and McCain are all part of the plan. They only make sense if you have already predicted both a Trump nomination and Presidential defeat. Gramps will get the Sunday circuit again to explain how politics really works, and I Told You So.
The GOP base has reached rebellious teenager status, and Dad is an authoritarian prick. The kids have learned their racism “from you Dad!” but they don’t know how the real world works. This is a classic power struggle. The only thing that will break this pied-piper-spell from Trump is defeat. GOP can’t stand losers, and losing is the one thing that will break Trump from his own spell. This will be his biggest and most public loss ever. It will be Yuuuuge.
Bob In Portland
@chopper: Go back to the Quinniapac and Economist polls. There are a lot of people who don’t like Clinton. A majority if the two surveys are correct.
You guys, who I’ve sussed to be semi-liberal and well-heeled generally, are in the minority regarding Clinton. You all seem to think she’s great. And you are all confident that she’s going to win. And John D. says likeability doesn’t reflect on actual voting, so the fact that 17% more of the electorate not liking her than liking her should of no concern.
You don’t have to make me some evil right-winger in your mind to disregard Quinniapac. Just disregard it.
Although it does point out a problem here. You folks get really fierce and do a lot of personal attacking if someone says something that doesn’t fit into your view of the world.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: So we should base our votes on favorability polls is what you’re saying?
Miss Bianca
@Kay: @jl:
“of all the gin joints in all the world, he’s got to drop into mine”…
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: And it’s been non-stop right-wing propaganda since 1992, so expecting a lot of crossover voting from Republicans and independents isn’t likely.
But you people seem to have a problem differentiating between right and left. There are Republicans with the Vince Foster trip. There are Democrats who point to Iraq, Syria, Libya et al to claim she’s a murderer. Mass murderer.
They are different.
Rob in CT
Are we gonna get a flounce?
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: No. You go ahead and vote for who you want. And make sure to spread the joy and love that comes with Clinton.
I don’t like Clinton. I don’t like her politics or her grifting. It doesn’t bother you. She’ll probably win. Congratulations.
chopper
@Bob In Portland:
a lot of people don’t like clinton. a lot of people (more if the polls are to be believed) don’t like trump.
wasn’t there a whole bit about this in the other thread, where you out of nowhere called another poster “fucking stupid” because he said something to someone else that didn’t fit in with your worldview and then you pissed and moaned about ‘personal attacks’?
Rob in CT
Hillary Clinton is, for a liberal, a hawk. This is not good.
However, if she’s a “mass murderer” then pretty much every US President has been a mass murderer. Which, I know full well, is something the leftier-than-thou will say “yes! exactly!” to. But then where does that leave us?
You make what choices you can to pull things towards sanity. In the primary, vote Bernie. In the general, vote Hillary. This is simple. She is much more sane on FP than any Republican. This is not hard to see unless you’re so invested in your Hitlery narrative that you’ve made yourself blind.
chopper
@redshirt:
only as to clinton. it’s science.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: She will win. I’m confident in that, and our nation and the world will be better for it, regardless of your favorability polls.
Will you vote for Clinton in the General if she’s the nominee? I’d vote for Sanders if he is, that’s for damn sure. Because any Democrat is better than any and all Republicans. You get that, right?
raven
@redshirt: You talk to this jackass like it matters.
Brachiator
@TheBuhJaysus:
Release the Romney!
Great.
“Trump has put his name on some lousy investments… Like Mitt Romney.”
ouch
redshirt
@Bob In Portland:
I don’t give a whit about crossover Republican votes or so called “independents”. Democrats are enough to win the election.
qwerty42
@sigaba: I’d have to check the maps, but I think a portion on the border with France was controlled by the Empire. Meanwhile, in the east, the Margrave of Brandenburg (aka the King of Prussia, but Prussia was not an Imperial domain) was an Elector. Germany especially was an incredible assortment prior to the Napoleonic Wars. Anyway, no German Empire before the Franco Prussian War. What we call Germany today did not exist except as a sort of concept. There were several kingdoms and duchies, etc. The 30 Years War broke up a lot of what limited cohesion the Empire had.
John D.
@Bob In Portland: WBUR poll for MA: Sanders net favorability numbers were +15 over Clinton’s. He lost the race.
Favorability is a poor predictor of electoral success.
Matt McIrvin
@moops: Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
The Republicans have done dog-whistle racism for decades, and they’ve mostly lost minority support over that period. There have been times when they actually made some headway: George W. Bush had a lock on the Muslim vote in 2000, and he actually gained Hispanic support from 2000 to 2004. But they keep throwing it away by doing things obnoxious to these same minorities. These voters are not stupid.
If they didn’t do that… this would be a better world. Their other positions I don’t like might gain headway (African-Americans are still relatively culturally conservative, and Republicans keep imagining that they can get their votes this way; if the Republicans weren’t so obviously racist it might actually work). But it would be a huge step forward for justice if they just canned the racism.
chopper
@redshirt:
bob is on record that if clinton is the nominee he’ll vote for jill stein. precious, innit?
redshirt
@raven: Does anything matter on a blog?
Original Lee
Most of my anti-Trump Republican friends are openly speculating about Bloomberg deciding to run as an independent. At this point in time, they are saying they will vote for Bloomberg before anyone currently running.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: I find Clinton a despicable candidate. The Clintons have made the Democrats the party of Wall Street and eternal war. I have no hope in her domestic plan. Like I’ve said, she’ll be the first Democratic candidate (aside from when Carter conceded early before I voted) that I won’t vote for.
Now, there are two ways to look at this. You can call me, stupid, you can make up a conspiracy theory in your head that I’m really a right-winger, or you can dissect my posts, misrepresent me. Or you can call me names. That seems to be the range of responses here.
hueyplong
I’ll beat Bob in Portland to the polls to vote for Bernie in November if he’s the nominee, so my attempted snark isn’t about Bernie. It’s about Bob. You’d have to look long and hard to find someone less persuasive in tenor and tone, things that matter a little if, in fact, you’re looking to persuade someone of something.
But as long as we’re playing, it seems fairly safe to say that anyone who has bought into the Vince Foster stuff is probably a Limbaugh or Hannity listener, and that guy isn’t going to vote for Bernie Sanders, either, because I’ll bet Limbaugh/Hannity is going to have something to say about the “self-avowed Socialist” in the hypothetical world in which we get to the point at which they realize it won’t be Hitlery after all.
Those guys have a preferred opponent just like we do.
Cacti
@redshirt:
Thus far, Bernie’s high favorability marks have translated into a 5-11 record through 16 primary contests.
Bob In Portland
@chopper: And you don’t want to know why.
chopper
@Cacti:
“he’s liked, but he’s not well-liked”.
redshirt
@chopper: lol. Jill Stein will rise again!
John D.
@Bob In Portland: This post doesn’t make me think you are stupid. I makes me wonder *why* you believe those things, since Bill Clinton hasn’t been the president in 16 years. But I’m not going to tell you your opinions are wrong, even if I disagree. Sorry to see you go.
Rob in CT
Look at it this way, if Bob is in Portland, OR, it doesn’t matter. OR will almost surely go for the D candidate (2012 = 54/42 for the Ds).
If it’s Portland, ME, same result (2012: 55%/40%).
If he was in Florida or something, there would be some tiny chance of his stupidity mattering.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: You seem more naive then anything else. I find it interesting how someone seemingly so earnest about improving the lives of his fellow Americans could so easily buy the tripe of the well understood Bad Guys. I’ve never called you a bad name by the way.
You marched with the Panthers but reject the candidate that got near 80% of the primary vote in Alabama; how does that jibe?
pamelabrown53
@beltane:
Agree. There is a limited effect of corporate/crazy billionaire ideologues’ deep money pit at the national level. Where their $$$ is wreaking the most havoc is at congressional districts and state legislatures and STATE SUPREME COURTS where they’re on the ballot. They have been staggeringly successful.
Peale
@redshirt: shall we play her concession speech from 2012? The one where she displayed such presidential characteristics like insulting the voters for not choosing her? The one that she couldn’t give herself because she was having too big a tantrum at the time to be allowed out in public? The insistence that she was going to win…something even though no polls indicated any such thing?
redshirt
@Peale: Yeah, but her favorability numbers were through the roof!
andy
@WarMunchkin: Well, he said the family will be sticking around DC for a few years until his girl’s out of school. Maybe somebody will appoint him to the Supreme Court and he’ll stick around even longer!
The Golux
@singfoom:
And when he emerges victorious, due entirely to the power of his personality, they’ll make a movie about it. They can call it “Triumph Of the Will”.
SFAW
@Bob In Portland:
Outside of (apparently) you, who would they be?
Where “all” is defined as a positive integer greater than three but less than 15, perhaps? Or are you classifying people who say “I like Bernie, but I’m willing to vote for Hillary in the general” as thinking “she’s great”?
Of course, most of us here think she’s great when compared to anything the Rethugs have. You seem to disagree with that idea.
Repatriated
@mclaren: At worst, he’s only 50% wrong: there will be a lot of crossover votes for Hillary, but they probably won’t come from male Republicans. So, only half of the potential crossovers are really up for grabs.
CONGRATULATIONS!
Truly, a truth that oughta be self-evident but isn’t, from some comments on this thread.
Every last one of those GOP fuckers squalling about the short-fingered vulgarian today will be voting for him in 8 months. You’re more likely to find a live unicorn shitting popcorn and M&Ms in your bed than you are to find one of these non-existent “crossover” voters.
SFAW
@The Golux:
“Drumpf of the Will,” perhaps?
I hear he’s got “this yuuuge and classy guy, the best,” named Lenny Riefenstein (or something like that) who’s going to produce and direct it for him.
Hoodie
@moops:
Actually, a few said this yesterday. Anyway, the GOP daddies will say they’ll support Trump as the nominee irrespective of them saying he’s not fit for the office because they want to leave their options open if they can bring him to heel and also don’t want the base to get too pissed by even suggesting that Hillary might be better. Not sure if that will work, the base may be pig ignorant, but they’ve become very sensitive to being led around by the nose. They know that the establishment wants them to lay down and be quiet, and they’re not in the mood for that right now.
What the GOP establishment really needs is a faux culturally white populist like W or Reagan who is a tool of the PTB and who they can con the base into falling in love with. Trump almost fits that, except he’s not compliant enough, at least right now. They can’t trust that he won’t go full metal WWE, and they can’t afford to wait to see if they can corral him, so they’re setting up the failure option so they can reboot in 2020. However, they’ll line up behind him if they think they can control him and, if so, eventually elevate him into the pantheon of gods along with Reagan.
benw
@The Golux: it will be a great movie. A GREAT movie. Big. Really big. HUGE. We’ll put top men on it. The best men. The BEST. And we’ll make Mexico pay for it!
You can’t spell Triumph without Trump!
chopper
@Bob In Portland:
why would i? anybody who doesn’t support the democratic candidate this fall, whoever it may be, is being a complete moron.
Matt McIrvin
@jl:
They’re interesting, though. I’ve been watching Huffington Post’s aggregate of Hillary vs. The Donald polls and there’s all kinds of weird motion, but I think a lot of it is spurious, having to do with house effects and the timing of different polls. It looked as if she’d opened up a wider lead very recently, but it’s just because a new poll, Ipsos/Reuters, got in which assigns her a much bigger lead than the others. A lot of the other motion is from Morning Consult posting results with a much narrower lead than the others (they’ve always been relatively bullish on Trump).
Take both of them out of the picture and the rest imply that Hillary has a pretty flat, consistent lead of about 5 points. Lately it seems like some polls have been posting larger “undecided” numbers, but it’s hard to say what that means, motion in one direction or the other.
NickM
Trump gives them almost everything they want: anti abortion, Nazi Supreme Court picks, tax cuts, shutting down unions, shutting up the NYT with libel laws, boots on necks of blacks and browns. The trade shut they can block. They’ll get their war somehow. They will fall into line to a man, and they’ll love it. Marching to the Horst Wessl Lied is what they’ve always wanted, even if some hadn’t realized it before.
Callisto
@redshirt:
Lots of people marched in the 60’s; some are still great allies. Then again, Charlton Heston marched with Dr. King. So there’s that. It was 50 years ago, after all.
Iowa Old Lady
Kos just issued a declaration that after March 15, if Clinton has widened her lead over Sanders, his site is shifting to general election status, meaning no attacking the nominee with insults or right wing memes. Issue oriented discussions are fine if they really are geared to how to get liberal policies in place.
Please don’t push me over there.
PurpleGirl
@Miesekatze: Deep down he really loves us. Well, he must — he keeps this place for us to meet and converse (okay, sometimes fight).
Baud
@Iowa Old Lady: There will be purges.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
OT:
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Baud: Glad you’re here: Do you think Patty Judge has a shot? I think I may have to send her money just on principle
ETA: @Jim, Foolish Literalist: that was for @Iowa Old Lady: , not that I am not, as ever, happy to see the next President of These United States in these threads
chopper
@Baud:
it’s gonna be a laugh riot over there for at least a few weeks.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: With the turnout I would bring in Iowa, she has a good shot.
John D.
@jl:
Among my local people, I’ve got a standard challenge: Find a net 63 electoral votes from Obama’s 2012 map that Clinton will lose to a Republican challenger. It’s really hard to do. The state level polls don’t really support it yet, though obviously things will shift once the nominees are chosen officially. NC and VA are much bluer than 2012 (and blue vs. Trump), FL and OH are tossups. About the only bad news is PA and CO. They are tossups in current polling.
FlipYrWhig
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: The Democratic Party of Iowa should IMHO try very, very hard to get that seat away from the odious Grassley.
Baud
@John D.: NC isn’t going Dem in 2016.
And wasn’t blue in 2012. It was blue in 2008.
rikyrah
@Mnemosyne:
I hear ya.
Run those totals up.
Felonius Monk
To paraphrase that great Iraq War strategist: Republicans will vote for the shit sandwich that was nominated, not the shit sandwich they wish had been nominated.
Immanentize
@chopper: This happened with the 2008 PUMAs at Kos. There were a few PUMA blogs set up where all the manic dead enders could go and endlessly discuss why Obama was such a loser and could never beat McCain. Feh The GOS was much better when those folks left.
SFAW
@Baud:
Well, she looked at your stunning performance in American Samoa, and said “Baud! is the guy for me!”
If you are at a joint-campaign rally with her, while you’re there, see if you can get Dan Gable’s autograph for me.
Baud
@Immanentize:
I was at Kos in 2008. I remember mocking PUMAs, but I don’t remember actually encountering any in the wild.
John D.
@Baud: OK, I’ll bite. Why make that kind of categorical statement this far out? NC was blue in 2008.
(Yes, I am aware it was blue in 2008 and red in 2012. It was won by 2.2% in 2012. Current polling is less than that, hence “bluer”.)
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Immanentize: they called it a strike, didn’t they? Oh, it was adorable. MyDD was hotbed of PUMAism before they ran off, including a couple of charmers who cheered for Ted Kennedy’s brain tumor.
Baud
@SFAW: Ugh. You had to bring up the whole American Samoa thing. I need to reset; figure out if there is a way forward.
@John D.: NC has gone hard right since then. Would love to get them back.
Iowa Old Lady
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I think she does, though I thought Joni Ernst had no chance, so what do I know. Judge is well known and well liked.
Matt McIrvin
@John D.: It doesn’t seem hard to find those votes, then. Losing PA, OH and FL would do it.
John D.
@Matt McIrvin: She’s leading in all of those within the MOE. They are tossups, but it would be surprising if she lost all 3 (at current polling). (Also, most recent PA polling is from October. I do not expect that state to shift.)
mclaren
@Brachiator:
A good example of the pointless commentary on this forum. California has been a deep blue state since the mid-90s when Pete Wilson permanently drove the Latino vote to the Democrats. Doesn’t matter what Republicans in CA do, the state will go for Hillary in November. Guaranteed. Just as it doesn’t matter a damn what Democrats in Texas do (all five of ’em), Texas will go for whatever roadkill the Republicans put up.
The election will not be decided by giant states like CA and TX whose votes are already cast by demographics. The election will be decided by smaller states, which is why GOTV is crucial. Bonus: with Republican hate for Trump at nuclear-meltdown levels, R’s will not be getting out the vote if he is the nominee. Many will stay home.
Redshift
@Mnemosyne: I’m with you. I think it’s possible we’ll get some crossover voters among the group that is the reason conservatives are urged to do dogwhistle instead of doing outright bigotry — suburban voters who are uncomfortable with racism. But we definitely shouldn’t be changing anything to appeal to them, just take them if we get them.
I’ll be working hard to play any advantage to the hilt, and crush them.
D58826
@chopper: If the RWNJ and many of the VSP’s inside the beltway are correct and the Clintons are the most corrupt people to have every lived;. then they are also the smartest because after 30 years and 10s of millions of dollars in investigations the only thing they have come up with is a blowjob. So maybe having someone that smart and devious might be a good thing in dealing with the likes of Putin and the Iranians. On the other hand the Clintons may just be your average run of the mill politicians with all the warts that entails. There really is no fire, just some little man with a smoke generator hiding behind a curtain.
Sad_Dem
If nothing else, the past eight years have given this white person a real education on just how broad and how deep this country’s racism goes. I’m not young, and I remember the Clinton and Carter presidencies. The level of blind hatred directed at Obama far surpasses anything I’ve seen before. Trump the birther is just another manifestation of this.
mclaren
.@Felonius Monk:
Normally, yes. You may have noticed that 2016 is not a normal election year. When was the last time a self-avowed socialist ran for the Democratic nomination? And made a good showing, with half as many votes as the leading contender?
Trump is not your standard Republican candidate. First, he’s not a Republican at all — his positions have been all over the place, he has identified as a Democrat earlier in his career, and he keeps switching his policies so often that it’s impossible to tell what he actually believes.
This leads to the second and even bigger issue — Trump is not reliable. The Numero Uno requirement for any Republican nominee is that the person must be a team player. Trump’s a maverick. He may make promises, but it’s unlikely he’ll keep ’em, and everyone knows that. Both the Democratic and Republican party establishment demand above all a candidate who is reliable and will not go off on a tangent once nominated.
Trump is a real nightmare for the Repubs because there’s no telling what the hell he’ll do. He might swear on a stack of bibles to support the repeal of the ACA and slash taxes for billionaires, then turn around once nominated and propose universal nationalized health care and a crackdown on tax loopholes. He’s said if before. Who’s to know he won’t pivot in the general if the thinks it’ll get him votes?
The problem for Repubs is there’s no way to keep Trump in line. He’s self-financing his campaign so they can’t threaten him with cutting off funding. He’s a master of getting media coverage so he doesn’t need the right-wing noise machine. In fact, FOX and the rest of the right-wing noise machine has already tried to destroy Trump, and instead it hurt Fox News’ credibility with Trump supporters.
This means that nominating and/or voting for Trump would mean rolling a loose cannon on deck and letting it blow up anything that moves. The Republicans are pissing-in-their-pants scared of what could happen if Trump ever got into the Oval Office. He might suddenly decide on a lark to unleash the hounds of DOJ hell on giant monopolies like Comcast and Microsoft and big pharma. Those aren’t his businesses, he doesn’t care, and he’s so unreliable and so ungovernable and so capricious, he just might do it.
With Hillary, they may hate her policies, but at least they know what they’re getting. They have no goddamn idea what they’ll be getting if Trump winds up in the Oval Office.
I think his unreliability and mercurial nature will make him radioactive in the general election. The Repubs can build a party brand by opposing Hillary. How can they rebuild their party if Trump starts doing crazy stuff as president completely out of the control of the party?
Matt McIrvin
@John D.: The most recent polls I can find in all three states show her losing to Donald Trump, though the Pennsylvania poll is really old. They’re within the MOE, but that’s not a lead, it’s a tossup at best. And there’s an equally old poll from CO that shows her losing to Trump in an absolute rout.
Granted, some of the recent polls in NC actually show her winning, and if she loses PA, OH, FL and CO but picks up NC, that’s a win! A George W. Bush-level squeaker, but a win.
There’s not a lot of data. Of course, it’s plausible that Clinton will look better as her primary lead solidifies, and the dumpster fire that is the Republican primary will make Trump look worse. But we’re already into the realm of speculation.
C.V. Danes
PEOPLE!
At the end of the day, the enemy is Donald Fucking Trump. Don’t forget who the real enemy is here.
Redshift
@Baud:
I was at the DNC Rules&Bylaws Committee meeting when the infamous Harriet Christian “unqualified black male” video was filmed, so I guess I can say I’ve seen one in the wild.
trollhattan
2/3 of the way to a TBogg Unit for this thread?!? Where be our front-pagers this Friday p.m.?
raven
@Sad_Dem: Well, when you’ve known it for 50 years it’s not as big of a shock.
Tripod
GOP candidates pledge to vote for man they call liar, con-man and fraud
raven
@C.V. Danes: Boom Shaka Laka Boom!
Baud
@Redshift:
Wait, there are rules????
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Bob In Portland: I’m late to the party, but I wanted to leave this here…
Gallup, from December 2015:
HRC was at 13% and the top of the list for women.
BHO was at 17% and at the top of the list for men.
Trump was at 5%.
Bernie was at 3%.
Hillary and Barack were the only people in double-digits.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
Archon
@Matt McIrvin:
If Clinton loses all 3 of FL, OH, and PA she’s losing Wisconsin, Michigan, Colorado and Virginia too, probably in a dog fight to hold onto Minnesota and Oregon.
In other words it’s an electoral wipeout that makes 2008 look like a fight to the finish.
redshirt
@mclaren: So, based on this analysis, would Big Business support Hillary over Trump in the General?
mclaren
@John D.:
Correctamundo.
It’s demographics. Even states like Texas are getting bluer. Texas is a long way from going blue, but you can see the trend. The R’s base is dying off.
Source: “Yes, Texas Could Turn Blue,” The New Republic, 26 October 2014.
Sad_Dem
@raven: It’s been teaching me I should have known it for the last 50 years.
jl
@John D.: Thanks. I saved your comment for further reference. Sounds like encouraging news on the likely match-up.
mclaren
@redshirt:
Yes, big business would shift their support to Hillary, because she’s reliable. This is where HRC’s liability as a primary candidate (her ties to Wall Street and big corporate bucks) becomes an advantage in the general election.
With Hillary, big business knows what they’re going to get. With Trump, they might get anything and there’s no way to tell. He could decide to turn around and propose nationalizing all ISPs or an excess profits tax for oil companies or some other nightmare scenario. Trump is a nativist populist, and that playbook is not even in the same zip code as the big business playbook.
FlipYrWhig
@redshirt: I feel like we used to hear more about how business likes “certainty.” Trump is the antithesis of certainty. Even if you don’t like Hillary you probably still think of her as methodical and calculated. That was partly why Obama got some support from Wall Street types in 2008, I think I heard, by weighing him against McCain’s hotheaded streak.
redshirt
@mclaren: Are your predicting such a thing or just speculating?
Baud
@FlipYrWhig:
The fact that business continues to support Republicans even after all the tea party/Freedom Caucus shenanigans in Congress has put a damper on that theory.
hamletta
One positive note on NC is the Moral Mondays protests. They’ve done a lot of organizing and voter registration that might help tip the scales this time around.
Redshift
@Baud:
They’re more like guidelines, really. I’m sure they’ll waive them for your campaign.
Linnaeus
@Archon:
Folks might be interested in this Center for American Progress report by Ruy Texieira:
The Path to 270 in 2016
If Clinton can’t carry Florida, Pennsylvania, or Ohio, there’s no way she’s making it to 270. But I don’t see her losing all three. She’ll win at least one, probably two, and even winning all three is more likely than losing all three.
mclaren
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:
Don’t forget that Trump also has record high negatives for a presidential candidate. His negatives are at 60%, right off the charts for a national presidential candidate. That’s Alan Keyes-level negative polling. C’mon, people, this is a guy who just boasted about the size of his penis in a presidential debate. You think that’s going to play well with soccer moms, with urban blacks, with religious fundamentalist Republicans?
Read “Trump’s Negative Image” from the Gallup polling organization. You’ll get an education on just how broad and how deep the nationwide dislike for Trump really is. He’s a New York type, and it’s a type unloved outside NY/NJ, a goombah who spits casually racist crap and boasts about his big car and big house and big truck. Trump is basically Archie Bunker with orange hair and more money. Archie Bunker is not at the top of anyone’s Q ratings.
redshirt
@Baud: Indeed. Republican policies crashed the economy in 2007; while no doubt some people made money off that, the majority did not. Why would Big Business continue supporting a party that threatens everything that makes them money? Just for a few percentage points of taxes?
For example, threatening a credit default. That ain’t good for business.
jl
Listening to a very recent Sanders stumper right now. Comparing that to HRC’s Super T acceptance speech, it is clear that she is really stealing more and more of the big Sander’s applause lines. She is also bragging about her grassroots contributions. I hope that she is building out her small donor infrastructure to ring up some big numbers to backup her brags.
Looks like HRC is ‘Sandersizing’ her campaign to deal with Trump’s populist appeal.
Baud
@jl: Isn’t that what people wanted (assuming Sanders didn’t win outright)?
hamletta
Also, too, remember in the 1992 race, some pundit/wag suggested George HW Bush reminded a lot of women of their first husband?
I think Trump reminds a lot of women of that creepy blowhard they went on one date with, then noped out and thought about changing their phone number, just in case. I can see some educated, upper-middle-class Republican women voting for Hillary because she doesn’t give them the heebie-jeebies.
Archon
@Baud:
I do think a Clinton vs. Trump will put the “business likes certainty” theory to the ultimate test.
Baud
@Redshift: Are they online?
mclaren
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:
Don’t forget that Trump also has record high negatives for a presidential candidates. His negatives are at 60%, right off the charts for a national presidential candidate. That’s Alan Keyes-level negative polling. C’mon, people, this is a guy who just boasted about the size of his pen!s in a presidential debate. You think that’s going to play well with soccer moms, with urban blacks, with religious fundamentalist Republicans?
Read “Trump’s Negative Image” from the Gallup polling organization. You’ll get an education on just how broad and how deep the nationwide dislike for Trump really is. He’s a New York type, and it’s a type unloved outside NY/NJ, goombah who spits casually racist crap and boasts about his big car and big house and big truck. Trump is basically Archie Bunker with orange hair and more money. Archie Bunker is not at the top of anyone’s Q ratings.
redshirt
@Archon: But Trump is a Business Man who knows Business and does Business and makes Deals, and such. How could Big Business reject one of their own?
Cacti
Bernie has racked up the endorsement of another working class hero:
Graham Nash, musician, net worth $185 million.
To the ramparts fellow proles! Down the 1%!
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@C.V. Danes:
I’m all for running up the score. Yes, nothing is guaranteed. But we should remember that Democrats have won the popular vote for president every election (but one) since 1988. Yeah, the EC elects our Presidents, but it’s rare for the EC not to follow the popular vote.
There are many intrinsic advantages for the Democratic nominee this year even if the Teabaggers are motivated. Let’s not get disillusioned – that’s what they want. When Democrats turn out, we win.
Cheers,
Scott.
TheBuyjaysus
I know this is late in this thread, but the purity issues made me wonder…
Where do the fire baggers hang out now that FDL shuttered it’s doors?
superpredators4hillary
Is there any way to automatically append a personalized version of lonesomerobot’s disclaimer to every comment?
mclaren
@Linnaeus:
I’m not buying Ruy Teixeira’s argument here.
First, he wrote this screed back 3 months ago, back before Trump became the nightmare Godzilla rising out of Republicans’ Tokyo bay to burn the whole place down. The 2016 election is not even close to “wide open” as of March 2016. With Trump the likely nominee, the election is in the bag for Democrats.
Second, Teixeira’s analysis is the usual bloviation we get from beltway insiders blowing smoke out their asses. How about a more quantitative data-driven analysis?
Try applying the 13 Lichtman keys and see what you get.
Key 1: The incumbent party (in this case, Democrats) holds more seats in the U. S. House of Representatives after the midterm election than after the preceding midterm election. False.
Key 2: There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. False.
“Serious contest” is defined as getting 2/3 of the delegates on the first ballot at the convention. Too early to tell, but let’s figure Bernie continues to pile up delegates.
Key 3: The incumbent-party candidate is the current president. False.
Key 4: There is no significant third-party or independent candidacy. True.
“Significant” is defined as at least 5% of the popular vote. Again, without knowing for sure, this seems unlikely.
Key 5: The economy is not in recession during the campaign. True. [could change]
This is the crucial key, and the one where we’re shooting in the dark to the greatest degree. But look at the latest jobs report up-page. It looks good for the U.S. economy, slow but steady recovery.
Key 6: Real (constant-dollar) per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth for the preceding two terms. True.
Key 7: The incumbent administration has effected major policy changes during the term.True. This is why getting the ACA through matters, and people aren’t forgetting that.
Key 8: There has been no major social unrest during the term. True.
Before you cry, “Ferguson!”, the book makes clear that isolated events don’t cut it. To qualify this must be a long, sustained disorder of significant magnitude–the labor unrest of the 1880s and 1890s, or the repeated race riots and Vietnam-inspired disorder of the 1960s, are the measuring stick for this sort of unrest.
Key 9: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. True.
Lichtman’s definition requires Watergate levels of scandal. Even Iran-Contra did not rise to this level in 1988. Obama’s two terms have not been marked by major scandal.
Key 10: There has been no major military or foreign policy failure during the term. True.
“Major” means 9/11 or Pearl Harbor as the measuring sticks. Barring a disaster on that order in the next 24 months, this is likely to remain true.
Key 11: There has been a major military or foreign policy success during the term. True. The Iran deal is a biggie.
Key 12: The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or is a national hero. False.
This is one of the only keys dependent upon the identity of the candidate. By “charismatic,” Lichtman means someone like JFK, Ronald Reagan, or Theodore Roosevelt. The Democrats have no candidate for 2016 that meets this standard.
Key 13: The challenger is not charismatic and is not a national hero. True.
Run the numbers. The Lichtman keys say the next president is a Democrat. Moreover, we would need multiple major catastrophes to change the Lichtman key prediction — we’d need not only another 9/11 attack, but another major recession before November 2016. How likely is that?
Texeira is just wrong. I’ll go with the Lichtman key prediction. It’s pragmatic, simple, and quantitative.
mclaren
@jl:
That’s exactly why this is such a great election. Bernie is forcing Hillary farther to the populist left, while Trump is splitting the Republican party wide open. You couldn’t ask for a better one-two punch for progressives.
jl
@Baud: Yes. I think HRC understands that a Trump nomination will bring an unexpected challenge in terms of GOP populism and a half-assed progressivism, and she will not just sit there and take pot-shots, but will adopt a more genuine and realistic Sanderized version for the general. And that will appeal to the only segment of potential crossover from Trump support that the Democrats can hope for and should even attempt to get. As I said above, trying to ‘Webbize’ her campaign with goofy appeals based on Scots-Irish and white ethnic grievance would be a disaster on several grounds (one of which is that no one who is really into that stuff will care and they will vote GOP no matter what).
The thing is that working class and lower middle class whites do have grievances, but in the reality based world, there is no systematic racism against whites, and their real problems don’t stem from any race or ethnic based issues. So the Webb approach is just a plain old-fashioned mistake in how to think about policy, in addition to being offensive and electorally futile. I think Sanders has shown that tackling the real issues head on is a better course in terms of getting to useful and sellable policies with electoral appeal to whites.
Of course, the popularity Trump brings to the GOP, and the associated dick, fart, booger, piss and loser jokes, shows that people really want Baud! 2016!. Trump has been the imperfect vessel for that hunger on the GOP side. Too bad it has been so difficult to weave those themes into the Democratic primary. My sympathies and appreciation for your brave efforts, though.
Tripod
This is a good comparison:
2008 Obama McCain
2016 Clinton Trump
I just don’t see her under-performing Obama. The Louisiana election should be interesting, her results on Tuesday, idk, maybe the progsphere should reconsider that John Bel Edwards win, she certainly has a path through the South.
NR
@John D.: If Trump improves over Romney with non college-educated whites, and Hispanic turnout boosts as a backlash against him, we could see an electoral scenario where we hold Florida but lose Iowa and Ohio, and have to fight like hell to hold on to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Trump could win the White House while losing Florida in that scenario.
scuffletuffle
@Frankensteinbeck: Whoops, read that as mass defecation…helluva nasty image!!
Andrey
Bob or anyone else who is worried about turnout – the solution is in your hands.
https://my.democrats.org/page/contribute/help-elect-democrats-demsdotorg
https://my.democrats.org/page/s/help-elect-democrats
Donate and volunteer for GOTV efforts.
If you are specifically worried about youth votes, there are organizations and campaigns targeted at that.
http://www.rockthevote.com/get-involved/
If you are specifically worried about voters in any particular location, especially battleground states, there are local organizations and campaigns in every state and in every major city.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: I won’t vote for Jill Stein because she’s going to win. I’ll vote for her if Sanders doesn’t get the nomination.
Bob In Portland
@Andrey: Why worry about the turnout?
Bob In Portland
@Cacti: Did he get Deutsche Bank yet?
Bob In Portland
@jl: Funny, I guess the “cut it out” line didn’t work well.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: And you seem rather sheltered. Glad to exchange insults if that’s all you can do. I am progressive, and Clinton isn’t anywhere near a progressive. You’re not a progressive if you go begging to banks and corporations.
Andrey
@Bob In Portland: You mentioned people not being excited about Clinton. That’s a turnout problem. If you’re not worried about people being excited, great!
Of course, there’s nothing wrong with overkill. We don’t just want 51%. We want as big a margin as we can get. So even if you think turnout will be great, it wouldn’t hurt to try to get a bit more.
I can also guarantee you that after the primaries close and the nominations are finalized, the real ground game will kick into high gear; there will be even more opportunities to donate, volunteer, or otherwise contribute as we roll into summer.
Bob In Portland
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: That’s the great thing about America. You can be the most admired woman running for president and you can be the least liked woman in the presidential race.
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: What’s the difference?
Bob In Portland
@C.V. Danes: Why am I not cheering?
Bob In Portland
@redshirt: Put on your thinking cap. Think hard. Come back. What is the difference between the Black Panthers and a busload of church people in Alabama? Think hard.
Bob In Portland
@John D.: I’ve actually been saying why I won’t vote for Clinton for the last couple of days. Most people here want to shout me down instead of listening. So read up on Clinton. Read to articles I’ve linked. Then you will know why I don’t want her and Schultz in charge of the Democratic Party.
Bob In Portland
@chopper: The two latest favorability polls show Clinton as -21 and -15 and Sanders is, I believe, +15 and +9. So, no, I look at other favorability polls. So far the only person who has worse ratings than Clinton is Trump.
Bob In Portland
@Chyron HR: I was the guy in Newark next to the guy who got his head cracked by a YAFer swinging a monkey wrench. What side were you on?
mclaren
@redshirt:
Trump is mostly a one-person Ponzi scheme. Donald Trump is not even one of the top 10 real estate developers in New York city. Trump is mostly about promoting himself. Most of the buildings that say “Trump” are in fact built by other developers — Trump has made a fortune licensing his name out to other developers.
Trump is a brand, not a business: he’s a multi-level marketing scheme. Real businessmen regard Trump with the contempt he deserves.
Source: “Buying a Trump? Better read the fine print,” CNN politics, 22 February 2016.
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: I’m guessing you know what’s better for black folk then black folk do. Right?
redshirt
@Bob In Portland: Calling you naive is not an insult, friend. It’s my opinion on your political views.
C.V. Danes
@raven: Just sayin :-)
C.V. Danes
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: The problem with the crossovers is that they still vote Republican downticket. Better that they just stay home :-)
C.V. Danes
@mclaren: Indeed, indeed.
C.V. Danes
@Bob In Portland: Cheers!
Seriously, I’m reminded of the Spanish Revolution, where infighting by the good guys resulted in the bad guy winning.
John D.
@Bob In Portland:
I am not much younger than you are — so I lived through the Clinton years as well. Almost all of your linked articles put the absolute most negative spin on every action and accusation against Clinton that is possible. So, while I understand why you hold the opinions you do, I do not share them. I do not think she is nearly as far-right as you do, nor do I view her even half as negatively as you do.
Like I said earlier, you are totally welcome to your opinion, even if I feel it is wrong. You aren’t allowed your own facts, though, and I’ll push back on any narrative that isn’t supported by data, like your favorability argument. Not because you are putting it out there, but because it isn’t supported by prior data. You, of course, are welcome to ignore me.
chopper
@redshirt:
hey, he marched 50 years ago. in the other thread he was asking a black woman about what marches she went to, cause, well, Jesus that’s just idiotic. and we wonder why so many black people just shake their heads at us.
Death Panel Truck
@Keith G:
This. There won’t be any pivoting to the center once he wins the nomination. The guy has no filter, and no one on his campaign staff who will (or even can) tell him to shut the fuck up and stop driving away women and minorities. He’s going to need at least 1/3 of the Latino vote to win, and he’s not going to get it.
redshirt
@chopper: I assume Bob knows more than any of us, hence our failure to understand Quinnipac popularity polls.
jl
@Death Panel Truck: Very good chance that what you say is true.
Thing is, Trump knows that he has to move towards the center and tone down his outrageous act a lot. He has said so in interviews. And he thinks he can do it, very easily.
I’m not as sure as you are that he won’t be able to moderate and tone down at all. I am sure that it will be much harder than Trump thinks it will be.
I think he made a trial run at his Super T victory speech / press conference, and at times it looked like his head would explode with frustration. Or maybe looking like a man who is about to stroke out from sheer unbounded rage but has to act calm is his idea of presidential gravitas. Time will tell.
Matt McIrvin
@Archon: There’s a lot more polls in Virginia, and they usually seem to show her with a good lead over Trump.
A lot of this is probably noise resulting from small sample sizes, since there is very little state-level general-election polling going on (I was getting numbers from Wikipedia). We’re not at the point where people like Sam Wang and Nate Silver even bother. You can, though, definitely find some ammunition in the numbers for the claim that the Dems should nominate Bernie Sanders, since in one or two of those swing states he does better against Trump than Hillary does.
I’m a pessimist by nature. Because I voted for Hillary Clinton, I’m now convincing myself that that was absolutely the wrong choice and she is doomed. If I voted for Sanders I’d find reasons to feel awful about that.
Chris
@mclaren:
My only thing here is to ask to what extent big business is ruled by rational self-interest (IOW the need for stability and reliability from the government) and to what extent it’s ruled by tribal instinct and affiliation and ingrained prejudices. These things tend to be discussed as sentiments that elites use to manipulate the plebes, but there’s plenty of them among the elites, too. A tribal affiliation with the Republican Party and knee-jerk distrust and rejection of the Democrats as shifty communists inciting the rabble against you and coming for your hard-earned money is a real thing among America’s wealthy white country clubbers. (No matter how well they actually do under Democratic presidents and how badly under Republican ones, and no matter how far backwards Democrats might bend to accommodate them).
I don’t insist on this, we’ll see how it ultimately plays out once the primaries are over and Clinton v. Trump is in full swing. I just wouldn’t be at all surprised if most of the wealthy Republicans decided to hold their nose, hope for the best, and decide to stick with The Tribe.
Monala
@Kylroy: you still have a better chance of influencing your white male friends and family than the rest of us do.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Bob In Portland: The point is likability polls aren’t votes, as was made more eloquently by the Massachusetts results pointed to far up the thread.
Hillary has a lot of fans. According to some analysis out there, women elect US Presidents. The chance to elect a woman seems likely to have a positive impact on Team D results, even if lots of white men can’t stand her…
But we’ll see.
Cheers,
Scott.
SFAW
@Baud:
Don’t give up hope!
And besides, you’ve got gifted … hands. Or at least, what “hands” is supposed to represent in the Rubicon. (i.e., Rubio lexicon)
SFAW
@redshirt:
Actually, I just fail to understand Quinnipiac’s credibility. I mean, they’re not Rasmussen or Gallup or Dean Chambers or Bloody Billy Kristol, but hasn’t their success rate over the past few cycles been kinda iffy?
(Disclaimer: TLTDTR – too lazy to do the research)
J R in WV
Gosh, Bob sue has a lot to say, up in Portland. Been to all the riots and demos for the last, um, 1960s to 2016, wow, over 45 years!!
What credentials! I bet he’s been on Democratic committees of all sorts, right?
Worked hard for everyone but, well President Carter, back when he lost so bad there was nothing Bob could do. So sad. I hope he keeps us informed from his high-level perch!
SFAW
@mclaren:
You’re kidding, right?
You’re talking about an electorate that, in practical terms, rewarded the Republicans for shutting down the Government, rewards people like Brownback for impoverishing his/their state, rewards McConnell for stopping the uppity darkie in the Black House (no matter what it does to their own well-being), and so on
They can’t get their hate on against Trump talking about how well-hung he (says he) is. But they can sure-as-shit get it on against Hitlery, because of Robert Bork, or the Vince Foster/lesbian thing, or her Commie health plan (from the ’90s) or “Is today a day that ends in ‘Y’? Then Hillary is EVUL!” or Benghazziiii!!! ad infinitum.
Matt McIrvin
@SFAW: I don’t know, but in the case of Hillary Clinton’s favorable/unfavorable, Quinnipiac’s numbers aren’t too far out of line with anyone else’s. They did happen to post some of the most pro-Sanders recent outliers for the national primary race, but I think it was just by chance, since there doesn’t really seem to be a pattern there longer-term.
Raven Onthill
@raven: Hey, I had it first!
But there are a lot of corvids. Ravens are important in the north in all kinds of different ways, so there’s a lot of ways to get to the name. So now I’m Raven Onthill, and who are you?
LAC
@Bob In Portland: here we go with the race immunity credentials that is supposed to cover your ass and make any of your dumb assertions about black people ok because blah blah. Jaysus…
Matt McIrvin
@Linnaeus: Just saw a commenter on Delong’s blog saying that his “state-by-state analysis” revealed that she’d lose all three, and also NH and Colorado, and “has to win Virginia”.
Which I don’t get, since if she really loses all those states (and doesn’t carry any non-Obama 2012 states) there’s no way she’s winning just by getting Virginia. And I also don’t see where his claim about New Hampshire comes from, since she actually has a comfortable lead over Trump there in all recent general-election polls.