• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

The Dems need to nominate someone not named Biden, Booker, Sanders or Warren.

Kamala is growing on me, ever so slowly, and I still like Buttigieg.
 
I don't know if Warren is the most electable candidate, but I think I'd trust her to make the most meaningful change if elected. Curbing corporate influence in government is number 1 priority IMO. Everything follows from that.
 
Aberdeen said:
I don't know if Warren is the most electable candidate, but I think I'd trust her to make the most meaningful change if elected. Curbing corporate influence in government is number 1 priority IMO. Everything follows from that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that's still putting the cart before the horse. As much as I think anything with a pulse and most things without should beat Trump, in reality it's not quite that way. Although you can't just run a bland option - need someone who can inspire some change in people.
 
Habsy said:
Not in the States that matter but Ok.
Click to expand...

Her message will sell well in rust belt states that have already realized Trump bamboozled them. If Hillary had spent 5 ****ing minutes speaking to income inequality in those states, Trump loses in 2016


You’re setting yourself up for disappointment again. Of course this is my opinion only.
Click to expand...

Nah. Warren covers the bases Clinton didn't and Trump is more unpopular (with a far more engaged resistence against him) than he was in 2016. Warren's entire schtick is middle class relief, protecting american jobs, consumer protection, fixing health care. etc. She puts to life the exact messaging that people claimed was Trump's forte in 2016 (that we all knew he was completely full of shit about, but enough voters in the rust belt didn't apparently).

Hillary scored an own goal with the help of the FBI doing some unprecedented shit when she was in sight of the finish line. She was shit stomping Trump in the polls until Comey's awkward ass press conference. The problem with black swan type events is that once they've happened, people start to over estimate the possibility of them occurring again. The Trump base isn't big enough to win with, and the Trump resistence is damn near 60% of eligible voters, and they're ****ing engaged. I've been saying it for a while now. Trump has become so ****ing unpopular that anyone competent beats him in a general election. Warren is more than competent. She's competent and credible on the topics middle america wants to hear right now. She's also smart enough to stick to message while Donnie shits himself during a general.
 
Habsy said:
The Dems need to nominate someone not named Biden, Booker, Sanders or Warren.
Click to expand...

aren't 3 of the 4 of them shit stomping Trump in heads up polling right now?

You're going to wake up one day and realize that "socialism" is actually preferred policy among US voters. It just has to be couched in different terminology. Farm subsidies, medicare for all, educational assistance, adult job re training, etc. "Socialist" policies poll extremely well almost everywhere in the country. How do you think Trump got elected in the first place? He sold job protection, improving Obamacare, and middle class prosperity. He sold "socialism". The people who voted for him on those issues know he can't/won't deliver now. They still want the same things.
 
Look I get it, and you may be correct, my opinion is coming from someone that won’t vote Trump but needs to be somewhat comfortable with the other choice. I do not think Warren will get the independents. Not enough of them to win. Her best shot would come from people not voting for either.

Warren will be portrayed as too radical and people will buy it. As mentioned before, Wall Street will work against her and that is a serious detriment. I don’t think she’s the one that’ll take him down and he needs removed. You’re rolling the dice with Warren.
 
MindzEye said:
aren't 3 of the 4 of them shit stomping Trump in heads up polling right now?

You're going to wake up one day and realize that "socialism" is actually preferred policy among US voters. It just has to be couched in different terminology. Farm subsidies, medicare for all, educational assistance, adult job re training, etc. "Socialist" policies poll extremely well almost everywhere in the country. How do you think Trump got elected in the first place? He sold job protection, improving Obamacare, and middle class prosperity. He sold "socialism". The people who voted for him on those issues know he can't/won't deliver now. They still want the same things.
Click to expand...

It’s interesting that you believe the average voter knows any of this. The assumption that the electorate is educated in the issues is a mistake. I think you’re grossly underestimating American stupidity.

I know you believe a meat puppet can beat Trump because of how he needed to thread the needle to win compounded with Clinton’s arrogant mistakes but I’m trying to tell you that the vast majority of middle America will likely vote for Trump over Warren regardless of what current polls may say.
 
JackBurton said:
It's funny, we heard Hilary was a weak candidate. All these people are worse
Click to expand...

Hillary was a weak candidate in retrospect, for 2 reasons

1) So much baggage. Decades of well poisoning by right wing media had injected conspiracy theory on top of conspiracy theory into popular opinion of Clinton. That type of conditioning takes years to achieve, and in Hillary's case it started in the 90's. There was a significant portion of the country who had hated her viscerally for decades by the time she ran as the Dem nom.

2) She ran a meh, bland, corporate dem campaign. Trump's messaging worked because he paid lip service to real issues. He did it like the mentally deficient con man he is, but when only one side is willing to talk about industrial job losses, fixing medicare (which the GOP was/is actively trying to break, but whatevs amirite?), immigration policy (which is a legit issue, if not the race based issue Trumpists want it to be). Throw into the mix Hillary getting sick mid campaign, buttery males, Ben Ghazi, etc being sticky issues among the right wing base (which got just enough of them out to vote in the rust belt) and you have, in hindsight, a weak candidate. more accurately, she was the wrong candidate at the wrong time more than she was a "weak" candidate. She wins in a walk in 08 if Obama didn't channel MLK and stomp her out in the primaries.
 
Habsy said:
It’s interesting that you believe the average voter knows any of this. The assumption that the electorate is educated in the issues is a mistake. I think you’re grossly underestimating American stupidity.
Click to expand...

Eh? The electorate tells us what they know and what they don't. 60% of American's don't like "socialism". But when you check under the hood and ask them about individual policies, most of those "socialist" issues poll in the high 60's or better. Which makes it an issue of messaging, not of substance. Like I said, Trump's messaging wasn't rugged individualism, it was socialist policy. I don't under estimate American stupidity at all...the fact that they're dumb enough to dislike socialism while having broad based support for socialist policies tells me all I need to know about what we're dealing with. The issue, again, is one of messaging. Warren is stronger on all of the issues Trump actually spoke to in 2016, other than draconian immigration policy.

I know you believe a meat puppet can beat Trump because of how he needed to three the needle to win compounded with Clinton’s arrogant mistakes but I’m trying to tell you that the vast majority of middle America will likely vote for Trump over Warren regardless of what current polls may say.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're as tuned in to middle America as you think you are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top