631–640 of 1001 posts
America should have voted against all of them and ask for better candidates. But that would never happen.
I have a lot of thoughts, but here's one: Hillary focused her entire campaign on why people should stop Trump, at the expense of talking about why she should be president. In general, making the case against someone else rather than the affirmative case for yourself doesn't work. It's reaction versus action. It's undoubtably true now that there was a very real populist anger towards the existing political order, and…
> at the expense of talking about why she should be president. Hillary couldn't make that argument because it would've drawn more attention to her most damning flaw: The fact that she's a textbook demagogue who was on the wrong side of every progressive issue until she found it politically expedient to "evolve". That's why so many people were so passionate about Sanders. You could go back to C-SPAN videos from 1992 a…
I mean, I know people have been redirecting Trump's flaws onto Hillary but this is just hilarious.
My takeaway from this is that our strategy of "shaming" people into voting a certain way doesn't work. Exit polls seem to suggest that plenty of people understated their support for Trump because they were embarrassed to admit they voted for him. But they still did. In effect, you don't stop people from supporting racism, homophobia, or misogyny by calling attention to it. That only makes them support it quietly. You…
I like your points, I do think this is a big piece of the picture. I almost wish the polls let you vote either "for" a candidate or directly "against" a particular candidate - I think we'd see that many of the Trump voters would have preferred to vote "against" Clinton rather than "for" Trump.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, Republicans did this. Don't blame this on Hillary (hint: she won the popular vote). Don't blame this on Democrats. Accept responsibility. As for likable, Hillary has been the most admired woman in America, 14 years straight. Trump ran the most negative fact free campaign ever to overcome her likability.
However, in light of the DNC email leaks, the Democrat Party's elite seemed to sandbag Bernie, who many believe (citing polls from before the primary) would have given Trump a run for his money. And honestly, this was the Democrats' election to lose, and they did nothing to win it. So I will blame them. I will blame them for going with a candidate that is firmly "establishment" when the general consensus among the pu…
The democratic nominee always had an uphill battle against a base of R's motivated for "Change", for the same reason that the party in power tends to fall behind during the midterms.
My takeaway from this is that our strategy of "shaming" people into voting a certain way doesn't work. Exit polls seem to suggest that plenty of people understated their support for Trump because they were embarrassed to admit they voted for him. But they still did. In effect, you don't stop people from supporting racism, homophobia, or misogyny by calling attention to it. That only makes them support it quietly. You…
>they were racist, sexist, or Islamophobic This is a big issue here, and something that I don't feel that many democrats seem to understand. It wasn't a race issue, it was an immigration issue since many illegal immigrants have taken American jobs. It isn't sexist to acknowledge differences in the genders. It isn't islamophobic to see cultural issues with Islam that would cause integration issues, especially with a l…
I don't disagree with your point but how many "hard working" Americans want to work the fields and kitchens of the country for low wages? What impact is the removal of cheap labour going to have on the cost of food?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, Trump focused his campaign on populist anger against Clinton, which seems very similar to making the case against someone else. "The woman, Hillary, it would be a disaster if she was elected and I can save you from her." I'm not convinced by this argument.
That was part of his argument. He also pushed immigration and anti-trade.
She definitely attacks Trump. She also calls for:
* investing in infrastructure
* solar energy
* expanding broadband access
* more technical education, with the strong implication that there are other reasonable paths beside the elite four year college path
* moratorium on student debt
* public health funding
I have a lot of thoughts, but here's one: Hillary focused her entire campaign on why people should stop Trump, at the expense of talking about why she should be president. In general, making the case against someone else rather than the affirmative case for yourself doesn't work. It's reaction versus action. It's undoubtably true now that there was a very real populist anger towards the existing political order, and…
I can't help but think of the similarity to the 2012 election where rank-and-file middle-class conservative voters were being asked to support a Republican candidate who built his fortune firing Americans and off-shoring their jobs. They didn't vote for Obama, but they sure didn't vote for Romney either.
He got elected on all these promises. 1- Build the wall and make Mexico pay for it 2- Deportation Force on day one 3- Repeal obamacare 4- Renegotiate NAFTA 5- Bring back coal 6- Reduce taxes for the rich 7- Ban muslims 8- Prosecuting Hillary Clinton 9- Bring back American companies to the USA 10- Etc. The Senate and the House are Republicans and the Supreme court will lean republican after his appointment. What do yo…
In all honesty: almost none. He just wanted to be president. Most of his time will be spend enriching himself by selling banal access and bloviating on the world stage. That's pretty awful, but not apocalypse-level awful. Of your list: The wall is a technical impossibility that everyone can recognize. There's no funding for a deportation force and the political optics of goon squads rounding people up is something co…
I'm about as worried about a Trump presidency as I am worried that I'll remember how to breath at night.
Human Nature says he'll strive to be the best and I have faith in that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In all honesty: almost none. He just wanted to be president. Most of his time will be spend enriching himself by selling banal access and bloviating on the world stage. That's pretty awful, but not apocalypse-level awful. Of your list: The wall is a technical impossibility that everyone can recognize. There's no funding for a deportation force and the political optics of goon squads rounding people up is something co…
> The wall is a technical impossibility that everyone can recognize Right, and it won't get funded. And in 2020 when the same poor people are still poor, he'll claim it's not his fault, it's because he didn't get to build the wall.
I have a lot of thoughts, but here's one: Hillary focused her entire campaign on why people should stop Trump, at the expense of talking about why she should be president. In general, making the case against someone else rather than the affirmative case for yourself doesn't work. It's reaction versus action. It's undoubtably true now that there was a very real populist anger towards the existing political order, and…
I disagree with you entirely on your first point. Trump's entire campaign was based on hate and that's why he won. It was all about building the base of people who hate the other side more.
OTOH Hillary rallies were 90% Trump bashing distributed among different groups. - now all women!! - now all hispanics! - now [insert group name here]
You can't compare how both candidates ran their campaigns and it's hard to argue that HRC main campaign points were: 1. I'm a woman. 2. I'm not Trump.