DontBeThatGuy
Member
Not really, the right candidate and a reality check is all that's needed.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ABC/Wash Post Poll: Trump, GOP, AND Democrats all suck
- Thread starter Schattenjäger
- Start date
- Status
Not really, the right candidate and a reality check is all that's needed.
RoninChaos
Member
I think the issue for me is democrats are mostly spinless and republicans act like they don't work for their constituents. That's my main issue with the parties. That and republicans are just mean spirited dick holes.
100% Agreed. We fucked up. The choice was binary and not enough people turned out. Now we all suffer with our dipshit in chief.
Milwaukee is actually a great example of what I'm talking about! The American Socialist Party turned that city into a real power base during its heyday, playing a huge role in machine politics there. If not for two periods of postwar prosperity corresponding with a pair of red scares, the Socialist Party would have likely grown in Milwaukee and come to prominence in other cities.
Pretty much everything about our electoral process is hot garbage, but it's much easier to subvert legal obstructions than change them. The best way to push for institutional change is to demand jungle primaries in every state. But local electoral reform is such a sterile, un-sexy issue that it's near impossible to rally support for it.
Someone can campaign on it all they like, it's basically an unstoppable juggernaut at this point.
I mean what would the policy platform for stopping automation even look like?
jack_package_200
Banned
It would have to involve sending the military to seize control of the manufacturing companies.
I mean think larger than manufacturing even. There's a retail apocalypse going on in the USA right now; online shopping is straight up murdering brick and mortar retail, and killing the jobs the latter entails.
What the hell is the political solution to stem that tide? Would the Federal government ban Amazon or something?
Democrats just don't have a face that represents them. Clinton was not it for many people.
And personally, I suspect young democrats want that perfect candidate that was for gay marriage at birth, never said anything objectionable, never was in talks with corporations, is only somewhat religious, and wants to make everything free.
And personally, I suspect young democrats want that perfect candidate that was for gay marriage at birth, never said anything objectionable, never was in talks with corporations, is only somewhat religious, and wants to make everything free.
Voting itself is pretty unsexy. I blame
Kamala Harris might be the closest we have to this.
can't wait for Chelsea Clinton to lose against the moldering corpse of david duke in 2044
jack_package_200
Banned
Why do people keep obsessing over Chelsea Clinton? She has said time and time again she has no political aspirations.
Aquavelvaman
Banned
But it was her turn!
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
The groups that have had their approval drop are actually just the different groups of the party base
The Democrats did better in 2016 than they did in 2014. (Gained seats in house, senate, and won popular vote by significant margin) Very different electorate from a midterm electorate. Will be interesting to see how 2018 shifts that equation, if at all, with a huge energy advantage on the Left.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Because they've been conditioned to hate Clintons for the past 20 years. Now that Hillary and Bill are mostly out of the picture, it's Chelsea's turn
There must always be a Clinton to hate
AstroNut325
Member
I think you're absolutely correct about the competitiveness in the future. I'm doing an MBA for a position that shouldn't require a friggin MBA. Yet, everyone in the positions I desire have one and that seems to be one of the first forms of elimination in a pool of applicants. On the same token however, all the bargaining power is now in the hands of the corporations. You're not going to get any candidate to stand up to the corporations and tell them they can't pursue the means to their very existence, the increasing bottom line. No one from the left, or from the right.
We as Americans are too focused on the "must have a job to be worth something". Either we embrace solutions that directly stop the technological progress, or we begin to shift our thinking and begin to ask for a greater social safety net. I'm personally in favor the latter because I want technological innovation to continue. It can bring about the means to solve many problems we face as humans.
Candescence
Member
Frankly, this is the perfect time for Elizabeth Warren to finally run - both Clinton and Bernie are out of the picture, and while there probably are other viable candidates who could do a good job as well who might think it's safe to finally run, I don't think there's anyone who is nearly as well-known and popular as Warren, nor anyone whose fans will potentially drag down the post-primary vote due to being sore losers like Bernie's might've done(?).
Warren would be far, far more capable of fighting Trump on the issues that won him the presidency, especially if he and the GOP-controlled congress continues to shoot themselves in the foot.
old manatee
Banned
R10Neymarfan
Member
She would just have to separate herself from Hillary
Because over the past few months the media has kept pushing her in a really obvious attempt to build her brand up for a future run for office. The sort of thing that results in disgusting puff pieces with extracts such as
Candescence
Member
I edited my post to clarify that I don't think the "Bernie or bust" vote really was a major factor in Clinton's loss, but I'm just discussing the possibility of a similar phenomenon (and how it's less likely in 2020).
old manatee
Banned
This is both infuriating and confusing.
Like, okay I could see a high number of respondents say that the Dems are out of touch if you're of the mentality that they're too corporate and right-wing than they should be.
But how the fuck are Republicans not at 99% by that logic? How are they somehow more in touch than Dems?
Sweeney Tom
Banned
Third parties, Bernies and Jills suck too
Candescence
Member
Yeah, not really, and I don't recall any studies or polling that reflects on any effect the "Bernie or bust" crowd might've had. I'm just bringing up the rather unlikely possibility of a voter split in the same vein that could occur if Warren beat any other potential primary candidates. The only way I could see a similar issue occurring is if Warren was somehow beaten by some other candidate, but it would probably require a repeat of the Obama phenomenon for that to happen, IMO.
That's pretty much true. Warren never really associated with Clinton (if anything, her anti-financial system "crusade" certainly makes her distinct from Clinton's Wall Street leanings), and Warren is considerably more popular than both Clinton and Trump. Plus, much less baggage for the GOP to use as ammunition, unlike Clinton and Bernie.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Warren was a Republican up until the mid-90s.
Funny how the purity tests only apply to certain people.
TBH I see Warren running into many of the same likability/personality issues Clinton had. I don't find her very charismatic and that matters a great deal in shaking off baggage. You think Obama would have been taken down by an email scandal?
Not to say Warren has skeletons in her closet, although I could see the Native American ancestry thing being made into an issue for some dumb fucking reason. Trump would make some idiotic comment at the debates about "she's not Native American, she's not even wearing any feathers!" Rank-and-file Democrats will be sufficiently appalled, but the media and Republicans would eat it up and swing voters would knock Warren for lying while ignoring blatant racism.
As far as female candidates go I find Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand far more compelling, although Gillibrand could be painted as Hillary 2.0 as well.
Funny how the purity tests only apply to certain people.
TBH I see Warren running into many of the same likability/personality issues Clinton had. I don't find her very charismatic and that matters a great deal in shaking off baggage. You think Obama would have been taken down by an email scandal?
Not to say Warren has skeletons in her closet, although I could see the Native American ancestry thing being made into an issue for some dumb fucking reason. Trump would make some idiotic comment at the debates about "she's not Native American, she's not even wearing any feathers!" Rank-and-file Democrats will be sufficiently appalled, but the media and Republicans would eat it up and swing voters would knock Warren for lying while ignoring blatant racism.
As far as female candidates go I find Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand far more compelling, although Gillibrand could be painted as Hillary 2.0 as well.
2016 wasn't a midterm. Pretty fucking hard to perform worse in comparison.
You're right that 2018 will be a real decider. The Democratic Party has behaved pretty poorly since Trump's election, refusing to cede any ground to the progressives among them, whether it be significant matters of policy (single payer) or symbolic gestures (Ellison appointment). This is alienating a lot of Democrats. Opinion polling and the migration of young progressives toward radical politics suggests this isn't just projection on my part.
Trump is such a shithead that it would be hard for the Democrats to fuck this up, though. Ideally his presidency will create an opposition fervor faster than the Democrats can spoil it.
benjipwns
Banned
Yeah, nobody else will probably start running until 2019, 2018 at the soonest.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Warren would lose.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
What world have you been living in? Haven't paid attention to the whole "Unity tour" bullshit?
The only people that have been alienated are women and minorities, who continually get their priorities passed over in favor of white working class men. See: Heath Mello and the disastrous way Bernie, Perez, and Ellison dealt with that.
Aaron Strife
Banned
The elections are a more important metric though, and Democrats have improved greatly in special elections in both solid red and blue districts (not too many swing seats to see if that would hold there). The reason fearmongering about Trump didn't work was because no one took the threat of Trump seriously as everyone thought he would lose, the GOP won't have that going for them in 2018.
I also don't like the distillation of Ellison vs. Perez into a progressive vs. centrist thing as both candidates were pretty damn liberal. We have to stop looking at Bernie's endorsements as stamps of approval.
Why is it so hard to recognize that other groups you don't identify with may have feelings too? Who are you to decide how progressive liberals should react? The reality is that ALL people left of the current administration are feeling disenfranchised and fearful. Women and minorities may especially be afraid of marginalization but that doesn't mean they're the only ones that are worried.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Well, women (for example) just had their party leadership (Bernie, Perez, and Ellison) support and campaign for a candidate who supported an ultrasound heartbeat abortion law when he was a State Senator. And maybe they're worried that that's the direction the party is going to go, even though women make up the majority of the party and are its backbone.
That's just one example. The "left" is being appeased day in and day out by the leadership. And they're starting to alienate some of the base when they do this.
I'm not saying women aren't legitimately afraid of being disenfranchised. I'm saying women and minorities aren't the only ones afraid of being disenfranchised. There are also women and minorities who are afraid of the direction the country is going primarily for reasons completely unrelated to their race or gender.
No, we don't need a third fucking party. The GOP's whole goal for the last thirty/forty years is to fucking break government and sow distrust in the institution, which is exactly what they've achieved. You can't just blame Dems when in a two-party system, one acting participant doesn't aim to cooperate but instead aims to blow it all up.
And of course, Dems get caught up in that because when you try to argue with fools, to the layman, you look just as foolish. Smarter individuals know better, but the average voter is dumb as fuck. And that's just people that even bother to go vote, so imagine how fucking dense the non-voter can be.
So what really can Dems do in this situation? Especially even when supposedly smarter and progressive peoples also get the basic things wrong, whilst bitching and complaining about the stupidest, most asinine bullshit.
All the while, minorities, LGBTQ, Women and the most vulnerable peoples continually suffer. SMFH at this stupid fucking bullshit.
And of course, Dems get caught up in that because when you try to argue with fools, to the layman, you look just as foolish. Smarter individuals know better, but the average voter is dumb as fuck. And that's just people that even bother to go vote, so imagine how fucking dense the non-voter can be.
So what really can Dems do in this situation? Especially even when supposedly smarter and progressive peoples also get the basic things wrong, whilst bitching and complaining about the stupidest, most asinine bullshit.
All the while, minorities, LGBTQ, Women and the most vulnerable peoples continually suffer. SMFH at this stupid fucking bullshit.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
A person who thinks the Dems are going to become anti-abortion because a few Dems stumped for a pro-life dude (whose rationale for supporting the ultrasound law was noy horribly dissimilar to establishment Dems' rationale for supporting DOMA, btw, i.e. it was a less-bad altetnative to what Repubs were proposing) running in flyover country is very much a fool.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
A few Dems meaning Perez, Bernie, and Ellison, sure. They're more than just a few Dems though! They're pretty important figures in the party.
They did enough to piss off NARAL and Planned Parenthood, which generally is not a good strategy when women are the backbone of your party. The Democratic Party is obviously not going to become anti-abortion, but it very much sends the wrong message! Especially when said candidate is called progressive by leadership.
Yoda
Member
I don't think young progressives want someone perfect, they simply want someone sincere. Evolving on issues if fine so long as it isn't done purely because it's what popular politically. A candidates' adherence to their convictions is a means of testing whether said candidate(s) will stay true to their ideology when times get tough. Obama is a good example of this, he's flipped on quite a few issues, but is still revered among most progressives (even the "bernie bros" this forum despises). In my opinion, this is largely due to people rightly or wrongly believing he'd only "sell out" if the other options available weren't good deals (see ACA's mandate vs. single payer). Contrast this with with an issue like HRC's needless rigid stance on gay marriage while she was a senator from a state that largely supported it (NY), but was trying to triangulate her positions for a future presidential bid.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Sure, but some groups (white working class) are being appeased by the party while other groups (women, minorities) are passed over, even if the latter have been the backbone of the party historically. That's the problem.
Schattenjäger;234558317 said:Yea so we need a 3rd party
No one will ever agree on what that third party needs to be.
You'll have someone who supports space exploration, but that healthcare shouldn't be gov't mandated. You'll have someone who wants universal healthcare, but believe in less regulation in the environment. You get someone who wants to save the EPA, but they think all these people with mental health issues are just 'weak' minded.
And that's extremes. Just wait until you get fiscal stuff involved and those who make $100K in one area get pissed off because the cost of living there with a tax increase would break them while in another it wouldn't break them but cost them a trip to Spain.
Last I checked Trump's approval rating was at 39%. This means that the only people that are supporting at this point are his staunch supporters that voted for him. The ones that aren't hurt and betrayed by his rather shocking reversal on policy decisions from the campaign trail.
Dems come looking the cleanest as they didn't go along with the draconian budget cuts nor the attempt to rob 26 million people of health insurance while giving rich people $594 billion.
Dems come looking the cleanest as they didn't go along with the draconian budget cuts nor the attempt to rob 26 million people of health insurance while giving rich people $594 billion.
titiklabingapat
Member
People always hate the abstract 'Congress' but like their own representatives.
This polls results are only really good at predicting who will fall out of power in a two-party system because voters will by and large hate the party in power more than the that doesn't have any power. This means the minority party is usually the ones who take over and then the cycle begins anew.
This polls results are only really good at predicting who will fall out of power in a two-party system because voters will by and large hate the party in power more than the that doesn't have any power. This means the minority party is usually the ones who take over and then the cycle begins anew.
The voters in this country refuse to take responsibility for their actions and lack of basic comprehension. Because how Democrats are seen as more out of touch than the Republicans, even though Dems hold no political power in either branch of government, is beyond me.
However, the common thread is the same on both sides: privileged White people. On the left, you have the dominantly White Bernie voters stirring the pot constantly, shitting on Clinton without paying any attention to context as to why she lost and what factors led to that happening. They are also throwing a tantrum every time someone who doesn't have Bernie's stamp of approval gains national attention, as the DNC chairman selection proved. These are also the same people disregarding the wants and needs of the minority base of the Democratic Party, and like to tell others that we should give a pass to the racist rhetoric that Trump voters bought into.
Meanwhile, the same base of minority voters (who are probably the only ones in this country who actually have a reason to be jaded about the entire electoral process) are the ones consistently showing up to handle their portion of the electoral bargain, even in low turnout elections. Minority voters have zero problem swallowing their pride and voting for whoever the candidate in the left is.
And yet, we keep running into this issue in three separate countries, in three separate occasions, because the dominant population in those countries are apparently in full self-destruct mode. And that's the worst part of all of this: there is no reason why Trump, Brexit, and possibly Le Pen should be happening at all. But the common thread among them is the same: White people who are either so scared of brown people they accept fascism, or White people who are so privileged, entitled and complacent, that they'll let fascism happen just because they didn't get 100% of everything they wanted.
Until this changes, we are going to keep having these polls show up, and we'll keep wondering why the West seems to be headed towards a path of self-destruction.
TL;DR: Voters, specifically White voters, need to start taking responsibility for us getting to this point and stop blaming Clinton or anyone else for your poor decisions.
However, the common thread is the same on both sides: privileged White people. On the left, you have the dominantly White Bernie voters stirring the pot constantly, shitting on Clinton without paying any attention to context as to why she lost and what factors led to that happening. They are also throwing a tantrum every time someone who doesn't have Bernie's stamp of approval gains national attention, as the DNC chairman selection proved. These are also the same people disregarding the wants and needs of the minority base of the Democratic Party, and like to tell others that we should give a pass to the racist rhetoric that Trump voters bought into.
Meanwhile, the same base of minority voters (who are probably the only ones in this country who actually have a reason to be jaded about the entire electoral process) are the ones consistently showing up to handle their portion of the electoral bargain, even in low turnout elections. Minority voters have zero problem swallowing their pride and voting for whoever the candidate in the left is.
And yet, we keep running into this issue in three separate countries, in three separate occasions, because the dominant population in those countries are apparently in full self-destruct mode. And that's the worst part of all of this: there is no reason why Trump, Brexit, and possibly Le Pen should be happening at all. But the common thread among them is the same: White people who are either so scared of brown people they accept fascism, or White people who are so privileged, entitled and complacent, that they'll let fascism happen just because they didn't get 100% of everything they wanted.
Until this changes, we are going to keep having these polls show up, and we'll keep wondering why the West seems to be headed towards a path of self-destruction.
TL;DR: Voters, specifically White voters, need to start taking responsibility for us getting to this point and stop blaming Clinton or anyone else for your poor decisions.
This is absolutely what it is. In the U.S. at least, Trump looks like a fool. Failed on the travel ban, failed to do anything with taxes, and he's teeing up a failure for his wall. Theres also an AP transcript out and trending right now with Trump stumbling through an interview like a fucking buffoon. Their heroes in Milo, Hannity and O'reilly are being destroyed by the DAY and those Presidential approval ratings stay in the gutter.
Constantly being the butt of the media/worlds jokes and ire has GOP voters feeling some type of way. And these sort of threads are a desperate attempt to gain company in their misery.
Nah bae. Y'all President is still hot trash. Dems aren't perfect but looking at those special election results, we have things moving in the right direction. See you in 2018.
Angelus Errare
Banned
What appeasement have we seen? The Democrats certainly haven't advanced any class policy at all. From what I can tell, the leadership is trying to play it safe by pursuing a platform identical to what they wanted on November 7th.
Appointing an anti-choice candidate has nothing to do with appeasing a reactionary demographic but instead the Democrats' inability to produce or select candidates who don't have disgusting opinions.
Damn at the realism.
- Status