Support NeoGAF

[TyrantII]

Someone else already made the point that many voters are single-issue voters. If your single issue is trade or free-trade agreements and protecting American jobs, that's something that Bernie and Trump are actually close to each other on and Hillary is miles away.

There's a reason why so much union membership is peeling away from Hillary to Trump, it's because no one who's a Democrat or Republican has even pretended to care about the unions or American jobs for decades. Even if Trump is just paying lip service to protecting American jobs, that's more than either major party has done since Jimmy Carter.

Strong Unions machines won Massachusetts for Hillary where it was prime territory for Bernie to crush it.

I don't think there any real data showing Trump stealing Union votes from Democrats. They know the GOP party position and who Trump is running with.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

Has to be sexism. Because clearly it has nothing to do with policy positions.

 

[turtle553]

For argument's sake lets say that in one day, out of a group of 160,000 people who read the Guardian, that all 500 answered.

500/160,000 is 0.003%

Off by a factor of a hundred there. Not that it really matters.

This whole election in a nutshell:

 

[NullPointer]

500 out of 700. It isn't a scientific poll, but still, having that much of a percentage of them willing to jump over to Trump is terrifying.

500 out of 700 people who specifically contacted them about their intention to vote for Trump if Bernie loses the nomination.

They should have just said 500. That 700 number is useless. Whats the point of 200 people contacting them just to point out that they're not what the Guardian was looking for?

 

[InsaneZero]

I only seen one other person pointing out the data, there's a lot more people that said something along the lines of "JUST AS I FEARED" than people rationalizing the numbers.

welcometogaf.webm

Whenever somebody makes a thread for a finding/report, people go straight to talking about the implications of said data rather than discussing how that data was derived unless there's something specifically worth noting about it.

 

[Odrion]

500 out of 700. It isn't a scientific poll, but still, having that much of a percentage of them willing to jump over to Trump is terrifying.

The Guardian called out for Bernie supporters who would switch to Trump and out of the 700 responses (of their 160k daily audience) 500 said they would. That means 200 either said no or sent them dick pics.

 

[Macho Madness]

500 out of 700. It isn't a scientific poll, but still, having that much of a percentage of them willing to jump over to Trump is terrifying.

Please read the article.

These are people who were already polled and asked if they would support Clinton should Sanders not be the nominee. You're talking a percent of a percent. This article is an interesting look into how some people feel but it's not representative of a big swing.

 

[TheOohChild]

500 out of 700. It isn't a scientific poll, but still, having that much of a percentage of them willing to jump over to Trump is terrifying.

500 out of 700 who specifically responded to this column

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/08/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-supporters

If Bernie Sanders fails to win the Democratic nomination, are you planning on voting for Donald Trump instead? We want to hear from you

 

[ApharmdX]

Any Bernie supporter who says they won't vote Hillary in the general have one thing in common.

Sexism.

That is the ONLY reason to not vote Hillary if Bernie isn't the nominee. They may not want to admit it but it's the truth and everyone else knows it.

Jesus, really, man? I don't agree with voting for Trump when Hillary gets the nomination, but there are other reasons to vote for Trump over Hillary that aren't distilled down to "I'm a sexist". For starters, a Trump victory would send a strong message to the Democratic establishment not to take progressive votes for granted.

 

[Wag]

We have no idea what Trump actually believes in. How would someone know that he shares the same views as Bernie on anything?

Trump believes in doing what's good/right for Trump.

 

[kamspy]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

 

[LiquidSword]

Jesus, really, man? I don't agree with voting for Trump when Hillary gets the nomination, but there are other reasons to vote for Trump over Hillary that aren't distilled down to "I'm a sexist". For starters, a Trump victory would send a strong message to the Democratic establishment not to take progressive votes for granted.

That's great and all but the cost will be blood. Also these people aren't progressives.

 

[hawk2025]

Jesus, really, man? I don't agree with voting for Trump when Hillary gets the nomination, but there are other reasons to vote for Trump over Hillary that aren't distilled down to "I'm a sexist". For starters, a Trump victory would send a strong message to the Democratic establishment not to take progressive votes for granted.

Actually, It would send a strong message to move further to the right.

Nice job.

 

[APF]

a Trump victory would send a strong message to the Democratic establishment not to take progressive votes for granted.

A Trump victory would literally be taken the exact opposite way.

 

[Odrion]

Off by a factor of a hundred there. Not that it really matters.

Oops sorry I put the numbers in the Windows 10 calc and that's what I got. v(o_o)v

 

[Unknown Soldier]

That's great and all but the cost will be blood. Also these people aren't progressives.

The No True Scotsman argument is going to look really bad for the Democrats if they manage to throw this election with their belief they are entitled to all progressive votes.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

What is with all this ridiculous psychoanalysis in regards to Clinton.

But she killed Chelsea!!

 

[Key789]

Jesus, really, man? I don't agree with voting for Trump when Hillary gets the nomination, but there are other reasons to vote for Trump over Hillary that aren't distilled down to "I'm a sexist". For starters, a Trump victory would send a strong message to the Democratic establishment not to take progressive votes for granted.

So people should vote for Trump to send a message to the Democratic Party, even if means electing a sexist, xenophobic racist POS. I'm hoping you aren't one of those people, because people's lives could be ruined with a trump presidency.

 

[LiquidSword]

The One True Scotsman argument is going to look really bad for the Democrats if they manage to throw this election with their belief they are entitled to all progressive votes.

Why did you quote me to make your weird "entitled" argument that you have repeated several times now with no explanation?

 

[shortsFortallPeople]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

supreme court nominees? Not voting for an openly xenophobic and dog whistling candidate?

Or dont vote for president but don't forget to vote for members of congress and any other things on the ballot.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

From what I've seen its people who want to see the "system" change no matter what change that is. They think Hillary won't change it, and so if they can't get Bernie, who they think will pull the whole thing out, they will just go for trump who they think will at least burn it all down. Seems like some just want change no matter what form it takes.

Either way though, those people are psychos. They don't see what damages a trump presidency could actually do to America.

 

[Slayven]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

Trump said he would torture and kill families of terrorists. How is that anti war?

 

[Real Hero]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

She's not a racist or a fascist, she's a career politician who will continue in the way Obama has. Trump is alot worse than that.

 

[lednerg]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

Vote Jill Stein (Green Party), then. Don't give the GOP back its Supreme Court.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

You're delusional if you think there's a huge gap of ideology between the left and right on ALL issues. On primarily social issues, the left and right are clearly defined in the US. Nobody is arguing about that.

But on economic issues, the left and right are exactly the same these days which is why Democratic President Obama is working with mainstream Republicans to pass the TPP. The primary base of "anti-establishment" votes are the ones tired of both the Democrats and Republicans being controlled by the corporations who are selling the country out in the name of globalization and free trade and further enriching the 1% along the way.

Starting with Bill Clinton and his "Third Way", the Democrats have basically become the same as the Republicans on the economy. It was Clinton who signed NAFTA, after all. Obama presided over the largest expansion of the federal budget deficit and the largest growth of income inequality since the Great Depression. Obama enshrined the Bush tax cuts permanently into law.

To even pretend the left and right are different on the economy these days is lunacy. And these are the voters who don't want to be anywhere near Hillary, and if they are forced to switch from Bernie to Trump to further their own interests then that's their voter's right as an American citizen.

Ahhh, I'm delusional huh? I'm delusional because I'm not parroting the same BS about how horrible trade agreements are in a GLOBALIZED WORLD.

News flash, free trade was going to happen and will continue to happen. You can't turn off the free trade machine, there is no going backwards. If you think all the jobs and wages we lost are because of NAFTA then you're reading into your own shit and proclaiming it to be fact.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-12-30/nafta-20-years-after-neither-miracle-nor-disaster

You're acting like NAFTA destroyed the US economy.

The Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank based in Washington, estimates that Nafta was responsible for the loss or displacement of more than half a million American jobs, mainly in manufacturing. Some Nafta supporters say certain job losses were inevitable but that the agreement was so broadly stimulative that the net effect on employment was either negligible or positive. (For what it’s worth, total U.S. employment is up about 22 percent since Nafta was enacted.)

Half a million jobs displaced for a total, and that's not even including or arguing the other variables of a 21'st century economy and the inherent nature of increased automation.

The economic angle of each party is far more than just agreement or disagreements on free trade, and to say that because there is an agreement on the TPP which is aimed to take territory away from China before they expand is simply silly. I could do without the name calling too, but if you wanna get into that part I'm more than happy to indulge.

 

[ApharmdX]

A Trump victory would literally be taken the exact opposite way.

I disagree. The theme this election cycle has been anti-establishment. Many voters are tired of what they feel are the same old crooked political oligarchy. If the establishment fails to secure the presidency, then there will be a shakeup, either way.

So people should vote for Trump to send a message to the Democratic Party, even if means electing a sexist, xenophobic racist POS. I'm hoping you aren't one of those people, because people's lives could be ruined with a trump presidency.

I'll stifle my vomit and vote for Hillary in the general, but I don't automatically feel like all other Bernie supporters are obligated to vote for her. Certainly without her actually earning their votes I couldn't say that they should.

 

[Garrett Hawke]

If Hillary gets the nom and Bernie doesn't fully, genuinely endorse her properly then he will be responsible for a lot of this shitvoting tbh.

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

She doesn't hate anyone who isn't white, male, or Donald Trump?

 

[br0ken_shad0w]

You're delusional if you think there's a huge gap of ideology between the left and right on ALL issues. On primarily social issues, the left and right are clearly defined in the US. Nobody is arguing about that.

But on economic issues, the left and right are exactly the same these days which is why Democratic President Obama is working with mainstream Republicans to pass the TPP. The primary base of "anti-establishment" votes are the ones tired of both the Democrats and Republicans being controlled by the corporations who are selling the country out in the name of globalization and free trade and further enriching the 1% along the way.

Starting with Bill Clinton and his "Third Way", the Democrats have basically become the same as the Republicans on the economy. It was Clinton who signed NAFTA, after all. Obama presided over the largest expansion of the federal budget deficit and the largest growth of income inequality since the Great Depression. Obama enshrined the Bush tax cuts permanently into law.

To even pretend the left and right are different on the economy these days is lunacy. And these are the voters who don't want to be anywhere near Hillary, and if they are forced to switch from Bernie to Trump to further their own interests then that's their voter's right as an American citizen.

Frankly thinking that both parities are the same with regards to the economy is the real lunacy. Supply side economics alone is why I'll never vote Republican.

 

[SURGEdude]

Every time this topic comes up, I just try to calm myself by repeating "Most of these voters probably weren't reliable democratic voters anyway, so they don't represent a loss from the baseline votes in November. These voters are likely a very small minority of Bernie fans. This sort of thing happens every election."

I'm not sure how true it is, but at this point it's my litany against fear.

I think your assumptions are right on. It's a small fraction of people. I'm sure some of Hillary's support would shift as well were there a Rubio vs. Bernie general. In both cases it would be so minor as to have little to no effect.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Why did you quote me to make your weird "entitled" argument that you have repeated several times now with no explanation?

Every Hillary supporter's fallback argument when all others have failed is basically "You have to vote for Hillary or the world will end when Trump is President". There is no argument beyond that for why a Bernie supporter would actually want to, of their own free will, want to vote for Hillary. Maybe "entitled" is the wrong phrasing, I should just say "FUD" instead because that's literally what it is.

Frankly thinking that both parities are the same with regards to the economy is the real lunacy. Supply side economics alone is why I'll never vote Republican.

The Democrats embraced every part of the Republican economic theory long ago, including supply-side economics. Who made the Bush tax cuts permanent? Obama did.

 

[Cipherr]

The No True Scotsman argument is going to look really bad for the Democrats if they manage to throw this election with their belief they are entitled to all progressive votes.

That so eh?

Yeah, well. November aint that far. Let's wait and see who looks irrational after the votes come in.

 

[AkumaNiko]

hmmm they did not ask myself or my wife. #anyonebuttrump

 

[TyrantII]

You're delusional if you think there's a huge gap of ideology between the left and right on ALL issues. On primarily social issues, the left and right are clearly defined in the US. Nobody is arguing about that.

But on economic issues, the left and right are exactly the same these days which is why Democratic President Obama is working with mainstream Republicans to pass the TPP. The primary base of "anti-establishment" votes are the ones tired of both the Democrats and Republicans being controlled by the corporations who are selling the country out in the name of globalization and free trade and further enriching the 1% along the way.

Starting with Bill Clinton and his "Third Way", the Democrats have basically become the same as the Republicans on the economy. It was Clinton who signed NAFTA, after all. Obama presided over the largest expansion of the federal budget deficit and the largest growth of income inequality since the Great Depression. Obama enshrined the Bush tax cuts permanently into law.

To even pretend the left and right are different on the economy these days is lunacy. And these are the voters who don't want to be anywhere near Hillary, and if they are forced to switch from Bernie to Trump to further their own interests then that's their voter's right as an American citizen.

Trade deals / free trade isn't inherently bad. There's actually a lot of benefits to competitive advantage.

The problem is how it's been implemented, in this supply side conventional wisdom that's infected everything since Reagan.

We could have propper trade deals that also see the benefits legislated down to the 99% if we get the right leaders in. Dems are realizing this, but its not a change that's going to happen over night.

It sucks, but the current flavor of CW economics is a direct result of 40 years of organizing from the GOP. Democrats who want change, take note. There's lessons to learn.

 

[Macho Madness]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

- Trump's actual policy on free trade is "We need to make better deals and bring jobs back" which is vague, he's a businessman who profits from free trade, and seems to want to start trade wars which helps no one. We need to make better trade deals but his ideas are out there if you ask me. I'm also not confident those jobs would come back.

- Campaign finance reform. I'd say this is wash between the two. Trump is open to accepting outside campaign donations for the general election, Hillary does accept big money donations. Hillary says overturning the Citizens United ruling is a major importance to her picking Supreme Court justices (where such a thing would most likely take place). I don't have confidence in Trump to do the same given his comments on Scalia.

- Both have shaky pasts on war but Hillary actually does believe in diplomacy. Trump has already committed to sending 20-30,000 troops to Syria.

 

[T'Zariah]

The issues that matter to me are:

- Free trade
- Campaign finance reform
- Not going to war

Bernie is my first choice by a million miles. What makes Hillary a better second choice for me than Trump?

You don't think Clinton doesn't want CFR?

You think she'll start a WAR?!

You can't be fucking serious.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Personally I've always been a bit disgusted by people who only are about issues that personally affect them, rather than issues that will affect the long term good of the nation and all the people who live in it. Not to mention I wish we could extend more empathy and good will towards people who aren't from our own country.

I think a Trump presidency would fuck over the USA in a number of ways, including increasing racial tensions and violence, hurting diversity programs, and completely screwing over our foreign relations. The last is especially vital since it's harder for future presidents to reverse and easier for trump to screw up by himself (as opposed to issues that would need to pass through congress anyways)

 

[hawk2025]

It surprises me that progressives that are supposedly defenders of common sense research are categorically against free trade in 2016.

The evidence is overwhelmingly and resoundingly against you. The entirety of the academic left disagrees, and it's up to you to decide that you would rather side with fringe dissenters with weak or non-existant empirical evidence.

Much like the anti-FED goldbugs, I suppose. How's that hyperinflation coming along?

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

I think there's a large segment of people who feel like "If you're not willing to do what's best for you, I hope you crash and burn instead." Has nothing to do with sexism, has nothing to do with racism. It's a feeling of "if you can't see what's best for you then you deserve worse than you have now." "Take your medicine and like it, or die without it." Smug superiority, sure, but that's not sexism or racism.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

It surprises me that progressives that are supposedly defenders of common sense research are categorically against free trade in 2016.

The evidence is overwhelmingly and resoundingly against you. The entirety of the academic left disagrees, and it's up to you to decide that you would rather side with fringe dissenters with weak or non-existant empirical evidence.

Much like the anti-FED goldbugs, I suppose. How's that hyperinflation coming along?

it's so bad man, I've had to eat my neighbors and use their money to stitch together a blanket just to keep warm

 

[Hot Coldman]

I'll take "losing all perspective" for $1000, Alex

 

[Averon]

I live in a safe blue state (Illinois) so my abstaining from voting for Hilary won't matter. I'll vote for my congressman and to unseat Mark Kirk, but that's it.

 

[LeleSocho]

*reads title*
Now that would be stupid.

 

[lednerg]

It surprises me that progressives that are supposedly defenders of common sense research are categorically against free trade in 2016.

The evidence is overwhelmingly and resoundingly against you. The entirety of the academic left disagrees, and it's up to you to decide that you would rather side with fringe dissenters with weak or non-existant empirical evidence.

Much like the anti-FED goldbugs, I suppose. How's that hyperinflation coming along?

Free trade isn't the goal of TPP.

 

[kamspy]

supreme court nominees? Not voting for an openly xenophobic and dog whistling candidate?

Or dont vote for president but don't forget to vote for members of congress and any other things on the ballot.

Are supreme court nominations worth more than peoples lives in Syria and soon to be Iran?

You don't think Clinton doesn't want CFR?

You think she'll start a WAR?!

You can't be fucking serious.

I think she would gladly escalate the one in Syria. She's implied as much. Iran is always next on that list with those people. I don't want that country to be destroyed either.

 

[APF]

I disagree. The theme this election cycle has been anti-establishment. Many voters are tired of what they feel are the same old crooked political oligarchy. If the establishment fails to secure the presidency, then there will be a shakeup, either way.

Even if I grant this will be the outcome of the election, it does not follow that this means progressive policies will be the victor of that conversation, given the fact that (in a Trump win) someone who embodies the polar opposite came out of nowhere and defied all statistical and demographic probability to steal the highest office in the land. In the 2000 election, the message wasn't "golly we should have been more aligned with those Nader voters," it was "you selfish assholes cost us everything!" You can really tell who went through that election and who didn't.

 

[Meowster]

I don't really see how voting for the racist, sexist, slightly homophobic man who wants to build a huge wall, makes authoritarian demands and promotes active violence toward anyone who opposes him, wants to forcibly deport millions, would be showing the Democratic Party that they want a more left candidate. If anything, that would be exact opposite, lmao.

 

[TyrantII]

Are supreme court nominations worth more than peoples lives in Syria and soon to be Iran?



I think she would gladly escalate the one in Syria. She's implied as much. Iran is always next on that list with those people. I don't want that country to be destroyed either.

Have you been paying attention to what Trump thinks of Syrians and Iranians?

His opinion starts with the gallows.

 

[besada]

I'm generally of the opinion that anyone who votes for Trump has something going wrong with their brain.

That said, people unwilling to vote for Hillary aren't necessarily doing so because they're sexist. Some people don't like Hillary, for reasons that may be arguable, but are not fictional. She has a very long history, and much of it is questionable at best.

I'll be voting for her if she wins the nomination (which won't make an ounce of difference because I'm in Texas) but I'm not going to immediately assume that anyone who isn't willing to vote for her is doing so because they hate women. No more than I'm going to assume that people not voting for Sanders are doing so because they hate Jews.

Sometimes people have different focuses than yours. Your focus may be "any candidate but Trump!" but someone else's focus may be "No candidate that lies a lot" (which makes Trump a pretty fucked up choice) or "no candidate that takes money from Wall Street", or whatever weird criteria you're using to pick your candidate (see Huelen).

 

[royalan]

At this point, I can't respect anybody who votes for Trump.

The amount of hate that man has spread, the violence he's condoned. There's no washing that away at this point.

Screw his vague-as-shit policy positions. A vote for Trump is a vote for a hatemonger. A racist. A xenophobe.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

It surprises me that progressives that are supposedly defenders of common sense research are categorically against free trade in 2016.

The evidence is overwhelmingly and resoundingly against you. The entirety of the academic left disagrees, and it's up to you to decide that you would rather side with fringe dissenters with weak or non-existant empirical evidence.

Much like the anti-FED goldbugs, I suppose. How's that hyperinflation coming along?

Are you pretending the TPP is actually a free-trade agreement? You don't need thousands of pages to proclaim that trade is now free across the entire TPP economic zone. Those thousands of pages are mainly carve-outs for every nation in TPP to ensure some aspects of the trade are not actually free for every nation, to protect their own economic interests.

Also a significant portion of TPP is dedicated mainly to expanding American corporate power over the TPP economic zone. The infamous American lifetime + 75 years copyright regime is the most glaring example of this. But also the expansion of patent protection for American pharmaceutical companies should be alarming to every country in TPP that isn't America if they like reasonably priced drugs for life-threatening illnesses.

No one is claiming expansion of trading rights is inherently bad. I'm not and I never have. But the reality is that that the way "free trade" is implemented in the real world is mainly about increasing the power of corporations and enriching the 1%. There's nothing actually free about it.