2018 Democrats thread

[StrangeSox]

Everyone throws around the line "you need to be more than AGAINST TRUMP" but I haven't seen a campaign yet that actually has done that. Pritzker is probably the worst at it but even he tamped it down as it got closer.

 

this isn't the first article to hit on this, there have been other ones highlighting how "anti-Trump" is great for energize the activists and volunteers, but running on actual issues is what's needed to get enough non-base voters to win.

 

Trump, Trump, Trump:

A Losing Strategy

 

For a recent column, I did some retrospective reporting on last year’s Alabama Senate campaign. During that race, the progressive group Priorities USA came up with a series of political messages and then ran online surveys to see which advertisements resonated with voters. The goal was to see which were most and least likely to motivate African-Americans to turn out and vote for Doug Jones, the Democrat running against Roy Moore.

 

Priorities USA had a long list of potential themes to choose from: Moore’s history as an accused molester; his ties to white supremacists; his opposition to Obamacare; Doug Jones’s endorsements from civil-rights leaders; and more.

 

The most effective message, as I described in the column, ended up being one about education — how Jones would help more people go to college and get good jobs. I didn’t have room in the column to describe what the least effective message was: One that cast Moore as a rubber stamp for President Trump.

 

People who heard this message actually seemed to become less likely to vote. As Civis Analytics, a data firm hired by Priorities, wrote in a memo, “This finding is consistent with previous research on African-American voters, which suggests that many feel less motivated to be politically involved when Trump’s name is invoked.”

 

To many African-American voters in Alabama, Cecil said, “Donald Trump is the living embodiment of the idea that voting doesn’t matter.” Trump is profoundly unfit to be a president — a congenital liar and racist who lost the popular vote by 2.9 million votes. And yet president he is.

[caulfield12]

According to the Cook Political Report, 14 more seats in the House shifted in a more positive way towards Dems since the Ryan retirement announcement...

[Dam8610]

this isn't the first article to hit on this, there have been other ones highlighting how "anti-Trump" is great for energize the activists and volunteers, but running on actual issues is what's needed to get enough non-base voters to win.

 

Trump, Trump, Trump:

A Losing Strategy

 

If African Americans are motivated by helping people get access to education and good jobs, why isn't Bernie Sanders president?

[Reddy]

If African Americans are motivated by helping people get access to education and good jobs, why isn't Bernie Sanders president?

I'll ask you a better question. Why did they turn out in such huge numbers for Doug Jones?

[caulfield12]

I'll ask you a better question. Why did they turn out in such huge numbers for Doug Jones?

 

 

Hard to isolate those numbers with the sexual assault and constitutional rights violations issues with Moore.

 

The numbers in the Lamb race would be of more interest, although that was a pretty sizable majority white district in Western PA.

Edited April 14, 2018 by caulfield12

[Dam8610]

I'll ask you a better question. Why did they turn out in such huge numbers for Doug Jones?

 

That's not a better question, because the answer is the oligarchy or "party backing" as it's commonly referenced.

 

Bernie Sanders was calling for free college, free healthcare, government financed job training and apprenticeship programs, raising the minimum wage to a living wage, and major prison and criminal justice reform, and had plans to implement taxes that would pay for all of it that mostly consisted of heavily taxing wealth and the wealthy. Considering the average African American has a far lower net worth than the average Caucasian, is far more likely to be killed by police, far more likely to be convicted of a crime and receive prison time, and far less likely to receive a call for an interview when submitting a resume, Bernie Sanders platform was tailor made for African American interests. That Clinton was able to convince them to vote against their interests is another fine example of the oligarchy at work.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Dam8610

[caulfield12]

Union buster extraordinaire or dolt?

 

Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin says children were left vulnerable to harm, sexual assault and drugs as a result of public school closures throughout the state Friday to allow teachers and supporters to protest at the state's Capitol.

 

"I guarantee you somewhere in Kentucky today a child was sexually assaulted that was left at home because there was nobody there to watch them," the Republican governor told reporters Friday afternoon, according to CNN affiliate WDRB.

 

"I guarantee you somewhere today, a child was physically harmed or ingested poison because they were home alone because a single parent didn't have any money to take care of them."

 

Bevin went on to say that "some were introduced to drugs for the first time because they were vulnerable and left alone."

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/14/politics/ken...rike/index.html

[Dam8610]

Union buster extraordinaire or dolt?

 

Why not both?

Edited April 14, 2018 by Dam8610

[Reddy]

That's not a better question, because the answer is the oligarchy or "party backing" as it's commonly referenced.

 

Bernie Sanders was calling for free college, free healthcare, government financed job training and apprenticeship programs, raising the minimum wage to a living wage, and major prison and criminal justice reform, and had plans to implement taxes that would pay for all of it that mostly consisted of heavily taxing wealth and the wealthy. Considering the average African American has a far lower net worth than the average Caucasian, is far more likely to be killed by police, far more likely to be convicted of a crime and receive prison time, and far less likely to receive a call for an interview when submitting a resume, Bernie Sanders platform was tailor made for African American interests. That Clinton was able to convince them to vote against their interests is another fine example of the oligarchy at work.

Black voters didn't turn out for Clinton. They did for Doug Jones.

 

Explain using Sandersism please.

[Dam8610]

Black voters didn't turn out for Clinton. They did for Doug Jones.

 

Explain using Sandersism please.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/resu...imaries/alabama

 

77.8%-19.2%. The oligarchy convinced those voters to vote against their own interests, yet again. In fact, the exact same way as when they voted for Trump over Clinton in the general. Why did they vote for Jones? Probably a crapton of grassroots activism that was activated in large part by Trump's presidential election win combined with the Roy Moore damn near admitting to pedophilia.

[Reddy]

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/resu...imaries/alabama

 

77.8%-19.2%. The oligarchy convinced those voters to vote against their own interests, yet again. In fact, the exact same way as when they voted for Trump over Clinton in the general. Why did they vote for Jones? Probably a crapton of grassroots activism that was activated in large part by Trump's presidential election win combined with the Roy Moore damn near admitting to pedophilia.

It's hard to take you seriously with all your oligarchy stuff.

 

And black voters did not vote for Trump over Hillary in the general, but they also didn't turn out for Hillary the way they did for Obama. That means that Trump is NOT the driving factor in black turnout. It's issues and grassroots organizing that turns them out, just like everyone else.

[Heads22]

I don't know if you're ever gonna match the African-American turnout for Obama for obvious reasons.

[caulfield12]

None of this matters much for Jones if black voters don’t flood the polls. HuffPost spent last week walking the streets of Birmingham ? a city where Jones is campaigning heavily ? asking a dozen or so black residents if they plan to vote and what they think of Jones. The overwhelming response was yes to voting and mild enthusiasm for the Democratic nominee.

 

“Absolutely,” said Sy Belyuu, 48, when asked if she was supporting Jones. “So many of us did not vote last year because we just knew [Hillary Clinton] was going to win. I don’t want that to happen again.”

 

Belyeu, a real estate agent and graduate student at the University of Alabama, said she thinks black voters are more focused on the election than the media has depicted. She said everyone she talks to is planning to vote, though it’s not because they love Jones. They’re horrified at the prospect of Moore winning.

 

“We just don’t look good in the news, you know what I’m saying? It looks like Hicksville,” she said. “There’s a lot of racism, a lot of homophobia. We don’t want to be characterized like that any longer. So there’s definitely a push to get out to vote.”

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/doug-j...4b0b185e539def4

 

 

Jones could alienate black voters if he’s not careful. His campaign circulated a mailer this week that shows a black man with a skeptical look on his face, and the caption, “Think if a black man went after high school girls anyone would try to make him a senator?”

 

The mailer was a jab at Moore, but it landed with a thud among some in the black community.

 

“Someone, probably a white man, thought that the image would resonate with black people and motivate them to get out the vote,” fumed Michael Harriot of The Root, an African-American culture website. “It’s as if black people were considering voting for the child molester until some brilliant strategist posited, ‘What if he were black, though?’”

 

https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/13/politics/bla...ones/index.html

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/13/a...it-polls-294159

 

Jones had a large amount of money flowing (just like Ossoff), lots of star power in terms of African-American politicians and celebs when the race became a realistic get...but he didn’t do anything special. Mostly a case of being in the right place at the right time, and he had the history going back to the church bombings (but hadn't done much since in the eyes of the black community.)

 

 

 

According to exit polls conducted by the National Election Pool, blacks made up about 29 percent of the electorate on Tuesday and voted for Jones almost unanimously, 96 percent to 4 percent — results that match turnout patterns showing greater than expected vote counts in many of the Black Belt counties and the state’s urban centers.

 

Jones also made some inroads among white voters — particularly women and those with college degrees. While Moore still won white voters by more than 2 to 1 margin, 68 percent to 30 percent, that is closer than other recent elections in which Republicans won nearly 4 out of 5 white voters.

 

Moore posted those kinds of margins among whites without a college degree, but he carried white voters with college degrees by only 17 points, 57 percent to 40 percent for Jones. And Jones successfully siphoned away 34 percent of white women, including 45 percent of white women with college degrees.

 

Among female voters as a whole, Jones won by 16 points, 57 percent to 41 percent, swamping Moore’s 14-point win among male voters.

 

[Dam8610]

It's hard to take you seriously with all your oligarchy stuff.

 

And black voters did not vote for Trump over Hillary in the general, but they also didn't turn out for Hillary the way they did for Obama. That means that Trump is NOT the driving factor in black turnout. It's issues and grassroots organizing that turns them out, just like everyone else.

 

It's hard to take people who don't take data and peer-reviewed studies seriously seriously.

 

I just said grassroots activism was the main cause, but that only happened because Trump won the presidency. Had Hillary won the presidency, Democrats would've been just as complacent as they were under Obama and Roy Moore would be a senator right now.

[StrangeSox]

*sessions would still be the senator from Alabama

[Reddy]

*sessions would still be the senator from Alabama

[Reddy]

I don't know if you're ever gonna match the African-American turnout for Obama for obvious reasons.

you racist.

[Reddy]

It's hard to take people who don't take data and peer-reviewed studies seriously seriously.

 

I just said grassroots activism was the main cause, but that only happened because Trump won the presidency. Had Hillary won the presidency, Democrats would've been just as complacent as they were under Obama and Roy Moore would be a senator right now.

Show me the peer-reviewed study or data that supports your case that the black vote in Alabama only turned out because Trump won the Presidency.

 

In the meantime, read this: How Grassroots Organizers Got Black Voters to the Polls in Alabama - The Atlantic

[caulfield12]

They upped the total vote turnout percentage from 24/25 (expected) to 29.

 

That said, a Clinton presidency and/or no pedophilia accusations against Moore drawing so much attention to the race...not to mention Trump originally supporting Luther Strange, and the whole election would have been a nothing burger.

 

Or Sessions would still be comfortably holding his seat.

 

 

[Reddy]

They upped the total vote turnout percentage from 24/25 (expected) to 29.

 

That said, a Clinton presidency and/or no pedophilia accusations against Moore drawing so much attention to the race...not to mention Trump originally supporting Luther Strange, and the whole election would have been a nothing burger.

 

Or Sessions would still be comfortably holding his seat.

Lol. There wouldn't have BEEN an election if Clinton won. And as far as Moore/Pedophilia/Trump, you could make the exact same argument for 2016, except black voters didn't turn out in unprecedented numbers that time. So. I have a lot of trouble with your argument on this one. Why do you feel that black voters are mobilized by a scandalous news cycle in ways others aren't? Why, in your view, did that motivate black voters for Jones and not Hillary? Why don't you think grassroots activism and mobilization within those black communities made any impact?

 

You didn't read The Atlantic article I linked, did you?

[Dam8610]

Show me the peer-reviewed study or data that supports your case that the black vote in Alabama only turned out because Trump won the Presidency.

 

In the meantime, read this: How Grassroots Organizers Got Black Voters to the Polls in Alabama - The Atlantic

 

The comment about data and peer reviewed studies was in reference to your comment about not taking me seriously because I called our society an oligarchy after I provided a peer reviewed study which proved it is. You can choose not to believe a thing in the face of evidence if you'd like, but that's a tactic typically associated with conservative politics in this country.

 

As for your article, why are you linking me to an article that says exactly what I told you? Grassroots activism is the cause the article lists, and the activists interviewed list Trump as one of the primary causes for the rise in political activism. That's exactly what I already told you. I don't know why you felt the need to share the article, you could've just said you read an article that confirms what I told you.

[Dam8610]

Lol. There wouldn't have BEEN an election if Clinton won. And as far as Moore/Pedophilia/Trump, you could make the exact same argument for 2016, except black voters didn't turn out in unprecedented numbers that time. So. I have a lot of trouble with your argument on this one. Why do you feel that black voters are mobilized by a scandalous news cycle in ways others aren't? Why, in your view, did that motivate black voters for Jones and not Hillary? Why don't you think grassroots activism and mobilization within those black communities made any impact?

 

You didn't read The Atlantic article I linked, did you?

 

You clearly didn't read your article, because in it, the activists talk about how everyone "just knew" Hillary was going to win, so they didn't think it was important to turn out. Reading is fundamental, especially if it's a thing you're trying to use as a basis for your argument.

 

[caulfield12]

Let’s put it this way.

 

The Dems (progressives in particular) have to be open to the Conor Lamb?€™s and Doug Joneses of the world to take back the House.

 

No litmus tests. Let?€™s not forget Sanders/Our Revolution has supported a few pro-life and gun rights candidates as well in conservative districts. The gun issue is evolving daily, though.

 

On a national basis, there has to be some compromise in 2020. You can?€™t have Kaine as a VP, and you shouldn?€™t have Sanders/Warren either if you?€™re completely serious about winning, no matter how stacked the deck looks against the GOP on a national basis at the current moment.

 

The Dems also have to make a decision where they are on trade...and it’s not an easy one, as Hillary’s waffling demonstrated.

 

 

https://medium.com/s/jeremiad/the-unfortuna...il-bd1063814dc0

This article is a bit philosophical...but the two choices for the country (and world) are not so obvious moving forward

Edited April 15, 2018 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

New England’s biggest GOP donor is funding Democrats

 

Boston hedge fund billionaire Seth Klarman lavished more than $7 million on Republican candidates and political committees during the Obama administration, using his fortune to help underwrite a GOP takeover of the federal government.

 

But the rise of Donald Trump shocked and dismayed Klarman, as did the timid response from the Republican-controlled House and Senate, which have acquiesced rather than challenge the president’s erratic and divisive ways. So, in an astonishing flip, Klarman, at one point New England's most generous donor to Republicans, is taking his money elsewhere: He’s heaping cash on Democrats.

[Dam8610]

Let’s put it this way.

 

The Dems (progressives in particular) have to be open to the Conor Lamb?€™s and Doug Joneses of the world to take back the House.

 

No litmus tests. Let?€™s not forget Sanders/Our Revolution has supported a few pro-life and gun rights candidates as well in conservative districts. The gun issue is evolving daily, though.

 

On a national basis, there has to be some compromise in 2020. You can?€™t have Kaine as a VP, and you shouldn?€™t have Sanders/Warren either if you?€™re completely serious about winning, no matter how stacked the deck looks against the GOP on a national basis at the current moment.

 

The Dems also have to make a decision where they are on trade...and it’s not an easy one, as Hillary’s waffling demonstrated.

 

 

https://medium.com/s/jeremiad/the-unfortuna...il-bd1063814dc0

This article is a bit philosophical...but the two choices for the country (and world) are not so obvious moving forward

 

"Big tent theory" leads to "majorities" that don't mean anything, so instead of saying "no litmus tests", you should say "all I care about is being able to say 'Democrats hold a majority of elected offices'", because the blue dogs (like Lipinski) are DINOs who are more likely to vote with the Republicans on any major issue, so a "big tent" Democratic "majority" effectively becomes a Republican majority with different names in key positions. It's certainly important to vote for Lipinski over the actual Nazi he's running against, but it was equally important, if not moreso, that his primary challenger Marie Newman should've beat him, so that that vote actually caucused with the Democrats on key issues.

 

Also, Conor Lamb is a progressive as far as I can tell. At least he is on the important (economic) issues. I've heard criticisms of him being "pro-life" as well, but his stance on the issue is that while that is his personal belief, he recognizes the importance of legal abortion and will defend that right as a congressman. All I ask for is to vote correctly. I'd even take a Republican who votes correctly for the wrong reasons.