2016 Democratic Thread

[StrangeSox]

The rnc abandoned dole in 96 to focus on congressional races, but that was because everyone knew it was a quixotic campaign and not because dole was a horrible person they couldn't be tied to. They still supported and endorsed him, it was more of a funding shift.

 

I think you need to go back to goldwater to find a similar example of am anti establishment fringe wing winning the nomination and getting rejected by at least some of the party leadership openly in the general election. The parties had more ideological overlap/mixing at the time, though, so I don't know if it was as stark and jarring. The Democrats had gone through the dixiecrat stuff a little before that for example.

 

Re: religion the reason that there are so many regional protestant denominations in America is historically due to ideological splits over slavery.

[lostfan]

Eh. I think the national view of religion is what has really changed here. It used to be pretty assumed that someone's religious views were going to be largely what their political views were based on. I don't think it is a case of this being a step forward towards religion, I think is more of a case of a good portion of the country taking a step back away from religion so it just appears differently.

 

For example, it has been a pretty consistent theme to use the bible as a justification for the separation of the races. It is just today that more and more people have turned their backs on that sort of stupidity. It isn't that this sort of thinking is new, it is that it stands out more today than it used to because it was more commonly accepted. Things like divorce, kids out of wedlock, gay rights, etc all fall under that same umbrella. It stands out more today, but it isn't new. In fact I would argue it is precisely this revulsion towards those lines of thinking that I feel tells me more that people are moving away from those lines of thinking than to it. Otherwise people in large numbers still wouldn't be getting upset about it like they weren't 50, 100, 200 years ago.

Abolitionists used religious justifications to do what they were doing too, FWIW

[southsider2k5]

Abolitionists used religious justifications to do what they were doing too, FWIW

 

Absolutely. Hell I use it today to justify the non-ostracization of "sinners" like gays. Even if you believe something is a sin, or someone is a sinner, it is pretty clear to me biblical that it isn't up to you to judge them. That Jesus dude kind of took care of that problem. The new testament is pretty clear on that whole love thing.

 

But that doesn't stop people from trying. It is just less socially acceptable than ever before because fewer people than ever before believe it.

[bmags]

Eh. I think the national view of religion is what has really changed here. It used to be pretty assumed that someone's religious views were going to be largely what their political views were based on. I don't think it is a case of this being a step forward towards religion, I think is more of a case of a good portion of the country taking a step back away from religion so it just appears differently.

 

For example, it has been a pretty consistent theme to use the bible as a justification for the separation of the races. It is just today that more and more people have turned their backs on that sort of stupidity. It isn't that this sort of thinking is new, it is that it stands out more today than it used to because it was more commonly accepted. Things like divorce, kids out of wedlock, gay rights, etc all fall under that same umbrella. It stands out more today, but it isn't new. In fact I would argue it is precisely this revulsion towards those lines of thinking that I feel tells me more that people are moving away from those lines of thinking than to it. Otherwise people in large numbers still wouldn't be getting upset about it like they weren't 50, 100, 200 years ago.

 

This is probably true. What is the biggest indicator this election? I think they said college degree was a bigger signifier than gender, religion, anything.

 

Some of that would of course be affected by the age swings, but one thing with the lack of a "third place" like church is the views of people being segregated not by race but by class.

[southsider2k5]

This is probably true. What is the biggest indicator this election? I think they said college degree was a bigger signifier than gender, religion, anything.

 

Some of that would of course be affected by the age swings, but one thing with the lack of a "third place" like church is the views of people being segregated not by race but by class.

 

There is a pretty huge racial divide.

[StrangeSox]

This is probably true. What is the biggest indicator this election? I think they said college degree was a bigger signifier than gender, religion, anything.

 

Some of that would of course be affected by the age swings, but one thing with the lack of a "third place" like church is the views of people being segregated not by race but by class.

Specifically it's a divide between college and non college whites. Every other demographic isn't even close. Fwiw Republicans typically win white college demographic by a decent amount.

 

If you break it down even more, I think non college white women are close to even but trump's main core of support is non college white men.

Edited August 26, 2016 by StrangeSox

[bmags]

Specifically it's a divide between college and non college whites. Every other demographic isn't even close. Fwiw Republicans typically win white college demographic by a decent amount.

 

If you break it down even more, I think non college white women are close to even but trump's main core of support is non college white men.

 

Yeah this is right. Ugh, so fatigued on demographic splicing in polls. Can't wait for this election to be over. brain is boiled.

[NorthSideSox72]

I saw one of the polls had Trump's support among African Americans in North Carolina was at... 3%. It's very rare to see any number that close to one end or the other in any candidate survey item. The general rule is chocolate - about 92% of the population likes chocolate. If your result is above 92% or below 8%, it is effectively 100/0 because anything closer is just noise.

 

[StrangeSox]

There have been several state polls showing trump running at 0-1% support among African Americans. Hilary might actually outperform Obama's margins due to both her decades of outreach to black communities and how awful Trump is.

[bmags]

Jill Stein

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-p...m=.d1d832f0b678

[StrangeSox]

New Department of Education rules from the Obama administration are cutting off federal funding to any new ITT Tech students. ITT is one of the largest for-profit college chains and has a pretty sketchy track record.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-government...tute-1472152253

 

I'm really glad they're turning off the firehose of free federal money for all of these for-profit colleges that typically leave their students with huge non-dischargable debts and poor job prospects.

[caulfield12]

The rnc abandoned dole in 96 to focus on congressional races, but that was because everyone knew it was a quixotic campaign and not because dole was a horrible person they couldn't be tied to. They still supported and endorsed him, it was more of a funding shift.

 

I think you need to go back to goldwater to find a similar example of am anti establishment fringe wing winning the nomination and getting rejected by at least some of the party leadership openly in the general election. The parties had more ideological overlap/mixing at the time, though, so I don't know if it was as stark and jarring. The Democrats had gone through the dixiecrat stuff a little before that for example.

 

Re: religion the reason that there are so many regional protestant denominations in America is historically due to ideological splits over slavery.

 

McGovern for the Dems as well in 1972....that and the 1964 election really stand out.

Edited August 26, 2016 by caulfield12

[Jerksticks]

Absolutely. Hell I use it today to justify the non-ostracization of "sinners" like gays. Even if you believe something is a sin, or someone is a sinner, it is pretty clear to me biblical that it isn't up to you to judge them. That Jesus dude kind of took care of that problem. The new testament is pretty clear on that whole love thing.

 

But that doesn't stop people from trying. It is just less socially acceptable than ever before because fewer people than ever before believe it.

Nicely put. I finally read the gospel a few years back and I was amazed. It should just be titled "How to live". It's almost impossible as a human with a conscience to disagree with any of the things Jesus says. Emulate that man's attitude and you'll probably have a wonderful life. It saddens me that men have twisted those words so much over the years, to the point where it's super trendy to bash it without ever reading it. I'd challenge even the strongest of atheists to try to disagree that those words are good.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Jerksticks

[CrimsonWeltall]

Nicely put. I finally read the gospel a few years back and I was amazed. It should just be titled "How to live". It's almost impossible as a human with a conscience to disagree with any of the things Jesus says. Emulate that man's attitude and you'll probably have a wonderful life. It saddens me that men have twisted those words so much over the years, to the point where it's super trendy to bash it without ever reading it. I'd challenge even the strongest of atheists to try to disagree that those words are good.

 

Jesus' horrific promotion of "hell" is more than sufficient to nullify his hippie-dippie "love everybody" talks.

[StrangeSox]

Paul "When you go to war, if you know the enemy, the enemy dresses in red and you dress in blue, you shoot at red. … You shoot at the enemy. You try to identify the enemy. And the enemy right now, the overwhelming majority of people coming in are people of color or people of Hispanic origin." LePage is a pretty good case study of why a third party that really only splits one of the existing two major parties in half is not exactly a good thing. LePage won with 37.6% of the vote because the two liberal candidates split the other 60%. Our electoral system just doesn't incentivize having multiple competitive parties.

[StrangeSox]

Trump having a pretty big meltdown on twitter this morning, not sure what set him off.

 

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

Look how bad it is getting! How much more crime, how many more shootings, will it take for African-Americans and Latinos to vote Trump=SAFE!

8:02 AM - 29 Aug 2016

2,979 2,979 Retweets 8,937 8,937 likes

[bmags]

Trump having a pretty big meltdown on twitter this morning, not sure what set him off.

 

I think it's probably just trying to save face for the horrendously callous dwyane wade tweets over the weekend.

 

Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner are splitting up.

[DrunkBomber]

Anthony Weiner got out of his cage again.

[StrangeSox]

I saw one of the polls had Trump's support among African Americans in North Carolina was at... 3%. It's very rare to see any number that close to one end or the other in any candidate survey item. The general rule is chocolate - about 92% of the population likes chocolate. If your result is above 92% or below 8%, it is effectively 100/0 because anything closer is just noise.

 

His response in this poll is a whopping null%

[StrangeSox]

Kellyanne Conway, last seen working for Todd "legitimate rape" Akin before becoming the co-campaign manager or campaign co-manager or whatever her title is for Trump, once said "rape would not exist" if women were stronger

 

https://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/trump-camp...-strong-enough/

 

the best people, believe me.

[StrangeSox]

Trump also used illegal alien labor via his modeling agency, having them come over and work on tourist visas.

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/0...gal-immigration

[bmags]

So today will be interesting. Do we really have 2 months left? good god.

[Chisoxfn]

Trump confirms president will pay for wall. Two hours later, president says, I didn't say that.

[bmags]

Trump confirms president will pay for wall. Two hours later, president says, I didn't say that.

 

This is kind of what I expect. But, considering Trump's propensity to echo whatever the last person told him, it's also possible he has another "softening" and claims he was wrong, goes back and then finds out that is bad, then tells us there was no softening again.

 

BUt both are preferable to something worse.

[StrangeSox]

Mike pence was very upset in 1996 that aids activists were allowed to speak at the rnc.