Why was everyone so shocked by Trumps victory? I believe it is because it was pretty unbelievable that he could have had a shot at winning against anyone.
Everyone? I don't think that I was? Unhappy, certainly. Not wanting to accept reality? A little. I considered Trump to have a very real shot at victory, though, despite how obvious it was that he was a vile con man.
The only reason Trump won was that his opponent was even more "unelectable" than he.
Ha, no. The illegal actions of the Russians and the way that the Republicans and media made a massively huge mountain out of the tantalizing nothing that the Russians fed them was more than enough to shift the election to Trump's win. Why was it that close in the first place? Well... that gets into nastier ground, where just about any Democratic candidate likely would have had a relatively narrow win, at best. Even if we took the decades of slander against the Clintons away and put in a different candidate, the nature of their propaganda machine, electorate, and seriously unethical stratems really needs to be taken into account - and it's not a pretty picture at all.
Trump was looked at at first as a joke, because he was so clearly, blatantly, unfit for the office of POTUS.
When asked, multiple Republicans told me that they voted for Trump
because he was such a joke and they thought that Trump being President would be funny. And, to be fair, if one buys into the BS equivocation that all politicians are equally corrupt and will never do anything to actually help you that the right-wing fosters, voting for Trump immediately becomes much less insane.
Which Democratic policies are more or less popular with voters WHO ARE NOT ALREADY FIRMLY IN THE BAG FOR YOU is not a totally unknown factor ("*Whine* But we can't know for suuuuuuurre *whine*" lamb bleating aside) and focusing on things which are more likely to get you people who weren't already going to vote for you is a good thing. IT'S LITERALLY WHAT POLITICS IS.
Making someone who is already going to vote for you like you more in a way that costs you votes of people who might have voted for you is STUPID.
That's all. That's all I've said. That's all I've ever said. And it's all I will get baited into discussing.
"Firmly in the bag" or not doesn't matter too much if they're not motivated enough to get to the voting booth. THAT has been the biggest loss-causer for Democrats. Remember - Democrats quite significantly outnumber Republicans.
What you're doing is fairly simple, by the look of it. You've grasped onto a simple truth and are trying to over-emphasize how much it matters in the larger picture. There's also a bit of the "why don't the Democrats have a storybook prince riding in on his white horse to slay the evil Trump monster with ease?" in play, too, by the look of it.
So getting back to the thread and tying that in, I'll say it again, if the candidate we choose doesn't recognize how Trump won and how to come back against those social media and mainstream media propaganda tactics, Trump (if he's not impeached) could win again.
Well, at least AOC is helping teach congressional Democrats more about how to properly take advantage of social media. It's actually quite abysmal that she's needing to, though. The MSM, on the other hand, well... it's not like they're likely to stop trying to profit off of a horserace that they create as much as possible - unless, for example, the profit motive was largely taken back out of the news.
You should run Gabbard. Or Williamson. Or Buttigieg. Or Romney.
Hmm... Why not Romney? You'll get enough of the "D" vote to carry those states. You'll get enough of the non-Trumpist conservative vote to win those states. Apparently Obamacare is just Romneycare anyway, so there should be plenty of policy overlap to mollify both sides.
With a little bit of careful marketing, running a right-of-center candidate is probably the Democrats' best shot at getting rid of Trump in 2020.
I think that something might be a little wrong with your eyes if you think that Romney would get enough of the "D" vote to carry the election, even if his opponent were Trump. As a Democrat, I say that it's much more likely that the Democratic Party would simply break if Romney became our candidate, even in the face of the negative partisanship towards Trump.
I can picture the GOP chomping at the bit to start that propaganda campaign against socialism.
Why would you need to? They already have. Democratic Socialism = Cambodian Genocide is a prime example of that, remember?
Not that I expect you to believe me, but that's honestly my train of thought this morning. Would a Warren presidency be so bad?
The institutions would fairly certainly have an immensely easier time coping with her attempts to get them running smoothly and well than they have had with the Trump Administration's attempts to sabotage them, after all.
I am coming from the viewpoint that Beating Trump should be the #1 priority for the Dems, overriding everything else, as a matter of national survival. They should nominate the candidate most likely to do that.
I also contend that the Swing voters ..the much despised "Moderates" and "Centrists" will decide this election. There is no vast hidden "Progressive" vote out there. So,logically, the Dems need to nominate somebody who can bring out the moderates and centrist. My fear is if the Dems nominate too radical a candidate, the Moderates will decide it's a case of two equal evils and stay home.
And if large numbers of the progressive wing of the Dems will stay home or throw away their votes on a third party candidate if somebody not "Progressive" enough for them is nominated, it's a lost cause anyway.
As was noted on 538 - There is no vast or hidden undecided "moderate/centrist" vote to win in the first place. No more really needs said as a response to that, I think.
In that case, you should be outraged at the IT sloppiness of the Dump Administration and not even countenance pulling the lever for Trump in 2020.
Indeed. Trump and his Administration have been horrendous when it comes to IT related things - exponentially worse than even the worst that the GOP dared to accuse Hillary of. Literally, there are IT security people quitting the White House because Trump and co refuse to follow even
very basic security protocols. Well, that and them being targeted for removal by the Administration because, well... this is an Administration that's shown a distinct fondness for political purges of the government.
