Jump to content

ROMAD1

Directions and Objectives For A Future Mainstream Party

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, FloridaTigers said:

So he's going to lose embarrassingly and get swept at the end of it all? ?

I was referring to your comments on Labour and current left-leaning candidates. There are many conservatives and Republicans who don't like Donald Trump. I just don't see how anti-imperialism is a bad thing?

im not a jeremy corbyn fan, for sure.  if i would describe myself politically, it would be as a centrist democrat.

of course, you might think thats the same as a republican!  lol.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Buddha said:

ok.  your quoting me giving an example of black voters voting overwhelmingly for a gay candidate in which i call into question the thesis that black voters wont vote for someone who is gay.

i mean, ive heard that said and im not sure i believe it.  some.black voters are more socially conservative but i dont know if that will translate into not voting for buttigieg.  it might.

as for your apparent thesis that black voters didnt vote for him because of his actions as mayor of south bend, they werent voting for him even before that stuff came out so im not sure it had any effect.

amd corey booker is gay, lol.

No voters had  him on their radar until he ran for President (outside of South Bend, and Indiana). And as soon as he became a public figure, we heard from black people in South Bend and in Indiana that his relationship with them was awful. 

So why would black voters think he is all of a sudden a champion for black people?

Also, what a tired and lazy thing to say Booker is gay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 313DetroitCity said:

So, basically every poll that has come out that shows Sanders or Warren beating Trump is wrong because Buddha just knows better about what will happen.

Also, Sanders is anti-imperalist, which is a good thing. But being anti-imperalist is not being anti-American. And making such an assertion is complete Trumpian nonsense. 

well...every poll had hillary winning in a landslide too but she lost the electoral college.  the national polling isnt all that useful in saying who will win a national election when you have the electoral college.

and those numbers are before you have the national election when there is more of a focus turned on bernie's and warren's policies and their costs.  i dont think its a coincidence that after the press actually started criticizing warren and the costs of her plans that her poll numbers dropped down.

bernie's a little different because he has a pretty hardcore base that warren doesnt have, but in a general election i dont know if it will be enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 313DetroitCity said:

Black voters never rallied behind Harris or Booker either. Didn't realize they were also gay.

Older black voters were hesitant to back Obama in 2008 until he started winning 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Buddha said:

well...every poll had hillary winning in a landslide too but she lost the electoral college.  the national polling isnt all that useful in saying who will win a national election when you have the electoral college.

and those numbers are before you have the national election when there is more of a focus turned on bernie's and warren's policies and their costs.  i dont think its a coincidence that after the press actually started criticizing warren and the costs of her plans that her poll numbers dropped down.

bernie's a little different because he has a pretty hardcore base that warren doesnt have, but in a general election i dont know if it will be enough.

So what are you basing your predictions on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 313DetroitCity said:

No voters had  him on their radar until he ran for President (outside of South Bend, and Indiana). And as soon as he became a public figure, we heard from black people in South Bend and in Indiana that his relationship with them was awful. 

So why would black voters think he is all of a sudden a champion for black people?

Also, what a tired and lazy thing to say Booker is gay. 

i dont know, black voters might actually look at the policies he says he will enact?  

the booker thing was a joke.  sheesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CMRivdog said:

Older black voters were hesitant to back Obama in 2008 until he started winning 

Nah man, black voters only care if someone is gay. They don't have any nuanced positions, nor do they actually follow what a candidate has said/done.

Pete's record with his hometown black community is trash. He even acknowledges it. Knowing that, why would black voters support him? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 313DetroitCity said:

So what are you basing your predictions on?

my views of history and thoughts about the american voter.  same thing everyone bases their predictions on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Buddha said:

i dont know, black voters might actually look at the policies he says he will enact?  

the booker thing was a joke.  sheesh.

Yes, black voters have already looked at what he enacted and his relationship with the black community in South Bend. It was trash. He admits it was trash. Should black voters expect anything else if he were to become President?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Buddha said:

my views of history and thoughts about the american voter.  same thing everyone bases their predictions on.

No, some people base their predictions on data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Deleterious said:

I get jealous when Buddha argues with other people.  

do you see how civil im being?  my therapist is going to be so proud!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Buddha said:

well...every poll had hillary winning in a landslide too but she lost the electoral college.

We've been around the pole about 100 times on this. I was watching the polls in the last month and Hillary's lead maxed out after the 1st debate and then started decaying pretty much every day after that but the media stopped paying attention. What happened in 2016 is that the polls moved a lot at the end - Lee has shown that the final polling was mostly within the margin of error. IIRC most the final real time predictions by election day had Hillary down to about 60% probability, which hardly makes her loss much of an upset based on the polling. When looking at 2020, the question will be to understand opinion moved so strongly at the end  - which has not been the norm in US presidential elections, what created that movement, and is it likely to happen again?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ROMAD1 said:

The Buttegeig issue with older black voters has nothing to do with race

 

1 hour ago, Buddha said:

ive heard that too but i dont know if i agree.

they tried that here in chicago.  our current mayor lori lightfoot is gay and her opponent in the run off

I think it is an issue, more with older black men and it will play more against a gay man than it would against a gay woman. And by the way I don't think this is race related per se.  I think the same is true on the white side - its older men who are most homophobic and they are more homophobic about gay men than lesbian women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

We've been around the pole about 100 times on this. I was watching the polls in the last month and Hillary's lead maxed out after the 1st debate and then started decaying pretty much every day after that but the media stopped paying attention. What happened in 2016 is that the polls moved a lot at the end - Lee has shown that the final polling was mostly within the margin of error. IIRC most the final real time predictions by election day had Hillary down to about 60% probability, which hardly makes her loss much of an upset based on the polling. The question is why did opinion move so strongly at the end  - which has not been the norm in US presidential elections, what created that movement, and is it likely to happen again?

 

the polls were right.  she won the national popular vote by 2-3%.  

but the national polls dont indicate who wins an election based on state electoral votes.  in 2016, there wasnt a lot of late polls for various states.  what there was showed a tightening race.

im not arguing the polls were wrong, i think they were right.  im saying that national polls in november the year before an election are not indicative about what will happen in an election in nobember of next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FloridaTigers said:

We heard this in 2016 and Democrats still lost. Kinda over this "we need a moderate fiscally conservative Dem!" argument.

Corbyn was a leaver at heart and listened to the Blairites in his party. Maybe Dems shouldn't turn impeachment into their own Brexit drama debacle and actually present a clear economic alternative to Trump. If not, they'll be routed no matter who gets nominated.

I think if the minorities and "youth" vote, Trump will be routed.  The question is always whether they will vote.  Do you risk alienating the moderates in the hopes youth will stay as engaged as they were in 2018?  I don't know the answer.  A lot of Democrats are saying Biden has the best chance to win, but you are right.  That's what they wanted the last time and they lost.     I don't really have a preference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buddha said:

well...every poll had hillary winning in a landslide too but she lost the electoral college.  the national polling isnt all that useful in saying who will win a national election when you have the electoral college.

 

This is incorrect.  The polls said it would be a tight race.  What state polls were available indicated a substantial number of toss ups.  I was pretty surprised at the how much confidence people had in Clinton because the polls didn't show her as a clear winner.  She was the favorite, but far from a prohibitive favorite.  Trump won a few of those toss up states and won the election.  

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like Pete's issue stems from him firing a black police chief who was illegally wiretapping white police officers and facing a federal indictment. Apparently this chief was popular amongst the black community so that means Pete shouldn't fire him. He compounded this by hiring a white chief, South Bend is 60% white afterall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gehringer_2 said:

 

I think it is an issue, more with older black men and it will play more against a gay man than it would against a gay woman. And by the way I don't think this is race related per se.  I think the same is true on the white side - its older men who are most homophobic and they are more homophobic about gay men than lesbian women.

They are more homophobic about gay men because they probably have videos of lesbians on their hard drives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Seems like Pete's issue stems from him firing a black police chief who was illegally wiretapping white police officers and facing a federal indictment. Apparently this chief was popular amongst the black community so that means Pete shouldn't fire him. He compounded this by hiring a white chief, South Bend is 60% white afterall. 

I tried to figure this situation out by doing some web delving and it appeared to be more complex than I cared to take the time to figure out. IIRC the feds didn't like the way the chief was investigating his own force but it was also true that his force apparently was in need investigation so who is more wrong - the person doing the right thing incorrectly or the people that want to leave what is wrong alone?  Clearly neither was right. And that said once the mayor got involved he apparently didn't handle either side with sufficient skill. It struck me as I read that all the incident really proved was that urban police forces have problems and that the mayor was an in-experienced administrator. Of course to some that may be a bigger red flag to his Presidential fitness that whatever his policy preference in the affair was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I tried to figure this situation out by doing some web delving and it appeared to be more complex than I cared to take the time to figure out. IIRC the feds didn't like the way the chief was investigating his own force but it was also true that his force apparently was in need investigation so who is more wrong - the person doing the right thing incorrectly or the people that want to leave what is wrong alone?  Clearly neither was right. And that said once the mayor got involved he apparently didn't handle either side with sufficient skill. It struck me as I read that all the incident really proved was that the mayor was an in-experienced administrator. Of course to some that may be a bigger red flag to Presidential fitness that whatever his policy preference in the affair was.

A federal judge ruled that the police chief violated federal law. I can't help but think the tune would be different if a white chief of police violated federal law and illegally wiretapped black officers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of this debate boils down to whether one believes that persuasion will be a necessity in 2020, or whether base alone is enough.

I think you need to persuade some folks, especially in the Blue Wall states 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from Pete's homosexuality, which probably does cost him votes with older voters across the board, he had relatively little interaction with the black political establishment, especially when compared to Biden.  Biden has a long history of appealing to, and working with, the black political establishment, and that was before he was Obama's Vice President.

That kind of political capital goes a long way and I rarely hear it mentioned.

In other words, Biden is a known, established candidate whereas Pete is not.  Older voters in general, older black voters in particular, tend to gravitate toward the more known quantity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,685
    • Total Posts
      2,986,477
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...