Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

TheMastersNemesis

(10,602 posts)
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 12:42 AM Jun 2015

Doesn't Matter How Bad Walker Or Brownback Are They Would Be Elected Again.

I believe Walker and Brownback would get elected again no matter how bad they are. Walker survived recall and won another term. Brownback was elected easily again. You cannot fix stupid voters.

The real reason Dems lose is that so many voters believe that Dems give their money to undeserving blacks. The GOP meme seems to work very well. And it works up north as well as the South.

They have been repeating that black welfare meme for decades. And white voters who are actually on these programs vote for the GOP. In reality the white population in many states far outnumber blacks and other minorities. And in truth poor whites hate government health care because they believe minorities benefit most.

Walker and Brownback are the best examples of how race baiting works.

31 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Doesn't Matter How Bad Walker Or Brownback Are They Would Be Elected Again. (Original Post) TheMastersNemesis Jun 2015 OP
This shithole I live in would reelect brownback tomorrow..... Logical Jun 2015 #1
Do the people realize the financial mess he has caused in the state? still_one Jun 2015 #2
So sadly true world wide wally Jun 2015 #3
This might be why Race forums are so eager to separate the Social from the Economic daredtowork Jun 2015 #4
Voting Against Their Own Interests napkinz Jun 2015 #5
He was right then and the statement is still true. hobbit709 Jun 2015 #8
Bingo. hifiguy Jun 2015 #14
Yep, racism is the primary plank in Wanker's policy platform. Classism is second. Scuba Jun 2015 #6
Remind me of the color of the guy Wisconsin voted for President in 2012... brooklynite Jun 2015 #7
And where were those voters in 2014? hobbit709 Jun 2015 #9
Sitting at home, not interested in voting for a Republican-lite candidate. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2015 #12
And Obama wasn't Republican lite? MoonRiver Jun 2015 #16
Which Obama? jeff47 Jun 2015 #18
He also stated in 2008 that Ronald Reagan was his hero. MoonRiver Jun 2015 #19
It's generally a good idea to actually read all the way through the post. jeff47 Jun 2015 #21
I'm not going to argue with you about what Obama meant in 2008. MoonRiver Jun 2015 #23
Except for the 3 posts where you argue about what Obama meant in 2008. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2015 #24
What difference does it make now? MoonRiver Jun 2015 #26
IDK. You brought it up. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2015 #28
That result in WI follows a habit of low voter turnout in off-year elections. HereSince1628 Jun 2015 #10
Blaming the voters is the stupid thing in your post. jeff47 Jun 2015 #11
I live here in kansas and disagree with you! Nt Logical Jun 2015 #13
Yeah, a Democratic candidate proudly announcing his Republican endorsements really shows a contrast. jeff47 Jun 2015 #15
If you think a left winger has a shot in hell you are nuts! Nt Logical Jun 2015 #20
They don't have to run Che Guevara to create a contrast. (nt) jeff47 Jun 2015 #25
I live in this miserable place too. MoonRiver Jun 2015 #17
So my question is this..... Sheepshank Jun 2015 #22
Your analysis assumes identical turnout. jeff47 Jun 2015 #27
isn't that what the straw poll is trying imply? Sheepshank Jun 2015 #29
No, the straw poll is self-selected, and party activists. jeff47 Jun 2015 #30
OMFG Sheepshank Jun 2015 #31

daredtowork

(3,732 posts)
4. This might be why Race forums are so eager to separate the Social from the Economic
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 03:18 AM
Jun 2015

They want to assert that blacks aren't in the majority of people who need welfare.

But in their eagerness to assert that truth, they support cuts that hurt those that do need that aid.

Perhaps the larger thought is if the rug is pulled out from under the white recipients, the idiot GOP who have been making the false associations will come riding to the rescue and be forced to the restore the programs.

But I think they will just be overjoyed they finally got away with getting rid of "welfare" and another aspect of Big Government for their rich benefactors. They don't really care about the poor white folks, either.

It makes me sick to my stomach every time I hear a politician slyly coding a speech to associate welfare with black people as their prelude to why it's filled with "waste and fraud" and why it should be cut.

Ps. The other big race-bating is "Mexican immigrants are taking your jobs".

brooklynite

(94,585 posts)
7. Remind me of the color of the guy Wisconsin voted for President in 2012...
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 07:12 AM
Jun 2015

...after electing Walker and then supporting him in the recall.

Boiling all State issues down to simplistic assertions of racism isn't useful.

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
16. And Obama wasn't Republican lite?
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:03 PM
Jun 2015

He clearly stated during the campaign that his hero was Ronald Reagan.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
18. Which Obama?
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:08 PM
Jun 2015

2008 Obama ran on "Hope and Change". Not "I'm slightly less bad than the Republicans". Then once in office, he tacked right.

2012 Obama tried to rekindle some "Hope and Change", had the benefits of incumbency, and couldn't run away from what he did in office.

He clearly stated during the campaign that his hero was Ronald Reagan.

And if you go just to the next few sentences of the speech, you'll find that it was because of Reagan's ability to transform the country. The guy says he wants to help the little people by transforming the country, and they aren't going to presume that meant continuing moderate Republican policies.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
21. It's generally a good idea to actually read all the way through the post.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:21 PM
Jun 2015

Here, I'll just copy and paste it here so you can try again.

And if you go just to the next few sentences of the speech, you'll find that it was because of Reagan's ability to transform the country. The guy says he wants to help the little people by transforming the country, and they aren't going to presume that meant continuing moderate Republican policies.

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
23. I'm not going to argue with you about what Obama meant in 2008.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:31 PM
Jun 2015

Most people now, who voted for him, including me, are disappointed with his presidency, although he has obviously been better than the alternatives would have been.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
10. That result in WI follows a habit of low voter turnout in off-year elections.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 08:23 AM
Jun 2015

Why this is, is as you say, not a simple problem, but it most assuredly has elements that demonstrate patterns that involve race. Race per se as an explanatory factor is questionable but it does appear to be a highly correlated confounder to yet named effector that moves the pattern.

Wisconsin, like many states, has a population that isn't distributed uniformly, most of the people live in urban areas, and most of them in Milwaukee:
https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/CwErGhC1ki8670x12pux1g--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9NjAwO3E9OTU7dz02MDA-/

This distribution creates something of a everyone else vs Milwaukee political arena, although it isn't always just Republican against Milwaukee (nw WI, wsw WI, and Janesville-Madison area have democratic strength but except for Madison low population/little power).

Because the distribution of African Americans largely follows the urban vs everyone else pattern, it's easily mixed into attempts to explain WI politics. There is no doubt racism is a strong undercurrent in Milw. The impact of discrimination against blacks is still an important factor in explaining almost every social and economic issue in the city and the county.

The national democratic party struggles against its image as an urban party, but by the numbers it turns out that most WI dem voters are urban and significantly African American (the largest exception to this is the Green Bay-Appleton-Oskosh corridor, which while basically urban has low African American population and identifies with much of the northland as anti-Milwaukee and is republican)

Urban democrats in WI (as shown above, largely blacks) tend to have a significantly lower turnout in off-year and special elections than in national elections. Why is that? Possibly because significance of such elections is viewed as less important. Perhaps because local and state politics have had a history of making less difference to the lives of these voters than have national politics.
Perhaps because polling equipment is unequally distributed to make voting time consuming, perhaps because part-time workers can't risk their jobs by committing time to vote. It is a plaguing but unresolved question.

Whatever underlies the problem, its a dynamic that involves black voters in WI. The off-year turnout penalty realized by WI dems is at the heart of the ~5%-~8% swing in Democratic strength between gubernatorial elections (off year, and one special elections) and national elections in WI. It largely accounts for how this purple state routinely goes for Democratic presidential candidates, but goes for Scott Walker




















jeff47

(26,549 posts)
11. Blaming the voters is the stupid thing in your post.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 10:54 AM
Jun 2015

Walker faced a Republican-lite challenger. That lead to low turnout and victory.

Brownback also faced a Republican-lite challenger. That also lead to low turnout and victory.

Give voters someone to vote for, instead of "vote against the Republican", and they'll show up. And Democrats win.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
15. Yeah, a Democratic candidate proudly announcing his Republican endorsements really shows a contrast.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:01 PM
Jun 2015

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
17. I live in this miserable place too.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:05 PM
Jun 2015

A lot of evidence is coming out about electronic vote fraud. As the saying goes, it was close enough to steal, and they did.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
22. So my question is this.....
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:23 PM
Jun 2015

Those constituency that would likely re-elect Walker and Brownback, are they more or less likley to vote for Sanders? It would seem to me that they are (politically speaking) polar opposites.

I have claimed several times in the last few days that Wisconsin is a wild card when it comes to their POTUS selection, and this apparently didn't go over to well with Bernie supporters. They were rallying and thumping chests because of a recent straw poll putting Bernie within 9 points of Hillary.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
27. Your analysis assumes identical turnout.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:39 PM
Jun 2015

Turnout in Walker's and Brownback's re-elections was bad. The Democratic candidates in those races failed to interest many people in voting.

The theory behind a Sanders victory in WI is based around his ability to get higher turnout. So the electorate would look much more like 2008 than 2014. You'd also get synergies between Sanders and Feingold that would help drive turnout.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
29. isn't that what the straw poll is trying imply?
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:51 PM
Jun 2015
Your analysis assumes identical turnout.
the poll presuming that the voter turn out will be same or similiar to the straw poll? And isn't that exactly what the Bernie supporters are implying, that the straw poll is a good indicator? It's not my analysis of the straw poll, it is the presumed use of the straw poll.

But you are now implying that the straw poll is NOT an indicator of voting habits, its an indicator of potential voter turn out for a political party? Not sure how that interpretation is made.

It would appear that Bernie folks should not be crowing over a straw poll then, and hitting me over the head with it because I had hurt their feel goods by stating the straw poll is not a reliable measure of final constituency voting. They should rather be trying to use your analysis for Bernie's possible sweep of a state, I happen to think is unpredictable and a huge, giant toss up.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
30. No, the straw poll is self-selected, and party activists.
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 04:57 PM
Jun 2015

It really only shows you who has the most excited activists, and only at this point in time. Sanders "appearing out of nowhere" is a big deal, in that it means lots more volunteers and donors than could be expected before. But it doesn't do squat for predicting the results on primary day, much less on election day.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
31. OMFG
Tue Jun 9, 2015, 05:18 PM
Jun 2015
But it doesn't do squat for predicting the results on primary day, much less on election day.


I think we finally agree on something!!!!!!!!!
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Doesn't Matter How Bad Wa...