2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumwyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Herman4747
(1,825 posts)That truly is a shame.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Herman4747
(1,825 posts)I was thinking more about this guy (who came up with the phrase):

wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)I hear a lot of stuff on DU about anti-war left-wing types being the base, and Democrats better not piss us off, or Democrats better court us, or Democrats already pissed us off, so screw you guys, I'm going home.
I hate to break it to you, but anti-war left-wing types are not the base of the Democratic party.
Union members are the base of the party, particularly in the northeast and Pacific northwest. Women are the base of the party, particularly in the northeast, far west, and portions of the midwest. African Americans are the base of the party all across the country.
Anti-war left-wing types are the single most unreliable voter group in America. Unless you are simon-pure, you are unworthy of support from that group. As no politician in 21st Century America (with a snowball's chance of winning a national election) is simon-pure, they are not likely to bust their asses to get anti-war left-wing support.
Anti-war left-wing support, by the way, is buried by the aforementioned real base. Yes, anti-war left-wing support can swing an election, but because of the aforementioned unreliability problem - anti-war left-wing voters will bolt at the first sign of impurity, even in a tight race (See: 2000) - it is too often a hopeless exercise to try and court that group with any real vigor. The real base outnumbers anti-war left-wing types 10-1. That's where the focus goes.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)you and a Mr. William Pitt call "the base of the Democratic Party"
BUT LYING, SELL-OUTS TO THE BANKSTERS ARE????
You're so very funny guy!
You may also want to ask your beloved Hillary what precisely she did to promote unionization at WalMart, where she was FOR SIX YEARS on the WalMart Board of Directors. Go on, ask her -- I DARE YOU.
Before asking, do check the TITLE and the VIDEO found here: Clinton Remained Silent As Wal-Mart Fought Unions
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)How dare you expose the Queen. It's gonna be your fault if she loses.
How will you sleep? We must NEVER bring truth about the Queen for fear it gives the GOP the "upper hand". I'm guessing once she's crowned the word liar and Hillary will get an alert.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)those SC voters don't that, they somehow believe Hillary is a progressive.
datguy_6
(176 posts)Jill Stein is looking mighty fine...
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)HoosierRadical
(390 posts)to carry her to victory.
FangedNoumenom
(145 posts)jmowreader
(53,194 posts)SENIOR CITIZENS win elections for candidates. And given the choice between a candidate who has promised to strengthen Social Security and Medicare (Clinton), one who wants to roll Medicare into his healthcare plan (Sanders) or someone who wants to privatize the whole thing (Trump), which do you think they'll choose?
desmiller
(747 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)desmiller
(747 posts)I was 15 or 16 when that speech was made.
pkdu
(3,977 posts)No?,,, then she wasnt calling you a superpredator
desmiller
(747 posts)write-in for bernie
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)gwheezie
(3,580 posts)You guys are letting him down. I'm listening to Bernie right now, he's asking for you guys to come out and vote for him. What happened in SC?
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)People voted against their own interests.
desmiller
(747 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Every single time someone tried to explain to people that winning an online poll was beyond useless, the response was always "well, why don't HILLARY voters vote in these useless polls??! HUH??!"
The same question can be asked here, but more logically. If all those people that voted for Clinton "voted against their interests" then where the principled, wise, voting FOR their interests people?? Why didn't they show up in numbers to give the guy a 50 point win? Why did apparently just the stupid people show up??
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I think a majority will prefer a liberal president instead of Trump.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)But everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
still_one
(98,883 posts)I guess that pretty much ch says it
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)trimming their nose hair to vote for her.
CajunBlazer
(5,648 posts)But nice try.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)But she will easily beat Donald Trump.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)You really have no idea how much your candidate is despised and how stupid the American public is.
book_worm
(15,951 posts)better start showing that he can win key portions of the Democratic coalition if he is going to be the nominee. He can't just coast by with lily white voters and those under age 30 (of course HRC won both of these groups in SC).
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)but unlike those people in SC, I actually research the issues, I have been a fan of Bernie since I was teenager and discovered that some mayor in whiter than white Vermont endorsed Jesse Jackson, who did Hillary support in '88? It wasn't Jesse.
onenote
(46,142 posts)Strengthens the argument that Bernie will do better than Clinton would against a repub?
Having trouble with the logic of that argument.
LexVegas
(6,959 posts)HoosierRadical
(390 posts)the base is not enough to win, independents will not vote for her. With Bernie, we would have not only the base, but independents, new voters and even some republican voters.
CajunBlazer
(5,648 posts)Let me try answering that for you - none - you have not one shred of evidence of that except your own opinion. Is this the last argument left?
Sure, some Bernie supporters may not support Hillary. Hopefully that will be very small percentage because not only is the White House at stake, but also the Senate, and path forward of the Supreme Court for the next 20 years.
Think about that. Not only will the next President appoint a replacement for Scalia, but could also appoint at least two other Justices. How can anyone with any progressive leanings possibably allow that to happen by not voting or voting third party. If true progressives can't get excited about that, then I imagine that Bernie Sanders will be very disappoint.
Then look at the other side. The almost inevitable Republican nominee is Donald Trump who has insulted nearly every voting group necessary to win the general election. How can he win the general election doing that. He can't, not when he is attracting no more than 45% of the GOP voters. But the way that the RNC has rigged the race, that's probably all he is going to need unless Cruz or Rubio drops out of the race soon and I don't see that happening.
I have heard some on DU talking about "holding their noses" to vote for Hillary. On the other hand I have spoken to several people who are solid conservatives and who have voted Republican in every election for at least 20 years who say they will a great deal of choosing Trump over Clinton so they might not even vote.
The reason - they are afraid that if "The Donald" wins the general election he could ruin the Republican Party for years to come. These are establishment Republicans who understand that if they don't change course in the face of changing demographics the GOP is in deep and serious. They feel that they cannot afford to lose control of their party to those are playing into the hands of the Democrats by insulting the minorities they need to win future elections.
So please, don't tell us that Hillary Clinton can't win the general election - let's not go there.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)all you have to do is GOOGLE.
CajunBlazer
(5,648 posts)I just looked up the latest polls - Clinton vs. Trump - in the swing states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Virginia. I suggest you do the same. RealClearPolitics.com is a good source.
Because reliably blue states have more electoral votes than reliably red states, the Democratic candidate need only win one or two of these swing states to win the election. The Republican candidate can only afford to lose 1 or 2 at the most.
I took only polls which were completed in January or February of this year and here are the results - Clinton is leading Trump in 4 of these states (3 by large margins) and Trump slightly ahead in 2). Now what was that about Hillary Clinton not being able to win the general election? I suggest you have your facts straight next time.
Colorado - no recent polls
Florida - Trump +2.5%
Ohio - Trump +2%
Iowa - Clinton +5%
Nevada - no recent polls
New Hampshire - Clinton +7.5%
Virginia - Clinton +17%
Wisconsin - No recent polls
Pennsylvania - No recent polls
North Carolina - 3 polls - Clinton +1
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)skewed data you managed to find. She will not win the GE, if Bernie doesn't get the nomination, the Democrats will lose and you Hillary supporters will be the blamed, but you don't care about that, you want to live in your fantasy world where everyone can't wait to put this corporate hack in the white house.
highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)His policies are the inspiration for his supporters.
They like him a lot as well, but they are not sheep.
I think that many millennials and indies will just
stay home.
Obviously the establishment of the party is willing
to take that risk, but actually it does not care as
long as the status quo is preserved.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)We won't fall in line. She's a loser and Trump will trounce her. Once he starts on her lies, he won't stop, and he has a lot to go through.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(135,718 posts)Thanks for coming clean. I mean if you didn't you wouldn't say shit like that. You'd do what you can to keep that guy out of the Whitehouse.
FangedNoumenom
(145 posts)Disgusting.
BreakfastClub
(765 posts)beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)Remarkable that so called progressives/liberals resort to such scare tactics...and do the old doom and gloom dance. I heard the same exact stuff in 2008 uttered by Hillary supporters when became apparent Obama was going to be our nominee...
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)It's going to be unbearable around here.
kerry-is-my-prez
(10,283 posts)HoosierRadical
(390 posts)with her "no we can't!" theme and the DNC rigging the primary for her.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Cut the self-pity and hair-pulling.
Support your candidate, and when he's done. Support OUR candidate.
I will do the same.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)You guys never believed anyone else had a chance and didn't realize how obvious you were about it. At least I hope you guys didn't realize that.
Onlooker
(5,636 posts)... he certainly can't beat Trump in the general election.
Your point makes no sense.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)that show Bernie beats any of the GOP candidates, while Hillary loses. Google is your friend, use it.
mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)No matter how many Democratic voters take part in the primaries, they are still a lesser part of the lesser number of US voters identify themselves as Democratic. Another third of the US voters are sadly willing to be loyal to the GOPukes, and the rest are included in the analysis as Independents or members of various really minority parties.
It is quite possible that a candidate who handily wins the Democratic nomination could go down in flames in the General Election, depending on turnout and attraction. It is inconceivable to most of us that Chump could even get the GOPuke nomination and win in November...
unless the Democratic candidate was hated by the GOPuke base and viewed as dishonest and untrustworthy by a good number of Independents, as unfair as that view might be.
What the Party needs is someone who can get Independed voters to enthusiastically support the Democratic Party while giving the sane GOPers the motivation to jump party lines. Otherwise you can expect President Trump making the next appointment to the Supreme Court.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)in the white male electorate. But that will be nowhere near enough for Trump to win.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)like the GOP usually does, it is only single white females who tend to vote Democratic, but the married ones are no different than their male counterparts. Not to mention the internalized oppression that many white women will project on to Hillary, she'd be lucky to hold the single white female vote.
Dem2
(8,178 posts)When one is angry, posting is a bad idea.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)kerry-is-my-prez
(10,283 posts)I have lots of experience with this. Do it almost every election.
WayBeyondBlue
(86 posts)fly in the face of conventional wisdom, go with your feelings and write Bernie in? Hillary vs. Trump, either way we get a Republican.
kerry-is-my-prez
(10,283 posts)As a woman in her 60's, I do think we need a female President. She will be good with the environment - which is my most important issue. It's not all bad. I actually would be happy this time around with both candidates - for really the first time ever. I will not need a barf bag....
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)You just can't go by the current polls, because Bernie has faced no real negative campaigning. Hillary has been attacked for years, so all that they have against her is out there. Besides the things that the right would invent against Bernie (think swiftboating), they have socialism, religion, and clips of him supporting pot legalization and raising taxes. He is just way too far left for the general electorate. For gods sake, some of these people don't even want to let Muslims in the country, no way they wouldn't put up a huge fuss about Bernie.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 28, 2016, 12:11 AM - Edit history (1)
that he is a socialist! Because those idiots have mislabeled President Obama as a socialist, socialism doesn't scare people like it once did, plus the younger voters don't view socialism as something negative.
The Clinton foundation has some questionable donations from foreign interests, that the GOP will have a field day with.
kerry-is-my-prez
(10,283 posts)Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Another reason TO vote for Bernie. Hillary isn't progressive enough on this issue or any issue for that matter. And there's more baggage out there on the Queen. And if it doesn't come out soon we're all doomed. The GOP will tear her apart. I hope this will be the LAST Clinton we ever see running for office. I'm tired of the lying family.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)She might "win" the Democratic voters who say "you had us Clinton" but that name recognition doesn't do well beyond true believers.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)
Starry Messenger
(32,381 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)There there, HoosierRadical.
There there.
Bleacher Creature
(11,504 posts)And again, and again, and again.
And yet, no matter how many times it's repeated, it's still 100% wrong.
Funny, for a Democratic website there sure are a lot of people hoping for the likely nominee to lose in November.
HoosierRadical
(390 posts)No one is hoping for a Democratic loss, I just refuse to ignore the polls that have her losing to the GOP candidate, whereas Bernie beats them. But you Hillary supporters are more interested in having her as the nominee, and hoping like hope, she somehow manages to win, despite everything indicating the opposite.
Calista241
(5,633 posts)2016 - roughly 370,000
2008 - roughly 535,000
jfern
(5,204 posts)HoosierRadical
(390 posts)We won't, but these Hillary people refuse to accept the fact that she can't get any votes outside the base, thankfully, Bernie will prevail in the end and secure the nomination and than win the GE. I was just interested in hearing if any of them had consider what would happen if she did manage to get the nomination.
jfern
(5,204 posts)That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)Did a memo go out telling people that if they post "HRC can't win the GE" a certain number of times, it will actually mean something?
Sorry to tell ya, but no matter how many times you post that, Hillary is still going to be the next POTUS.
I seriously don't know what you think you're accomplishing.