I will keep doing, but not worth it! The 2016 Presidential Primary Voting Thread

whoops! somehow missed that the Taibbi was posted already

i have a kind of theory i don't think i've seen elsewhere that the rank-and-file republican voters are ready to shift to the left on a number of issues (evangelicals/dreher types giving up on waging a successful culture war, working class reps looking for a stronger safety net and more govt involvement in their lives, tired of neoconservative botched foreign policy, etc) but they're so closely identified w/ the republican party that they can't just switch parties - the identification is more important than the actual policies (which we know when polled outside the context of a particular party some v left-wing policies are actually v popular). so trump is kind of a trojan horse for this shift - his welfare nativism resonates enough w the republican party enough that lifelong self-identifying republicans can sign onto. idk i haven't thought this through v carefully and i can see some immediate issues w/ this theory but it accounts for his popularity and maybe also can generate a sense of optimism about forming some sort of consensus in the future around left-wing economic policy.

Trump support is a little different than voting for Grandpa Munster for governor (which I have done). xxxp

not really

the modern republicanism as presently constituted is less a political philosphy than an amorphous blob of dude energy

@BillKristol
Debate advice from a friend!
"After some Trump rant Rubio walks over and punches him in the face...puncturing his aura as successful bully."

tbf, i'd like to punch bill kristol in the face

honestly rubio seems like such a mark ass buster than i might take the old man in a fair one

See also: Ahnuld out here.

I don't think this is comparable really - the unprecedented recall of Davis, his canny understanding of the electorate/courting necessary Dem votes make the situation quite different.

xps to Mordy - I'm on board with that theory generally tbh

his welfare nativism

Trump's not really into welfare afaict. He may be into protectionist tariffs and a more progressive tax rate, but he isn't offering a safety net to the poor, or free college, or free healthcare

xp

http://www.ibtimes.com/reckoning-very-wrong-media-after-nevada-donald-trump-no-longer-joke-2321947

i think Mordy has a good point. that's certainly a reasonable and somewhat hopeful (i guess) take on Trump's popularity.

but i also think they just really really like how he gets to say and do whatever the fuck he wants and suffers zero consequences. ESPECIALLY with the loud and proud racism/ bigotry. like, that's just the coolest. how he can do that. i want to do that and get a pat on the back. i want to do that and not be fired from work or a social pariah. this is America and Trump is going to Make it Great Again so i can be really loud and racist and suffer zero consequences.

he has come out explicitly for protecting social security and universal healthcare xxp

conservatives, hollow paeans to libertarian individualism notwithstanding, are fundamentally authoritarians, and Trump has made every single primary opponent, and basically the entire leadership of his party look just insanely weak, slapped them around constantly with no repercussions or effective pushback (see also Josh Marshall's "bitch-slap theory" of politics).

it's like a ruthless new gangster comes to town and suddenly starts embarrassing and picking off all the old fat lazy mob bosses, and their henchmen, who can tell which way the wind is blowing, start defecting to him. OK I think I'm just describing the plot of The Dark Knight at this point but it's kind of what this whole process has reminded me of.

'salt of the earth' americans worship trophy-wifed man who inherited a fortune, news at 11

he has come out explicitly for protecting social security and universal healthcare xxp

this is basically the status quo. also not welfare.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-set-to-blow-up-gop-orthodoxy-again/article/2571075

Trump has been sending signals that his tax proposal, which he says will be "comprehensive," will include higher rates for some of the richest Americans, a position generally at odds with Republican orthodoxy. "I want to see lower taxes," Trump said at an appearance in Norwood, Mass., on Friday night. "But on some people, they're not doing their fair share."

In particular, Trump has said he will go after "carried interest," which refers to the practice of hedge fund managers who make hundreds of millions of dollars a year paying a lower tax rate than Americans who earn ordinary wages. "I would take carried interest out, and I would let people making hundreds of millions of dollars a year pay some tax, because right now they are paying very little tax and I think it's outrageous," Trump told Bloomberg Politics last week. "I want to lower taxes for the middle class."

you know what welfare is, right

it's not fiddling with the tax code

Vox says:

The data on this is pretty clear. Put simply: While most elite-funded and elite-supported Republicans want to increase immigration and decrease Social Security, a significant number of voters (across both parties) want precisely the opposite — to increase Social Security and decrease immigration. So when Trump speaks out both against immigration and against fellow Republicans who want to cut Social Security, he's speaking out for a lot people.

By my count of National Election Studies (NES) data, 24 percent of the US population holds this position (increase Social Security, decrease immigration). If we add in the folks who want to maintain (not cut) Social Security and decrease immigration, we are now at 40 percent of the total electorate, which I'll call "populist."

it makes sense to me to understand trump in light of european welfare nativism as opposed to some sui generis the mule type figure. maybe even the essential slogan - 'make america great again' has this paternalistic element to it like when he says he's going to save our social safety net by generating lots of wealth. the nativism definitely arises out of these communal anxieties - "they're taking our jobs," "they're putting weight on our welfare" (i've definitely seen in this election cycle ppl talking about how unfair it is that ppl come to the US illegally and then jump the line for social benefits) - this is ultimately about ppl wanting Trump to take care of them. he doesn't need to say how he's going to do it, it's enough that he's a commanding figure and ppl are worried about the future and it is comforting to put themselves in his hands.

welfare is just the state providing a level of aid/care for its citizens - that definitely includes expanding social security or universal healthcare

I found this somewhat persuasive. What's the author missing?: http://static.currentaffairs.org/2016/02/unless-the-democrats-nominate-sanders-a-trump-nomination-means-a-trump-presidency

re: why is this happening, Taibbi is getting close to the answer

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-america-made-donald-trump-unstoppable-20160224

a dude at Lawyers, Guns & Money likes to say "no one cares about federalism" and Trump is showing that that is actually just a corollary to the more fundamental axiom "no one cares about conservatism"

― anonanon, Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:38 PM (37 minutes ago) Bookmark

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/01/the-great-republican-revolt/419118/

this is ultimately about ppl wanting Trump to take care of them. he doesn't need to say how he's going to do it, it's enough that he's a commanding figure and ppl are worried about the future and it is comforting to put themselves in his hands.

no argument here, this is def true.

expanding social security or universal healthcare

he hasn't advocated either of these things!

he has - google it

What's the author missing?

I'm not even going to bother reading it unless it explains how anyone wins the presidency without winning a huge chunk of the latino vote, which Trump is just not going to do.

Hungry4Ass, who do you support for presidetn?

i read it - the author's argument is that trump is going to hit hillary on all her pseudo-scandals and he's a better communicator/connector than her so he will beat her

he has - google it

idk these statements that turn up in the results are part of the vaguest bullshit (surprise surprise) it's hard to say Trump even knows the meaning of the words coming out of his mouth. I guess I am skeptical that any of Trump's support is tied to actual specific policy proposals, cuz Trump just doesn't operate within those parameters.

xp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6inQmf96SYQ

like I don't think there's a single Trump supporter who thinks "he's for universal healthcare? Then he's MY GUY!"

i agree with you - his understanding of the policies are vague as are his supporters. it's more like what you see in that clip - the government is going to pay for it, everyone is going to get taken care of.

I'm not even going to bother reading it unless it explains how anyone wins the presidency without winning a huge chunk of the latino vote, which Trump is just not going to do.

― Οὖτις, Wednesday, February 24, 2016 4:19 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark

how are you going to know... what he explains... without reading it...

supposed to be italics... u button right next to tha i...

I'm going to read Mordy's summary of it, Mordy's generally a sharp guy

I don't think this is comparable really - the unprecedented recall of Davis, his canny understanding of the electorate/courting necessary Dem votes make the situation quite different.

Drop out Davis, consider the point re: Dem votes that others have been making of late as hard right types yell about never voting for him and... But if I may, from my friend Kaleb:

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/01/arnold-schwarzenegger-donald-trump-celebrities-in-politics

don't let this guy manipulate you Mordy

I thought we were comparing Ahnuld and Ventura

xp

lots of xposts but i would not be even a little surprised if cruz got into a for real dustup with trump onstage at a debate

i think the argument is that she's not a good enough campaigner to deal w/ the huge amount of dirt trump can throw at her, and that trump is bulletproof and can get away with anything. it might be right about those dynamics but it's v hard for me to believe that trump can increase his part of the vote enough - for /some/ ppl he's bulletproof. for many many other ppl he's too toxic to vote for? i think. i've on record that i have no idea who between hillary + sanders is more electable. i can def see arguments for each.

Trump is definitely closer to Ahnuld, but honestly I don't think he's as smart.

xp

kinda surprised everyone is freaking out so hard about PRESIDENT TRUMP, calm down you guys

Hungry4Ass, who do you support for presidetn?

― mookieproof, Wednesday, February 24, 2016 4:20 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark

Sitting on my endorsement until it will make the maximal (latin) impact.

lots of xposts but i would not be even a little surprised if cruz got into a for real dustup with trump onstage at a debate

― ulysses, Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:27 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i misread this as:

if cruz got into a for real dubstep with trump onstage at a debate

and was like now we're getting somewhere

trumpstep

that takes the phrase "farty bass" to a whole new level

they should DJ battle, nomination goes to the sickest drop

Current Affairs guy does this pretty well

One can already imagine the monologue:

“She lies so much. Everything she says is a lie. I’ve never seen someone who lies so much in my life. Let me tell you three lies she’s told. She made up a story about how she was ducking sniper fire! There was no sniper fire. She made it up! How do you forget a thing like that? She said she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, the guy who climbed Mount Everest. He hadn’t even climbed it when she was born! Total lie! She lied about the emails, of course, as we all know, and is probably going to be indicted. You know she said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq! It was a lie! Thousands of American soldiers are dead because of her. Not only does she lie, her lies kill people. That’s four lies, I said I’d give you three. You can’t even count them. You want to go on PolitiFact, see how many lies she has? It takes you an hour to read them all! In fact, they ask her, she doesn’t even say she hasn’t lied. They asked her straight up, she says she usually tries to tell the truth! Ooooh, she tries! Come on! This is a person, every single word out of her mouth is a lie. Nobody trusts her. Check the polls, nobody trusts her. Yuge liar.”

@NinaTotenberg
#SCOTUS sources say Cruz asked to sit w Scalia clerks @ funeral. They said no. Then GOP leadership said no bc he wasn't 1 of them either.

lol