Il Douché and His Discontents: The 2016 Primary Voting Thread, Part 4

The chances that a large percentage of the white vote won't vote Republican (either staying home or third-party) seem a fairly crucial factor at the moment - how is that not deciding the election?

xp xpost what I mean is, losing the white vote doesn't mean a loss in the elections. Obviously if Democrats won the lion share of the white vote, they'd win in a landslide. but they haven't done this in 30+ years. the closest they've come is losing by 4 percent. - these two sentences contradict each other! How would Democrats win the lion share without Republicans losing it?

here's a bunch of data from the somewhat recent big Pew study you can comb through on the issue:
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/chapter-5-connection-with-and-attitudes-towards-israel/

No part of BDS is about the destruction of the state of Israel, FFS!

idk, the founder of BDS has openly called for the destruction of Israel, the plank about the right of return for descendants of 1948 refugees implies as much, it is often comorbid w/ other more obviously destructive ideologies, and norman finkelstein believes it is but reasonable ppl can disagree. not sure this is the best thread to rehash this argument tho.

these two sentences contradict each other! How would Democrats win the lion share without Republicans losing it?

first sentence is clearly referring to the Democrats...?

xxp

That's still the same thing though - if losing the white vote doesn't matter (because obviously Democrats win presidential elections) but gaining it would, that's still 'decides elections'.

Oh good right of return is anti-semitic, glad we cleared that up.

xxxpost what I'm saying (and Outis clarified) is that Democrats *never* win the white vote. I could only find stats that go back to 1976, and in every single election, whites predominately voted for the Republican candidate, with margins ranging from slim (4%) to large (20%). Obviously, Republican white males either staying home, voting third party, or actually voting Democrat for the first times in their lives could give the white vote to the Democrats. That would result in an overwhelming Democratic landslide, yes, but it wouldn't be the principal reason for the victory since Democrats have proven even 20% deficits amongst white voters can be erased with the minority vote. A

s Clemenza I believe noted upthread, for the Republican party to win this election without winning additional minority support from the previous election, he'd have to win a ridiculous percent of the white vote, one that is unusual and unlikely. Meaning, the Republicans know they have to reach out to and convert minorities to win the election. They'd probably need to get at least 40% in a few of the communities - having a hard time imagining Asians, Hispanics, or African-Americans thinking a guy that has said racist shit and doesn't openly criticize the KKK is a guy that deserves their vote. Where Dems could lose is if minority turnout decreases proportionately in this election, but even then it'd have to decrease significantly.

Romney lost the minority vote something like 80/20 in 2012, and that is one reason he lost the election. Minorities hated him. Obviously *every* vote is important, I'm just saying hey, if on election date, Trump was to command the white vote, even by 10% or more, it won't necessarily translate into a victory because it hasn't in the past. It's a vote they always win - they have to win where they haven't won recently.

The proportion of the voters that were white has precipitously declined from 87% to 72%, which means minorities carry a much larger influence on the election than they did in previous decades.

http://www.junkiesfan.com/images/cover_woen.jpg

hat's still the same thing though - if losing the white vote doesn't matter (because obviously Democrats win presidential elections) but gaining it would, that's still 'decides elections'.

what I'm saying is Democrats probably don't have to do well or even win amongst white voters to win in 2016, despite them being the majority of voters. obviously it would benefit them to do so but it isn't *necessary*

good posts neanderthal

i've been trying to explain this to various family members terrified of trump winning the general, and while it scares the shit out of me too, it is not likely to happen bc while i can imagine him possibly outperforming romney w/ white males, i certainly can't imagine him outperforming romney w/ minorities

he just doesn't have the numbers

I get what you're saying, and I agree with what you're saying - I'm just pointing out that phrase you used isn't what I think you meant.

These have been around for awhile (well, for at least three and a half years or so.)

But here's what the 2012 electoral map between Obama and Romney would've looked like if only white men were allowed to vote:

http://i.imgur.com/nV8Rjz9.jpg

Hooray for Oregon and Washington State!

Maine and Vermont?!

Quite surprised by Oregon, considering how polarised that state is (VERY conservative east), but then it's not very diverse either, so I guess the Portland metropolitan area has lots of white, male Obama supporters.

alfred have you been to vermont

even the rednecks have progressive politics and drive subarus

If Donald Trump becomes the Republican Party's nominee, Utahns would vote for a Democrat for president in November for the first time in more than 50 years, according to a new Deseret News/KSL poll.

"I believe Donald Trump could lose Utah. If you lose Utah as a Republican, there is no hope," said former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt, a top campaign adviser to the GOP's 2012 nominee, Mitt Romney.

The poll found that may well be true. Utah voters said they would reject Trump, the GOP frontrunner, whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is the Democratic candidate on the general election ballot.

While Clinton was only slightly ahead of Trump — 38 percent to 36 percent — Sanders, a self-declared Democratic socialist, holds a substantial lead — 48 percent to 37 percent over the billionaire businessman and reality TV star among likely Utah voters.

"Wow. Wow. That's surprising," said Chris Karpowitz, co-director of Brigham Young University's Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy. "Any matchup in which Democrats are competitive in the state of Utah is shocking."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865650513/Poll-Utah-would-vote-for-a-Democrat-for-president-over-Trump.html?pg=all

Yeah, the GOP figured out too late that winning entails more than slapping an 'R-' on a plate of pig offal.

my sense is, a result that weird -- mormons are one group in the conservative coalition with a really dim view of trump -- would indicate other weirdness all over the map, NOT a uniformly bad map for trump-as-nominee. he's also been mouthing off about romney's faith personally over the past few weeks.

i feel like his irreligious bullying anti-trade anti-immigrant nationalism is especially bad for sunny industrious deseret, but is (i fear) pretty great for a lot of angrier and down-at-the-mouth constituencies.

we have no idea what this election is going to look like, basically

holy shit @ Utah

he's also been mouthing off about romney's faith personally over the past few weeks.

I wouldn't be surprised if this has a lot to do w it

that and romney's speech against trump.

yeah i can imagine trump losing a lot of votes in western/mountain states but gaining nearly as many in the rust belt. and places like ohio and michigan carry more electoral votes than those mountain states....

in other words, yeah, who knows.

Frank rich correctly pointed out the bullshit duplicity of romney's speech but yeah probably

Xp

Warren going in on Trump on twitter fwiw

that's awesome, but i can't help but lament how successfully trump has dragged everybody down with him. not that politics hadn't been about scoring quick and nasty points before, but that seems to be just about everything this cycle.

also, kids these days.

damn it's good tho

alfred have you been to vermont

― jason waterfalls (gbx), Monday, March 21, 2016 2:24 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

even the rednecks have progressive politics and drive subarus

― jason waterfalls (gbx), Monday, March 21, 2016 2:25 PM (1 hour ago)

lol as someone who lived in burlington for 2 years until recently, and traveled all over the state for work, this is so otm

is that actually her account? because her official account didn't tweet anything (warren)

https://twitter.com/elizabethforma

yeah i can imagine trump losing a lot of votes in western/mountain states but gaining nearly as many in the rust belt. and places like ohio and michigan carry more electoral votes than those mountain states....

in other words, yeah, who knows.

There's a recent NBC/WSJ poll that has Clinton winning 12% of Republicans and Trump winning 5% of Democrats. Assuming this was nationwide.

alfred have you been to vermont

― jason waterfalls (gbx), Monday, March 21, 2016

failed joek on my part

I'd like to thank lots of you, particularly Neanderthal, for throwing out some vital history and stats I can relate to hand-wringing friends. The very notion of Trump makes me angry, but having numbers to back up my hope that the math really doesn't work in his favor makes me feel a little better, even if his name alone makes me oscillate between rage and depression.

On the other hand, I find it hilarious that Trump is garnering a historically diverse plurality of people who hate him. Women, minorities, immigrants, and now apparently Mormons.

all you have to say is "There aren't enough white people in Vermont to vote for Trump"

I wouldn't vote for that asshole for all the white people in Vermont.

lol Trump not so into NATO apparently

nate-toe as Bush I said

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/21/donald-trump-reveals-foreign-policy-team-in-meeting-with-the-washington-post/

as usual there's like this tiny kernel of a legit point buried in with a bunch of poorly thought out (or not thought out at all) nonsense

can u c+p the list, i've been paywalled

xpost I understand why, but how annoying is it that all papers are going paywall? So much for the internet as great collector and collator of information. But screw paying for several papers, especially given how much they seem to be sharing stories these days.

For the first time, Trump also listed members of a team chaired by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) that is counseling him on foreign affairs and helping to shape his policies: Keith Kellogg, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Walid Phares and Joseph E. Schmitz.

Trump praised George P. Shultz, who served as President Ronald Reagan's top diplomat, and was harshly critical of current secretary of state John F. Kerry. He questioned the United States’ continued involvement in NATO and, on the subject of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, said America’s allies are "not doing anything."

Trump said that U.S. involvement in NATO may need to be significantly diminished in the coming years, breaking with nearly seven decades of consensus in Washington. "We certainly can’t afford to do this anymore," Trump said, adding later, "NATO is costing us a fortune, and yes, we’re protecting Europe with NATO, but we’re spending a lot of money."

Trump sounded a similar note in discussing the U.S. presence in the Pacific. He questioned the value of massive military investments in Asia and wondered aloud whether the United States still was capable of being an effective peacekeeping force there.

ooo i guess under prez trump we'll get to find out whether the US has been keeping the peace or not

SCHULTZ?!

The guy must need a bib

Trump should have gone all in and name checked Kissinger.

"China has got unbelievable ambitions," Trump said. "China feels very invincible. We have rebuilt China. They have drained so much money out of our country that they’ve rebuilt China. Without us, you wouldn’t see the airports and the roadways and the bridges. The George Washington Bridge [in New York], that’s like a trinket compared to the bridges that they build in China. We don’t build anymore. We had our day."

my neighbor's Pomeranian is sharper

http://i.imgur.com/AuNdw2H.png

But ... but ... China has a wall! A great, big, beautiful wall!