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

i'll put this here since no one will read the cap punishment thread

@the_intercept
Clinton's vow to feel relieved when others finally win the fight against the death penalty isn't exactly courageous. http://interc.pt/1pBLjEN

Man, that Trump lawyer sounds like an even more evil and vindictive Trump, the brains behind the bully.

"brains"

Yeah, it's all relative. I just meant that Trump's bluster is backed up by bullshit, but I have a feeling his lawyer has the wherewithal to follow up on threats to really mess with people in more than a WWF way.

There really can't be enough said about Trump's mealy-mouthed derision of his detractors. The protestors are sick people, professional troublemakers who make signs with just the worst profanity, the worst words you've ever seen. Whereas Trump is standing up for his first amendment rights, and his violent supporters are just spirited folks who want their country to be great again, and I guess his own use of profanity and bigoted language is...whatever. They're sick, these protestors.

Reality is just whatever he says it is, I guess.

i heard that Vivia A Fox insisted on the "a" for just that reason

vivica, that is

signs with just the worst profanity, the worst words you've ever seen.

Yeah my wife and I had a good lol at this on the news this morning.

“The way that Trump interacts with other people is very violent, he seems like a physical bully … He seeks out conflicts in which he is going to be gratuitously brutal to other people,” says says Liza Featherstone, editor of False Choices: The Faux Feminism of Hillary Rodham Clinton. “I think women instinctively pick up on that. And it has nothing to do with policy.”...

“If men dislike Clinton more [than other Democrats], it’s partly sexist,” says Featherstone. “If you hate Hillary because she reminds you of your ex-wife, that is sexist. If you dislike Hillary because she has dedicated her life to the neoliberal polices that have screwed you, as a working person, that’s not sexist.”

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/21/women-hate-donald-trump-even-more-than-men-hate-hillary-clinton/

“If men dislike Clinton more [than other Democrats], it’s partly sexist,” -- seems pretty logical. outside general gender preferences per party i see no reason to believe that male voters have unique reasons to dislike hillary more than female voters so i've got to assume that the huge discrepancy between the two groups has a lot to do with sexism - probably both actual sexism coming from men and solidarity against sexism on some level coming from women.

female voters have more unique reason(s) to like hillary than male voters ie Making History

tho younger female voters seem markedly less invested in this as a prime reason for support

"We need steady hands and not a president who says he's neutral on Monday, pro-Israel on Tuesday, and who knows what on Wednesday," Clinton said.

She added that Israel's security is "non-negotiable," contrasting herself with Trump's business-like approach to politics.

http://theweek.com/speedreads/613956/hillary-clinton-slams-donald-trump-aipac

Quality!

https://twitter.com/aterkel/status/711919433200082944

How is making history a female-specific reason?

i was going to say that it's as much history making for me to vote for a woman POTUS as it is for any woman but i do understand why someone who shares your gender identity might give that an extra imperative.

full HRC remarks to AIPAC

http://time.com/4265947/hillary-clinton-aipac-speech-transcript/

i listened to the speech and found it pretty predictable. much more interested in what the donald has to say (and how many ppl walk out). morbz, i do often wonder why you're so interested in this particular topic but i guess probably best not to know.

well bcz i am a secret Jew killer as well as a Trumpist, obviously.

I knew it!

http://i.imgur.com/l6APHEM.jpg

oh wait, you said "trumpist".

Secret trumpets!
http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Slide2.jpg

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uTuQS7EEh8A/VvAb3eoJMvI/AAAAAAAAf3Y/fNNlVcgJTtsUXV9ieX7JMHD3Rrrhn6RpQ/s1600/Screenshot%2B2016-03-21%2Bat%2B9.02.34%2BAM.png

3%!!!

for all the time we spend worrying about their opinions, are white males even the biggest race/gender voting bloc nationally in terms of turnout?

women vote more than men, but yes NH whites compose by far the greatest share of the electorate

New Hampshire whites?

i know that whites are like 4/5 of likely voters but women are like 6/10 of white voters?

why does male people never want to vote?

they die younger and old people vote at a higher rate

ah of course

Who even cares about truth anymore, amirite.

How do you even attack or shame a candidate whose every public appearance is the spoken equivalent of rolling around in fetid shit? You can't tarnish Trump because he presents himself as soiled goods at every turn.

we prefer arguing on message boards xp

totally making this up but i always thought it was because men fetishized individualism more and women were generally leant more communal. writing this i realize it's a pretty broad stereotype.

chart also confirms that while r. edward "lyin' ted" cruz is indeed a huge liar, one of the hugest liars, he is not a demonstrably worse liar than donald trump. i wonder if that counts as one of trump's lies.

"broad" stereotype? you sexist son of a bitch

jk

also i would propose we start calling him "r. edward cruz," much as i was hoping "j. e. bush" or "j. ellis bush" would catch on, but i worry it would come off the wrong way.

I'm inclined to think that anything out of Trump's mouth aside from "my name is Donald Trump" and "I'm running for president" and "I'm going to make America great again" is a lie.

a "pretty broad" stereotype! xxp

"I'm going to make America great again"

think we can count this one as a lie too

kinda surprising to me that hillary gets a higher 'true' score than bernie

i thought men fetishized leather.

as we've said before, no idea what that methodology is, not taking at face value

it's p easy to tell the truth accidentally at least 10% of the time

(in Trump's case, there was "the Clintons came to my wedding cuz i gave em cash, and that's how the game is played")

the proportion of female voters has actually been closer to 53/47 the last three elections. that said, they've voted for

Whites comprised 72% of voters in the 2012 election but the white vote generally doesn't decide elections, because Republicans have won the White vote by double digit margins the last 4 elections. and, in fact, I went back to 1976 and I couldn't find one election where a Democrat won the white vote. Democrats have always won with minority votes.

Romney beat Obama by 20% amongst White voters (59 to 39), which was a much larger deficit than he worked from in 2008, but that was completely undone by losing 93% to 6% in the African American vote, 71% - 27% Hispanic, 73% - 26% Asian, etc. The Hispanic and Asian vote actually grew from the 2008 to 2012 elections for Obama - they were still predominately Obama in 2008, but it was closer to 3/4ths than 2/3rds in 2012.

Essentially the only way the Repubs can win the White House = maximizing their share of the white vote, while minimizing the damage of the minority vote (ie, losing 58%-42% isntead of say, 70%-30%). Democrats already know they're going to lose the white vote, but if they garner 2/3rds - 3/4ths of the minority vote, they can make up most deficits. More than likely, had minorities not increased their support for Obama in 2012, he might have lost, but Democrats only need to minimize, not erase their deficits amongst white voters.

Which is why I really feel like, as clemenza suggested above, Trump is doomed as a candidate. Granted, we don't allocate electoral votes by race and different demographics exist for different states, but no Republican candidate ever wins by alienating minorities, and Trump has done that moreso than Romney, which is a feat since minorities overwhelmingly hated him.

That's some fucked up definition of 'decide elections' - if the white vote stayed home, do you think things would look the same?

we're talking about voters who vote.

turnout obviously matters as well, but the white proportion of the vote has decreased in six consecutive elections - from 87% in 1992 to 72%. that is based in part in minority turnout but I can't imagine that a bigoted man threatening to be the most powerful man in the free world* wouldn't inspire similar turnout among

minorities

No, I get that - if the white vote switched to double-digit margins for Democrats, would things look the same? Or am I missing what you mean by "doesn't decide elections"?

they don't decide elections in that it's a given that the majority will go for the GOP. I guess it's less of a given that minorities will break for Democrats

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.