In retrospect, the strongest argument that should have been made against electing Trump

[andym]

beyond his obvious unpresidential qualities was the rubber stamping of the conservative agenda the GOP had planned-- especially against the safety net-- Medicare etc. The GOP had made very clear what they were planning. So few ads really emphasized this idea (some did), even though elected Democrats knew what could come if Trump won. Even Democratic Senate and House candidates probably did not publicize this enough as perhaps the key reason to reduce rather than add to GOP power. But the public, outside of politically active partisans, basically had very little idea what was coming-- and now they are in for a surprise.

[Binkie The Clown]

1. That might have worked, IF...

You could state it in four catchy, inflammatory words on a bumper sticker. Otherwise, what average voter has the attention span, or education to study the issues? You can't appeal to their heads, you have to gut punch them with something visceral that scares the shit out of them. Otherwise, the response is a yawn.

[raccoon]

10. You got that right. nt

[Tatiana]

25. Hands off my MEDICARE!

Secure our SOCIAL SECURITY -- Vote Democratic.

Etc.... there are people who were paid many $$$$ to come up with this stuff.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

26. It's not like Hillary, with her $1.2 BILLION campaign chest, couldn't afford to come up with some catchy bumpa stickers and a few hats.

[andym]

30. Sounds good to me. nt.

[JI7]

2. mostly of his supporters were voting against the safety net since they see it as minorities taking

from hard working white people.

so it would have actually helped him .

[whathehell]

4. Actually, Trump promised to protect Social Security & Medicare

These programs are extremely popular among Democrats and Republicans and there is no constituency for cutting them. Only the Republican leadership and their fat cat doners favor that.

[JI7]

5. they don't see those or anything they personally get as govt programs. this is why they didn't think

he would take away obamacare from them.

they think he should take it away from undeserving non white people.

[whathehell]

7. I can't be sure what's in their heads

and I don't think you can be either, but you're entitled to your opinion.

[JI7]

8. i can based on what they themselves say and how they vote

[whathehell]

9. Depends on how monolithic a group you think "they" are..

If you are saying those who voted for Trump did it solely, or even mainly, to take benefits away from minorities, I'd have to disagree with you.

[brush]

11. Many claim their trump vote was for economic reasons, but IMO it was to make America white . . .

er, ah . . . great again.

They heard the trump racist and misogynistic dog whistles, saw a white supremacist put in charge of his campaign and voted accordingly.

They knew exactly who and what they were voting for.

[whathehell]

16. I think they voted for him for more than one reason..

and economic reasons were part of it, IMO, but you're entitled to your own opinion.

[brush]

18. And you yours

The economic issue is surface, easy, but IMO, restoration of white privilege/high paying jobs for non-college educated WWC was the underlying reason, as it most often is.

Let's not fool ourselves, we know the history of the country.

[whathehell]

19. Yes it is..

and it hasn't changed since my last post, so why not just agree to disagree and move on?

[brush]

20. Cool.

[Yavin4]

34. People get uncomfortable when discussing race in this country

They just can't bring themselves to believe that it exists.

[Beartracks]

12. Im amazed how much the campaign was just a game to him.

Say whatever sounds right, say whatever they want to hear, say whatever makes you look good (or at least whatever you THINK makes you look good.) None of it matters!

Like he was running for Class President in 5th grade...

==============

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

13. Got that right... as sad as that is.

[exboyfil]

3. Kaine did the conventional thing during the VP debate

by going after Trump. In hindsight he should have exposed Pence. Iraq War, no pardon for innocent man, extreme on reproductive rights, failure of privatization in Indiana (toll road), early corruption (misuse of expense account).

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

14. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, oh what a party we'd have!!

[pnwmom]

6. DT was also lying about this -- saying that he had no intention to touch Social Security

or Medicare.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

15. The Fuhrer-Elect lie?!?! I'm shocked!! Shocked I tell you!!

[LaydeeBug]

17. Nope. The media is in cahoots with the KGOP and have been for years

so to pretend the democrats could publicize *anything* is folly.

Russia dictated our dialogue.

[triron]

21. Not elected but 'election'

as in fraudulent

[Ken Burch]

22. You're right...but doing that would require our "expert" Democratic strategists to accept...

...that we could win an election by actually defending our core progressive values...

Our "experts" are still convinced that we can only win IN SPITE of our principles-that we must always act as if it's somehow shameful to NOT be conservative.

Hillary tried to bust through that thinking, but it was just too deeply entrenched-so we ran a campaign that was mainly focused on attacking Trump's sleaziness...a sleaziness, it turns out, that the voters didn't actually care about.

[mythology]

23. The problem with that theory is that no states voted differently for

President and the Senate. That is every state where a Republican Senator was elected/reelected, Trump also won. To me that indicates people weren't just voting for Trump. They were voting for Republicans.

There are some counter examples like McCory in North Carolina, but the overall picture was Republican.

[andym]

24. But the GOP victories go hand in hand with a lack of fear of the consequences

You can say that people "wanted" these outcomes, but what people think they are getting (less taxes, more jobs) and what they really will get (loss of safety net, greater chance of the economy crashing, lowered quality of life, and few if any old fashioned jobs coming back -- steel, mining, etc) is what was needed to be made clear during the election. There are too many voters who only have a vague sense of what is going on, and will vote for someone they dislike least, or who has promised them something in particular that they want.

I think your point in no way diminishes the possibility that many voters had no idea what they were really going to get.

[deist99]

27. My view

What Drumps campaign did better than Hillarys is their message. They focused on 3 primary messages and kept repeating it over and over again. Build a wall, stop Muslim immigration, and create jobs. I can't even say what Hillarys message was or what she planned to do. And every ad I say on tv from her in NE Ohio was just about how bad Drump was.

What we are also forgetting is that Drump just didn't beat Hillary, he beat 16 other republican candidates and was not supported by a lot of republicans. Hillary's opponent campaigned for her during the election. And yet Drump still won. And heaven help us if we just sit around and say everyone who voted for Drump is racist, sexist, etc., and he gets one or two of those things done he promised. We will get killed in the 2020 election.

[Yurovsky]

28. Incumbent presidents are tough to beat...

That's what made Clinton's win in '92 so impressive. He beat a sitting POTUS who had approval numbers in at 91% (IIRC) just 18 months before.

If Trump gets anything done that excites his base and gives swing voters something to get behind it will be very tough to beat him. It's just a very tough thing to do. We need to acknowledge that and work like hell to beat the odds.

[andym]

29. Yes-- if the US is not in a recession

which is what helped Clinton in 92, Trump will be very difficult to beat.

Keep in mind, after the Iranian's took the hostages Jimmy Carter's approval rating was at 58%, which is great considering how low the numbers would be before and then after-- so Bush's approval rating during the Gulf War is misleading.

[blue cat]

31. Except that a lot of rep voters

want to get rid of the safety net. It makes them angry, so it wouldn't have worked in Texas. They know they are voting against the safety net.
And free college...I heard that idea unmercifully mocked.

[andym]

32. It's true that a lot of people have been convinced that less government is good

which is why it will be very difficult for Democrats to win in parts of the country where Reagan's ghost holds sway through his propagandizing minions at Fox, Talk Radio etc.

But there are places where the safety net is still important and the loss of the net will resonate there-- even in deep red states.

[blue cat]

33. It would help if there were democrats

to vote for. There were a lot of races where R is the only choice.

[Willie Pep]

35. Very true.

The Democrats should have been more explicit about how dangerous the GOP is from an economic standpoint and hit the Republicans harder on kitchen table issues. Instead we focused too much attention on the "Trump is a misogynist and racist" angle. Unfortunately, many people didn't care about that stuff. I even know some women who dismissed "Pussygate" as "boys will be boys" and accepted the "locker room talk" excuse.