Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

andym

andym's Journal
andym's Journal
November 18, 2016

Poll: Hypothetical Obama versus Trump in 2016 (electoral college)

To better understand what happened, it would be very interesting to compare Clinton versus Trump with a hypothetical Obama versus Trump election. In this way, we can compare factors, Obama does not face sexism, but more directly faces racism. Obama would be considered the candidate of the status quo, not change. Obama did face years of negative painting by the GOP, like Clinton, but was not under FBI investigation or Russian/Wikileak attack, etc. You can assume Sanders ran in the primary as well if you like.

For all these factors I personally believe that President Obama had he been allowed to run constitutionally, he would have won in an electoral college landslide. So please vote and provide your reasoning and how it impacts our understanding of the 2016 election in the electoral college.

November 16, 2016

One of Hillary Clintons top aides nailed exactly why she lost

One of Hillary Clinton’s top aides nailed exactly why she lost
By Chris Cillizza November 14 at 1:42 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/14/one-of-hillary-clintons-top-aides-nailed-exactly-why-she-lost/

"In The Washington Post's terrific oral history of the 2016 presidential campaign, there's a quote from Hillary Clinton media consultant Mandy Grunwald that is remarkably prescient. Responding to a question about how Clinton could lose despite being ahead in every traditional measure of the campaign, Grunwald said: "How it will happen would be that the desire for change was greater than the fear of [Donald Trump], the fear of the risk. .?.?. That’s something we talked about very early on — how do we make sure that people aren’t comfortable making that leap because they’d like to go for change. . . . The question is what’s the more salient question when they go vote."

That's it. That's the election in a nutshell: change vs. risk......
....
Why did Clinton lose, then? Because no one understood just how much people wanted change and how big a risk they were willing to take to put someone way outside of the political system into the White House.

....
[summarizing: only 38 percent of voters vs 52% for Clinton said that Trump was "qualified" to be president;
only 35% said that Trump had a presidential temperament vs Hillary at 55%. Voters knew that Trump was dishonest 66% said he was dishonest vs 64% for Clinton.]

BUT,
* One in three voters said Trump was honest and trustworthy (36 percent said the same of Clinton).
But, the desire for change last Tuesday was bigger than any worries Clinton was able to raise about Trump. Four in 10 voters said the most important character trait in deciding their vote was a candidate who "can bring needed change" to Washington. Of that group, Trump won 83 percent to Clinton's 14 percent — 83 to 14!!!!"
____________________________________________________
Since this came from a top Clinton campaign consultant, it's clear that the campaign knew what they were up against. There is little doubt that Comey was the difference maker, but if Trump hadn't captured the mantra of change, then there is good chance that Hillary would have still won. Unfortunately, her team knew that they couldn't use that theme, since she has a long political history in Washington coming in.

postscript: there are many stories similar to this one, ascribing the desire for change as a critical factor. Apparently even President Obama agrees that this theme played a key role:

from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/16/world/europe/obama-trump-nationalism-europe.html
Visiting Europe, Obama Warns Against Rise of ‘Crude Sort of Nationalism’
GARDINER HARRIS NOV. 15, 2016:

"Mr. Obama was unapologetic and unequivocal on his record of inclusiveness.

“So my vision’s right on that issue,” he said. “And it may not always win the day in the short term in any particular political circumstance, but I’m confident it will win the day over the long term.”

Mr. Obama said that the desire for change was a huge factor in Mr. Trump’s victory.

“Sometimes people just feel as if we want to try something to see if we can shake things up, and that I suspect was a significant phenomenon,” he said.

November 8, 2016

After losing, does Trump go around the country calling himself the "Real President"?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-holds-one-final-rally-in-michigan-unless-he-decides-to-keep-going-161242545.html
"Trump holds one final rally in Michigan. Unless he decides to keep going."

Holly Bailey
....
"It’s that addiction to the adulation of crowds that has led many around him to wonder what happens next to a candidate who has been feeding off that emotional high for more than a year. If he wins, Trump will be expected to get down to the serious business of governing, which is far different than campaigning. And if he loses, can Trump walk away from his need to be on the political stage? This is a question that even those closest to him cannot answer."
....
One of the biggest unknowns heading into Tuesday is how Trump will react should his quest for the presidency come up short. In recent weeks, the candidate — who has, by his own admission, never been a good loser — has raised the specter of a “rigged” election and has suggested he might not easily accept the result if he loses.

That has prompted some close to the candidate to question whether Trump might simply go on campaigning. There have been rumors that Trump is eying the creation of a political action committee or other organization to keep his political brand going and to settle scores with those who he believes slighted him during the campaign. But so far, Trump has declined to say specifically what he will do if he doesn’t win."

---------------------------
I can just see it now. Trump crisscrossing the country for the next 4 years as the "Real President" Donald Trump, pretending to be the shadow President.



November 6, 2016

So this year we get an October Surprise and a November Surprise!

Lets see how much damage the November surprise undoes.

November 5, 2016

PUTIN APPEARS WITH TRUMP IN FLURRY OF SWING-STATE RALLIES

PUTIN APPEARS WITH TRUMP IN FLURRY OF SWING-STATE RALLIES
Andy Borowitz , 02:00 P.M.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/putin-appears-with-trump-in-flurry-of-swing-state-rallies

TAMPA (The Borowitz Report)—Infused with a sense of urgency as Election Day nears, the Trump campaign has enlisted President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, to appear with the Republican nominee in a dizzying array of swing-state rallies over the weekend.

Putin will be the most visible Trump surrogate in the final weekend of the campaign, as he tries to fire up voters in Florida, North Carolina, Colorado, and Nevada.

The Russian President seemed to relish the warm response he got at his first Trump rally, in Tampa, where he led the crowd in a raucous chant of “Lock her up.”

Trump praised Putin’s talent for politics by noting that he had won the Russian election in 2012 by a landslide. “He got sixty-four per cent of the vote, and no one else even came close,” Trump said. “He’s terrific.”....

----------------------
Great satire. You can almost hear Putin now. "Don't worry Americans, I will teach Donald the ropes and tell him just what to do and how to behave. The US and Russia are going to be best buddies. I think Mr Trump is going to approve of mother Russia taking back all of those foolish countries that split off from the former Soviet Union, I may even give him a XMAS gift of excess polonium so he can take care of his opponents the same way I do."

October 1, 2016

Trump has succeeded in making this election all about him:

luckily he is terrible. But it sure would be nice to hear more in the media about how Hillary Clinton will change America for the better. It will help so much after the election to define her mandate. Wonder what her campaign is planning once it becomes clear she has an insurmountable lead after Trump's gaffes?

September 26, 2016

There you go again Jimmy

In 1980 a lot of folks were skeptical about Reagan: besides stating a bunch of ridiculous things on the campaign trail, like trees are the major source of pollution because they produce CO2, he had a set of unachievable policy goals: like balancing the budget by cutting taxes (voodoo economics). Moreover, he had previously stated he wanted to do away with Medicare etc. He was also a very vocal opponent of the Soviet Union, some suggested he might start WWIII.

In the one and only debate, a few days from the election, Jimmy Carter who was highly unpopular at the time running without an overarching campaign theme, attacked Reagan's very public policy proposals, which the affable Reagan dismissed by "There you go again." Reagan's performance lifted enough of the concern over whether Reagan was not an extremist to help him win by a landslide.

Lessons: Negatives are reversible and even a bit of seeming reasonableness goes a long way to help "characters" achieve respectability.

Reagan was positive and optimistic. Carter was pessimistic and realistic with a lot of wonkish policy proposals.

Carter was not bold in his campaign, Reagan was.

September 17, 2016

What Trump's birther comments really meant

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/16/opinions/trump-birtherism-comments-interpreted-begala/index.html
Paul Begala Sept 16, 2016


Trump's public remarks:
"Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it. I finished it. You know what I mean. President Barack Obama was born in the United States, period. Now we all want to get back to making America strong and great again. Thank you, thank you very much."

Paul Begala, Democratic strategist, translates Trump's remarks on Obama's birth to what Trump is really saying:

Translation 1 for Trump's base-- uneducated white people:
"My fellow oppressed, aggrieved, angry white folks: I truly do love the poorly-educated. Hillary is a witch, and a weak one at that. She lost to Obama and let that Kenyan Muslim become president. I am the only one who has stood up to the Great Imposter, and I cannot wait to see him moved out of our White House. I will replace his weak-kneed whimpering with a warrior's battle cry. I have to say this crap about Obama's birth because the media wants to crucify me. But watch my eyes: they're blinking in Morse Code: K-E-N-Y-A-N. You get it. It's like a hostage tape. I need you more than ever. We must not allow the coastal elites to replace a weak Kenyan with a weak woman. Thank you, thank you very much."

But Trump is trying to expand beyond his base to college educated white people. For them here is what Trump's speech sounds like
Translation 2-- for educated white people he hopes to trick:
"My fellow well-off, well-educated white people: Hillary is the real racist. She started the birther movement; it's all her fault. I had to say this crap about Obama's birth because I need the racist bumpkins to win. But now I've put an end to it. I'm really one of you. I mean, look at me: I'm standing in the five-star hotel I'm opening in Washington. Those rural rednecks are never setting foot in here, any more than those hillbillies are gonna join Mar-a-Lago. But now that I've got them all jacked up, let me reassure you: I'm no racist. And Hillary is. Bet you didn't know that, but she is. I'm one of you: a country club Republican who doesn't hate black people at all. Thank you, thank you very much."

Begala ends with this:
"Can Trump succeed in this effort to hold his base and expand his appeal? That depends on how gullible folks are. I do not doubt the intelligence of those who are taken in by Trump's con; some of the smartest people in America fell for Bernie Madoff's scam. Trump knows what every con man knows: You can go far in life by simply telling people what they want to hear -- even if it's two completely different things at the same time."
-----------------------
Scary and his analysis is probably right on the money.
September 16, 2016

Yahoo News: Why Clinton's pitch on the economy is (perceived as) so weak

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/hillary-clinton-is-blowing-it-on-the-economy-193752302.html
Rick Newman Sep 16, 2016

"If you’ve been half-following the presidential campaign, you know Donald Trump wants to get tough on China, stop US companies from moving overseas, round up illegal aliens, slash taxes and, of course, “make America great again." Trump’s plan doesn’t entirely add up, and even economists in his own Republican Party complain that debt would soar and he could cause a recession. But Trump’s plan is tangible, almost like something you can hold. Voters know what he stands for, what he plans to do and what his vision is (something about making America great again).".....

But he continues that nobody in the Yahoo finance news room could tell him what Hillary Clinton wants to do, except more of the same as President Obama.

"Clinton actually has a far more detailed economic plan than Trump does, with plenty of good ideas. Her website features 18 specific policy proposals on the economy, including more infrastructure spending, debt-free college for underprivileged kids, higher taxes on the wealthy, new fees on banks and fresh ways to boost small businesses.

But her economic agenda is about as exciting as a binder filled with think-tank papers, and if she has an overarching economic vision, she hasn’t communicated it with any zeal whatsoever. Clinton considers herself a champion of the underdog, as she tried to convey during her nominating speech at the Democratic National Convention this summer. But she’s also an elitist who gets paid millions in speaking fees and spends more time hobnobbing with millionaire donors than with ordinary people. If Clinton has a populist bent, it is largely lost in her small-ball economic agenda and her unwillingness to muster conviction."

What does he suggest? Well beyond something that I think is a confused idea on free trade. he says "present a small number of big ideas for making America the world’s most desirable economy (again). She could steal Trump’s good idea about growth: Set a target of 4% annually and declare it a national priority akin to winning a war. And then demand that we change the rules so every talented émigré in the world wants to come to America, and can".
----------------------

I think focusing on a strong overarching idea is great. That's how Bill Clinton won (the economy, stupid), that's how Obama won although "hope and change" is nebulous, optimism still sells. People want to believe that the person will do great things. Lets hope the Hillary Clinton's team is thinking similar thoughts.

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Sep 26, 2003, 09:31 PM
Number of posts: 5,660
Latest Discussions»andym's Journal