General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 257

well, that kind of thing is exactly what was predicted in the gop 2012 moratorium, and we saw the establishment and base both unwilling to transform or compromise to accomodate voters outside of the party's central pillars. it is not as though the social conservatives are the driving force behind trump, and without them the republican party is not nearly strong enough to compete nationally against the current democratic coalition.

 

This election is going to be a landslide for Hillary

 

Holy shit.

 

No Matter Who Our Next President Is, They Won't Understand Technology | Techdirt

 

But if the Democratic party becomes more hawkish under Clinton, and liberal social sensibilities become more authoritarian, then conservatives have an opportunity to seize don't you agree? It's almost as though liberals will become more and more puritanical and it's going to be the conservatives that become the counter culture and free-spirited party.

 

Yeah, I think it's going to be a 40-45 state loss for Trump.

 

Could you elaborate on your last statement?

 

no they will not become the counter cultural and free spirited party, thats not a part of their character

absolutely not whats gonna happen

 

Personally don't think it'll be quite that bad, but Hillary will for sure win by a bigger margin than Obama did over Romney in 2012

 

Won't be that bad. But if Clinton does win, she may be doing it with states like Utah and North Carolina and Georgia and Arizona, while losing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Would be a weird looking electoral map.

 

Gary Johnson and Rand Paul wanting to legalize marijuana doesn't make them counter culture

 

I can't wait to see Trump 'snap' during the presidential debates when he gets challenged on an issue...Clinton needs to challenge him to multiple debates. If he refuses, he looks weak, which goes against the 'brand' and if he accepts, he'll be made to look like a complete buffoon...must watch TV.

 

The whole world will be watching the debates between the two, haha

 

This has been discussed multiple times already but the whole debate landscape is so different now than it was 4 or 8 years ago. In the past, it would only take a few real missteps during a debate for a candidate to begin losing support (binders full of women) but Trump has proven that he can say anything, everything, or nothing and get away with it. Clinton can challenge him as much as she wants - and she will - but I don't expect his responses to be any different than what we have already seen from him. He'll just turn it back on her and call her crooked without ever giving an answer that would provide assurance that he understands anything about being the president

 

Hmmm, I thought that last statement might be controversial, so I'll do my best to elaborate. In the past, the people that were dangerous, outspoken opinion makers tended to be liberal, or left-leaning. Espousing anti-christian ideals would get you kicked out of organizations, banned from publishing your work, and generally shunned by establishment America. Art that challenged the conservative sensibilities of the time was not allowed to be shown to a wide audience (think of how sexuality was treated in the 40s and 50s).

Now, as I see it, it's almost the opposite. Liberal and left-leaning sensibilities are the establishment. They aren't trying to ban DH Lawrence, they are trying to ban conservative news stories from Facebook. Conservatism is the dangerous thinking now. The provocateurs that are emerging in social media are the ones who are anti-leftists, where it used to be the other way around.

Hope that elaborates. It's a half-formed thought if that, but I thought I'd share it.

 

I think it can be. Someone in that party has to realize that once the baby boomers die, social conservatism (and with it the GOP) will be dead.

Maybe a bit of an exaggeration, but I don't see it being close.

 

This was great as well

 

I mean, there is less tolerance of racist/anti-lgbtqia/sexist language. That doesn't make those opposing a sensitivity to the language we use counter-cultural. It just makes them terrible people. Trump personifies this. What he and others aim to say when they critique political correctness is, we all know that there are essential characteristics that pertain to these groups, so we just need to be honest instead of covering it up. That resonates with a lot of the American population that think they're being censored. But, they aren't libertines in any sense of the word. They're reactionaries that actually want reify differences, rather than break down differences that are, in reality, ideological constructions. In other words, they want the old hierarchies back and that is authoritarian in itself. The claims you make only make sense if we divorce ourselves from what these people are actually claiming to want in this world. They don't want free speech, they feel they are entitled to every and any outlet to push forth their openly racist and misognyistic views under the guise of "truth telling".

 

I'm curious to see if Bernie's movement carries over to 2020, let's be realistic though, if the Republican party can actually get behind a real candidate (Paul Ryan?) and not a shit show of a person, I don't see Hillary winning 2020. Trump's self destruction and stupidity is the major reason for helping Clinton, I have a hard time imagining the Bernie Bro's not supporting Ryan or Romney as their likability would be through the roof if they had to go against Clinton (regardless of policy).

 

bernie bros do not exist

 

A Bernie Sanders supporter liking Romney makes no sense to me as Romney is insanely wealthy

 

Never thought I'd see the day. Big thumbs up.

 

The day of what?

 

I never said his tepidness on abortion rights was an issue: I actually think reproductive justice is one, and perhaps the only, issue on which Clinton is genuine.

However, to pretend that choosing a pro-deregulation, pro-TPP, pro-privatization, and pro-fracking candidate is not tied at all to sponsorship, especially when she is getting absolutely throttled by Trump when it comes to campaign spending efficiency and after there was backlash from the financial sector at the prospect of Warren as VP, or to policy, is silly.

Also, let's not pretend that white males are some token demographics that are hard to come by. Narrowing the choice by that attribute would only leave about half the party still in play.