General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 202

The rhetoric from Trump supporters suggest they're instead disillusioned with the very essence of republicanism: they actually call out current Republicans en masse for cooperating too much with Obama over the past eight years and being "RINOs". It's basically "it's not enough that you believe in what I believe in: you have to be able to force everyone else to believe in what I believe in, or otherwise circumvent democracy, I'm not going to support you."

 

Exactly. His campaign has nothing to do with policy. His supporters don't care about policy. Criticizing him on the basis that he has no policy shows a profound misunderstanding about what his appeal is. The whole point of Trump is that he has no policy.

 

Unfortunately that was going to be part of platform Trump or not. Cruz supporters also criticized the GOP for cooperating with Obama too much. It was a major talking point throughout the rise of the Tea Party. I think the only candidate that would not use the RINO rhetoric would have been Bush. Maybe Rubio. But Cruz, definitely.

I think Trump supporters, as well as Bernie supporters, are disillusioned with the very essence of politics. Being consistently sold a bill of goods and then not delivering on those promises, and giving no indication that you ever wanted to to begin with. A media that is more concerned with dining with the elites than questioning them, and canned speeches that go through multiple focus groups before hitting the public.

 

No, they support Bernie. Or Stein.

 

The part in the middle with the "feelings" is terrifying.

 

If Bernie stays in what are the odd this splits the dem vote?

 

With the new polls showing Trump in the lead, I took a look at social media numbers and Trump has 5.2 MILLION more followers err...likers? on his official Facebook (9.8 million to Clinton's 4.6 million) and 2.5 million more followers on Twitter (10.1 million vs 7.6 million)

I fully realize that a follow or liker doesn't equate to a vote but that's an extremely large margin of followers being updated fairly constantly. It feels that this is Trumps election to lose, because at the end of the day this is a popularity contest and I have a gut feeling that there are a large amount of voters that will vote based on entertainment and not policy.

For comparison's sake Sanders has 4.4 million followers on Facebook and 2.9 on twitter
Gary Johnson 850k Facebook 245k twitter
Jill Stein 420k Facebook 177k Twitter.

 

There's no chance this happens, unfortunately. But would it be cool? Yup.

 

Donald Trump has been tweeting for years and it's not all political, doubt Bernie Sanders ever weighed in on Kristen Stewart's affair

 

Idk, he's still in technically no? Hell, I know people who have said they're writing him in even if he drops

 

How could anyone support Bernie when he hasn't weighed in on this issue?!?!

 

Technically yes, but he already endorsed HRC and he's handing over all his delegates. That being said, I am 1000% one of those people that will be writing him in even if he drops. HRC had all the chances in the world to win me over, but her hiring DWS yesterday was the nail in the coffin.

 

I really, really want to vote for Jill Stein, because Clinton has been doing such a good job of making it hard for me to vote for her. But at the same time, Trump is making it hard to not vote against him. If it were literally any other Republican, I'd go Stein without a problem.

 

I know what you're saying, but I refuse to buy into the "vote for the lesser of two evils" BS. I intend to vote for the best person for the job.

 

Cruz and Walker are the only two that would dissuade me from voting for Stein.

 

Zero, Clinton is the only true Democrat on the ticket and she is backed by a disproportionate amount of super delegates. How the Clinton campaign is handling everything will probably turn away a few hundred thousand Dem voters on the fence, but at the DNC she's a 99.9% lock.

I think Mr. Sanders has made it abundantly clear he's on team Pattinson.

Trump might be more popular as he's been more active on the social media front than Clinton, but don't forget that this is Clinton's second run at the Presidency which means she has people who liked her from two separate campaigns. Also, for another comparison's sake. Mitt Romney has 10.5 million facebook buddies after only one campaign run and only 1.78 million twitters. Mitt Romney is as squeaky clean as they come considering he says he's a devout Mormon, which if you have ever heard or seen Kathleen Madigan's reason for not voting for him, he's not really a thrilling/entertaining individual. Romney definitely supports team Rupert Sanders though in that Kristen Stewart affair. Big water cooler talk when that bomb shell went off.

 

It's interesting that Bernie supporters are pissed at the DNC considering the bolded statement. Sanders has always been an Independent, he ran on the Democratic ticket for the election but he has never really been a Democrat. Is it any wonder that the organization would move against him in favor of the standard bearer of the Democratic Party of the last 20 years?

 

This is a really good article. I highly recommend it:


'The technocratic approach to governing rests on the idea that there is a right way to manage major policy questions, and that much of the point of electoral politics is to keep the way clear for expert administration. In practice, outside of questions of war and security, this has meant managing the economy for maximum total growth. Even Democratic wonks have tended to promote market-style competition. (The usual difference is that the Democrats believe government has an important role in creating and policing such competition, while Republicans are more likely to think that rolling back government gives “the market” room to work.)....Hillary Clinton remains the odds-on favorite to beat Trump. She would, in all likelihood, continue the Clinton-Obama style of governance, albeit with populist inflections borrowed from the Sanders movement and some new effort to bridge racial alienation. But a zenith of liberal politics has passed, and her administration would be a transitional one, grappling with new movements that reject failed promises of reconciliation and instead insist on asking who gets what—money, jobs, resources, and respect and standing in the national community. There is much to hope for here, in a realistic grappling with problems of racial and economic inequality that are unsolved and, in some cases, worsening. There is also much to fear in an angry, centrifugal, zero-sum politics of wounded national and racial pride. It is the misfortune of the present to face these two prospects entangled in a single pregnant moment."

America's Rejection of the Politics of Barack Obama

 

Trump is worse to me than them, because he is so unpredictable and crazy that literally anything is on the table. Cruz and Walker are extreme, but they're at least extreme versions of politicians we've seen in the past. Trump bullies people, says whatever he wants to make his truth sound good, and does not respect the rights of the average citizen (Muslim ban, deportation plan, opening up libel laws).

I cannot fathom a worse president than Trump (besides, like, Ted Bundy).

 

That's not what the poll you were responding to shows?

 

Trump's been selling this all along. When the GOP threatened to drop him, he threatened to run independent. He has no allegiances. He cares for himself and his wallet. He's sold the rhetoric of the silent majority the whole time and idiotic people have eaten it up.

 

Someone who lacks policy shouldn't be allowed to run for any political position in the world's strongest country. Yet here we are.

 

The Tories have scrapped the roll of minister for newly arriving Syrian refugees. Another group that aren't included in the 'everyone' the new government is representing.

 

It's slightly surprising after the Sanders campaign gained momentum, traction, and even showed that he was the best possible choice to beat any Republican candidate. Bernie agreed to run on a Democratic platform meaning he would have to give concessions in order to possibly by endorsed which he was willing to accept, however the DNC has shown to be incredibly stubborn as Clinton being the promised candidate despite Sanders polling better than her. Her only real threat was Biden who, with the unfortunate loss of his son, didn't have the heart to run. Don't forget that she had over 200 super delegates before the primaries began, which is no accident or coincidence. The rhetoric before primary season began was "Who can challenge Hillary for presidency".
Bernie losing to powerhouse Clinton definitely wasn't surprising, what is surprising and catching people though is the Democratic's party minimal effort to acknowledge the massive surge of Sanders supporters thinking that once Clinton is the official nominee that they will just get in line because the alternative is "crazy". The DNC is willfully ignoring the holes in their ship.

 

http://gawker.com/ex-dnc-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz-heckled-with-chan-1784258076