Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I wonder if some of the economic anxitity might return when things fail to improve over the next few years, they can deny reality until they loose their job, then it becomes impossible.
Also it seems that the anxiety remains amongst some Republican voters, they can be targeted as possible voters to be swung to the Democrats.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranApparently in campaigning, you rank potential voters on a scale of one to 5. 1 means they agree with you compleatly, while 5 means that they never will agree with you at all. What we want to target are those people in the middle.
The second lesson of "Resistance School" actually dealt with campaigning strategies and how to swing votes and is worth a listen. (Even if you're not American, as most of the strategies can be adopted anywhere)
https://www.resistanceschool.com/session-two-1/
edited 17th Apr '17 3:42:56 PM by megaeliz
Sounds about right, when I used to campaign in the UK we'd rank people based on a letter (either our party, our main opposition party or a general against) and a 1-5 scale, so an L5 would be a hardcore Labour Party supporter.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranChoir preaching but yet another study that shows, it was racism that helped Trump win
Not only did Hillary low ball the number (it's more than half) but deplorable is too nice of a word to describe them.
"2016 was plainly an anomaly. While the wealthy are usually most likely to vote for the Republican, they didn’t this time; and while the poor are usually less likely to vote for the Republican, they were unusually supportive of Trump. And the degree to which the wealthy disdained the 2016 Republican candidate was without recent historical precedent."
As I have said and continue to say, both economic and social factors are essential to understanding what happened in 2016; trying to hold up either as the one true cause behind the Trump phenomena is a reductionist way of looking at it.
What was surprising to me was that Trump's voters actually were lower in terms of authoritarianism than previous Republican voting bases.
edited 17th Apr '17 3:53:40 PM by CaptainCapsase
Although a majority of the wealthy rejecting Trump appears to be mostly because he's such a terrible businessman. The people who genuinely made their wealth from commerce know that Trump is a phony who knows nothing of genuine business practices and that if he's so bad at business after trying for decades, how could he possibly know anything about politics?
edited 17th Apr '17 3:56:05 PM by Zendervai
I suspect it's less that and more them being unsure about whether or not Trump was actually on their team because of the mixed messages he was giving in regards to the welfare state and military-industrial complex. Now that he's in office and is basically implementing the standard GOP policy despite the grumblings from Bannon's faction, many of the wealthy Republicans have begun to warm up to him.
edited 17th Apr '17 3:58:09 PM by CaptainCapsase
"I'm worried about losing my job to a goddamn, dirty Mexican. So I'm gonna vote for the conman who has a history of conning and offered no economic suggestions other than blaming brown people for everything."
And as for the wealthy, we know that they can't stand Trump as a person.
edited 17th Apr '17 3:58:30 PM by NoName999
Yep. My father is a wealthy Mexican that listens to Fox News and voted for Trump.
(Then again this study was only done for white people. I'd be interested to hear how the study would go for minorities that voted for Trump.)
Although he now regrets his vote but he thinks that we'd be screwed in different ways if we voted for Hillary.
edited 17th Apr '17 4:04:37 PM by MadSkillz
Here's the thing
Even Fox News has been saying, "hey maybe this guy isn't such a good idea"
Not to mention, anyone who listens to one station ever, which stands against literally every other source of news, that person is willful.
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for youA lot of people only really see snippets of news and don't really dig too deep into information, they just get surface level stuff that the candidates and their campaigns bring up ad nauseaum like Hillary's emails.
Joe Sixpack doesn't necessarily know which sources are supposed to be reliable, and the ones he might consider to be might not actually be so, such as Fox News, because he was simply raised to believe the stuff they feed people is true.
And Joe Sixpack is allowed to vote on candidates who will pass legislation that will seriously screw people over.
Who was it said the best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter?
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for youEh, sometimes. But not really. I see it on enough times that it's more like it gives a passing criticism of Trump so as not to seem too biased. And that happens rarely.
Well there's more than one news source that fellates Trump like Breibart, the Drudge Report etc.
Personally, I find cable news to be misleading in general. I wouldn't listen to them unless it was for news outside politics.
edited 17th Apr '17 4:08:04 PM by MadSkillz
There was one post that took some really innocuous titles, and converted them to look much more politically charged.
Like: "Girl successfully crowdfunds life-saving surgery" becomes "Girl had to beg for her life to random strangers on the internet because health care is so ridiculously expensive in America".
"Innovative little boy saves money for college working at a plastic recycling plant" becomes "Gross violation of labor laws is necessary for this child to afford basic higher education"
Like, seriously, all of these news articles reflect major societal problems that are presented as no problem at all because of hidden conservative bias.
Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for youDepends on the company they keep.
A lot of people get their information filtered down through people than the news.
There's that too.
edited 17th Apr '17 4:16:39 PM by MadSkillz

Trump also congratulated Erdogan on the Turkish referendum.