Political Roundtable Part XIV

[dobrojim]

yet some claim we're in a post-racial society

[tontoz]

yet some claim we're in a post-racial society

Let's not overlook the fact that she got to the White House in the first place. That would have been unthinkable in the not so distant past.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[CobraCommander]

He was very fortunate and I think it is fair to argue that a portion, how significant is debatable,
of his success was due to a number of factors having little to nothing to do with him, working in
his favor. The principal one I am thinking of is the exceedingly high level of UNpopularity
and distrust by the american people of his major party opponent.

Add to that the historical infrequency of a major party holding the WH for > 8 years
and his victory doesn't in retrospect seem that remarkable.

We are also in a era of seemingly extraordinary levels of tribalism.
Rational objectivity has become an almost complete non-factor for
a huge proportion of voters in choosing who they will vote for.
It is currently an apparent necessity on the part of a large number
of people to know someone's party affiliation before they can pass
judgement on any particular action that person may have taken.

I agree but...All of your points can be made about every president since WWII and I could make a direct argument for everyone since Carter. Your point is Trump won because the other party put up a candidate that lost...well yes. Think about how flawed McCain and Romney looked against Obama. Was that Obamas doing or were those men really as flawed as Obama made them look? I would say its both- Obama was a better candidate and both of his opponents were flawed...which is essentially the same thing Trump did. Trump highlighted Hillarys weaknesses and rode a wave of tribalism. Obama did the same thing...i apologize if in my ultra long response that I didn't cover that fact. My point is taking advantage of everything you said is part of the genius.

Which major party candidates were as personally and viscerally unpopular as HRC?

My point, a huge number of people really were never ever going to vote for her.
However flawed many of the other losers in the recent past were, I don't think
they engendered the type of response that HRC did among such a wide swath of
voters.

You mean HRC...the HRC that won the popular vote?

If so the answer to your question is Trump was more unpopular. HRC had 2.1% More votes than trump.

Take that for data

[cammac]

Its interesting how badly Trump has been diminished this week with the healthcare legislation going down to defeat and the bill on Trumps desks increasing sanctions against Russia. Plus the battle within the White House makes the Trump the head clown in a clown car.

[Jamaaliver]

Its interesting how badly Trump has been diminished this week with the healthcare legislation going down to defeat and the bill on Trumps desks increasing sanctions against Russia. Plus the battle within the White House makes the Trump the head clown in a clown car.

And yet so many of his supporters refuse to even acknowledge how bad things have gotten.


This perfectly sums up what the WH has bottomed into:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[Ruzious]

You know it's all a fake reality tv show when they put in a character like Mooch - and outfit him with those ridiculous sunglasses. I mean... c'mon. Is that Ben Stiller playing Mooch (hint to SNL)? People aren't gonna really believe this crap. They'll have to cancel because the hair gell budget is too high. Hmm, is there a Trump line of hair products?

[JWizmentality]

You know it's all a fake reality tv show when they put in a character like Mooch - and outfit him with those ridiculous sunglasses. I mean... c'mon. Is that Ben Stiller playing Mooch (hint to SNL)? People aren't gonna really believe this crap. They'll have to cancel because the hair gell budget is too high. Hmm, is there a Trump line of hair products?

There's no way the guy's for real. I'm almost 90% sure he's trollin. A Dem plant.

[gtn130]

Just tossing out one more point of the election - there was a shift - those that make less than $50,000 move to support Rs vs. Ds in that election. And it wasn't based upon progressive vs. conservative ideology.

Both Bernie and Trump basically said they were going to raise or not cap entitlement spending. Trump also beat on established trade policies - with the America first mantra.

I think the election has serious ramifications for future candidates. Talk about any kind of sustainability in entitlement spending or about free trade at your own risk.

Pretty sure we've had this discussion a few times, but I don't agree with this narrative. People largely voted along party lines in the general election. Hillary won the popular vote by ~3 million while being massively unpopular. The average Trump voter, based on exit polls and primary data, was more educated and had a higher median income than the average Hillary voter.

If Hillary campaigns more in Wisconsin and Michigan, she wins
If Russia/Wikileaks/Trump don't interfere, Hillary wins
If the Comey letter doesn't happen, Hillary wins

To be clear, this isn't about Hillary or the campaign she ran - it's about the lack of evidence behind the Hillbilly Elegy narrative that everyone loves to trot out. The election results plainly do not support this narrative.

[tontoz]

@ that Bannon line.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[dckingsfan]

Just tossing out one more point of the election - there was a shift - those that make less than $50,000 move to support Rs vs. Ds in that election. And it wasn't based upon progressive vs. conservative ideology.

Both Bernie and Trump basically said they were going to raise or not cap entitlement spending. Trump also beat on established trade policies - with the America first mantra.

I think the election has serious ramifications for future candidates. Talk about any kind of sustainability in entitlement spending or about free trade at your own risk.

Pretty sure we've had this discussion a few times, but I don't agree with this narrative. People largely voted along party lines in the general election. Hillary won the popular vote by ~3 million while being massively unpopular. The average Trump voter, based on exit polls and primary data, was more educated and had a higher median income than the average Hillary voter.

If Hillary campaigns more in Wisconsin and Michigan, she wins
If Russia/Wikileaks/Trump don't interfere, Hillary wins
If the Comey letter doesn't happen, Hillary wins

To be clear, this isn't about Hillary or the campaign she ran - it's about the lack of evidence behind the Hillbilly Elegy narrative that everyone loves to trot out. The election results plainly do not support this narrative.

That group in the middle that used to be solidly D aren't and those above $100K in income are split. Not quite your narrative



And yes, if Hillary ran a good campaign, she wins. But she didn't - Trump did. You don't have to get the most votes in our system - you need to win the electoral college. Why did that normally solid D vote go the other way? That is the real question and does it become a trend like it has in the governorships throughout the country?

I think Trump will take down the Rs single-handedly. But that is just my opinion.

[cammac]

The interesting dynamic from the healthcare battle is how Collins, Murkowski and McCain will vote in the future and could Collins and Murkowski be persuaded to leave the Republican Party and become Independents but caucus with the Democrats. In both cases they have Angus King a Independent Senator from Maine and Bill Walker a Independent Governor of Alaska. McCain has flirted with becoming a Democrat in the past and might be maverick enough to at least become independent. Another target could be Dean Heller who will face opposition getting the Republican nomination but if he switched to become a Democrat he will be on the right side of the changing demographics in the state.

Collins, Murkowski and McCain could all be offered chairmanships in a then Democratic controlled Senate this would essentially marginalize Trump even more.

[dckingsfan]

I think anyone leaving the Rs would have cover with their constituents at this point...

[TGW]

:lol: @ that Bannon line.

where the hell did Trump find this guy? in the basement of some italian restaurant in brooklyn?

[TGW]

the situation involving Scaramucci hiring/Priebus firing is incredible. Scaramucci accusses Priebus of being the leak wrongly, Trump double down and fires Priebus anyway, and while Mucci is on CNN trying to explain himself, another leak comes out from a top WH official saying that Mucci's interview is a disaster.

If this is what Trump considers as "winning", well I'll gladly be a loser.

[montestewart]

Put that guy in a leather jacket and he fits in perfectly with Lenny and Squiggy

[montestewart]

Mooch screws the pooch!

Trump removes Scaramucci as communications director: NYT
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-scaramucci-idUSKBN1AG299?il=0

Fake news?

Damn, I was still working on new nicknames!

[TGW]

INCREDIBLE.

[Doug_Blew]

Mooch screws the pooch!

Trump removes Scaramucci as communications director: NYT
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-scaramucci-idUSKBN1AG299?il=0

Fake news?

Damn, I was still working on new nicknames!

I'm sad to hear this. The mooch is one of my top 5 characters ever. He reminded me of my child hood days watching Different Strokes with the Gooch, an imaginary bully.