Author Topic: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.  (Read 69311 times)

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #75 on: August 10, 2015, 06:31:46 pm »
THE ASSUMPTION THAT BLACKS ARE LIBERAL IS A STUPID ONE.

That leaves Blacks in an interesting situation.

They can be conservative, which is more or less suicide (given the conservative approach to police shootings and, for that matter, Blacks in general).

This is where Democrats pat themselves on the back simply, as far as I can tell, for not cheering the cops on. Democrats seem to be under the impression that their party has been GOOD to blacks, but in reality it's merely been slightly less bad. Maybe.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #76 on: August 10, 2015, 06:32:00 pm »
THE ASSUMPTION THAT BLACKS ARE LIBERAL IS A STUPID ONE.

That leaves Blacks in an interesting situation.

They can be conservative, which is more or less suicide (given the conservative approach to police shootings and, for that matter, Blacks in general).
They can be apolitical, which simply removes their voice.
They can start another political movement entirely, with a base of 13-19%.

In short, the Black vote isn't a kingmaker in this election; it is a king-breaker, but limited to breaking the candidate that is most sympathetic to BLM.  The Black vote is too small and spread out among electoral districts to affect any of the other candidates in this particular election.  The GOP is ignoring it entirely, and HRC assumes (probably correctly) that she'll get half the Black vote in the face of the GOP no matter what she does or does not do...But that she will probably still win without it.

Personally, I find the most important issue to be the environment, as it's a species survival thing.  He talked about that for the same amount of time that he talked about BLM last night.

I'm still going to vote for him, because I have a good idea of how he'd act as president...Which is to say, far better than any of the other candidates, on either BLM or the environment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/opinion/charles-blow-race-to-the-finish.html

I can't see anything I argue with in that article.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #77 on: August 10, 2015, 06:34:29 pm »
THE ASSUMPTION THAT BLACKS ARE LIBERAL IS A STUPID ONE.

That leaves Blacks in an interesting situation.

They can be conservative, which is more or less suicide (given the conservative approach to police shootings and, for that matter, Blacks in general).
They can be apolitical, which simply removes their voice.
They can start another political movement entirely, with a base of 13-19%.

In short, the Black vote isn't a kingmaker in this election; it is a king-breaker, but limited to breaking the candidate that is most sympathetic to BLM.  The Black vote is too small and spread out among electoral districts to affect any of the other candidates in this particular election.  The GOP is ignoring it entirely, and HRC assumes (probably correctly) that she'll get half the Black vote in the face of the GOP no matter what she does or does not do...But that she will probably still win without it.

Personally, I find the most important issue to be the environment, as it's a species survival thing.  He talked about that for the same amount of time that he talked about BLM last night.

I'm still going to vote for him, because I have a good idea of how he'd act as president...Which is to say, far better than any of the other candidates, on either BLM or the environment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/opinion/charles-blow-race-to-the-finish.html

I can't see anything I argue with in that article.

Well... you did just say:

That has in fact been their base since LBJ signed the civil rights act.  If they go against it, they lose 14 states minimum.  Not gonna happen.

I don't think that's accurate, and according to the article, it probably isn't.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #78 on: August 10, 2015, 06:35:51 pm »
THE ASSUMPTION THAT BLACKS ARE LIBERAL IS A STUPID ONE.

That leaves Blacks in an interesting situation.

They can be conservative, which is more or less suicide (given the conservative approach to police shootings and, for that matter, Blacks in general).

This is where Democrats pat themselves on the back simply, as far as I can tell, for not cheering the cops on. Democrats seem to be under the impression that their party has been GOOD to blacks, but in reality it's merely been slightly less bad. Maybe.

By the same standard, I am unimpressed with the dem's behavior on trade, workers rights, and banks.  I feel that I have been fucked.

But I know the difference between bad and worse.  I can choose between disregard for my welfare and actual antipathy for my welfare.

Now there's a candidate who is - in my opinion - not bad.  Imperfect is probably the best word for it.

So now I can choose between imperfect, bad, and worse.  I'm going to choose imperfect.  When he loses the primary, I guess I'm gonna vote bad, because it's still better than worse.

Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #79 on: August 10, 2015, 06:39:01 pm »

Well... you did just say:

That has in fact been their base since LBJ signed the civil rights act.  If they go against it, they lose 14 states minimum.  Not gonna happen.

I don't think that's accurate, and according to the article, it probably isn't.

Forgive me here, I'm not trying to be obtuse:  I did not see in that article where the republicans will not lose their base in 14 of 50 states if they abandon their white flight approach.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #80 on: August 10, 2015, 07:08:13 pm »

Well... you did just say:

That has in fact been their base since LBJ signed the civil rights act.  If they go against it, they lose 14 states minimum.  Not gonna happen.

I don't think that's accurate, and according to the article, it probably isn't.

Forgive me here, I'm not trying to be obtuse:  I did not see in that article where the republicans will not lose their base in 14 of 50 states if they abandon their white flight approach.

Quote
To get more directly at the issue of racism in political parties, Nate Silvers FiveThirtyEight Politics looked at a variety of questions on racial attitudes in the General Social Survey and specifically at the numbers for white Democrats and white Republicans.

This wasnt a perfect or complete measure of racial bias, but more a measure of flagrant bias the opinions of people aware of their biases and willing to confess them on a survey.

That said, they found that:

So theres a partisan gap, although not as large of one as some political commentators might assert. There are white racists in both parties. By most questions, they represent a minority of white voters in both parties. They probably represent a slightly larger minority of white Republicans than white Democrats.

So, if there isn't that large of a partisan gap, either there are a lot more racists in the Democratic party (who haven't fled due to Black fear) than you're accounting for, or a lot fewer in the Republican party. Probably, either way, not enough for the Republicans to lose 14 states.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #81 on: August 10, 2015, 07:19:11 pm »
Assuming those racists don't cluster.

My guess is that the GOP would lose
Kentucky
Tennessee
Texas
Georgia
South Carolina
Louisiana
Missouri
Indiana
Utah
Oklahoma
Arkansas
North Dakota
Arizona

for a combined total of 138 electoral votes.  They would in effect be destroyed as a political party.

Hence the ravings from Barbour and Stein quoted in the article you linked.  The GOP has to ramp it up for short-term survival.  I don't think they have a long term survival, really.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #82 on: August 10, 2015, 07:26:53 pm »
Eh, I disagree. But that's OK.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #83 on: August 10, 2015, 07:36:51 pm »
Eh, I disagree. But that's OK.

I'm just going off the difference in numbers between Obama's elections and prior elections.

The biggest gap in the numbers, pro-GOP, was in those 14 states.  I do not know where the author of the article you linked got his numbers on the racists in each party.  Lemme go look.

Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile

Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #85 on: August 10, 2015, 07:41:01 pm »
From the sourced article:

Quote
If the partisan gap in racial attitudes toward blacks has widened slightly in the past few years, it may be because white racists have become more likely to identify themselves as Republican, and not because those Americans who already identified themselves as Republican have become any more racist.

Then I read the rest of the article.

You're right.  It's hopeless.   :sad:

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #86 on: August 10, 2015, 08:00:58 pm »
Republicans would be stupid to not attempt regaining the black vote by taking a strong line on police reform. It aligns with their "everyman" image that they try to project. Family values, and jobs, and neighborhoods. So they lose the extreme racist vote, but gain the black conservative vote... that's a lot of people. A whole lot of people. God and freedom and family values are strong currents in black communities.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #87 on: August 10, 2015, 08:04:45 pm »
Yeah, well, as long as I believed that the USA was factionalized on the race issue at least to some degree, I felt that there was a chance for redemption.

There is not, given the details in the article and the supporting documentation.

And I don't believe than an immoral nation deserves to exist.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #88 on: August 10, 2015, 08:15:40 pm »
Yeah, well, as long as I believed that the USA was factionalized on the race issue at least to some degree, I felt that there was a chance for redemption.

There is not, given the details in the article and the supporting documentation.

And I don't believe than an immoral nation deserves to exist.

So a racist white minority makes the whole nation, including all the black people in it, immoral?
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Doktor Howl

  • SHIT FIXER
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 386329
    • View Profile
Re: Calling it now: Dems snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016.
« Reply #89 on: August 10, 2015, 08:24:04 pm »
Yeah, well, as long as I believed that the USA was factionalized on the race issue at least to some degree, I felt that there was a chance for redemption.

There is not, given the details in the article and the supporting documentation.

And I don't believe than an immoral nation deserves to exist.

So a racist white minority makes the whole nation, including all the black people in it, immoral?

If you buy that it's a minority.  As Silver says in the article, people frequently answer with a social-acceptance bias.

And when the rubber hits the road?  How many people - as a function of the population as a whole - protested the last few years of murders committed by the police?  How many, instead, talked about "thugs" and "instead of complaining about being choked to death, why don't you obey the law?"

Likewise, the outcry among churches - White AND Black - against Gay rights?

I am not Diogenes.  One honest man - or 10% of the population - isn't enough.  If there is no faction in a representative republic that represents morality on a political level across the issues, that is an indication that there is no demand for one.

To my mind, the United States is morally bankrupt, as a nation and a society, a few outliers notwithstanding.