When has a third party actyally accomplished much?
Third parties have been significant in multiple election years. Not enough to win the presidency, not yet anyway, but certainly enough to make their presence known. Generally in elections when both major parties aren't addressing a key issue, or when both candidates are widely unpopular, you'll see third party candidates accumulate support.
I think this current environment, with two widely unpopular candidates, is fertile ground for that.
Are there particular policies of Clinton's that you dislike?
I perceive her as Obama-except-worse.
Writ simply, I see our country as teetering on the verge of defaulting on the National Debt, and the big government, tax-more-spend-more policies that seem to define the Democrats as a one-way ticket to doing so.
The large quantities of qualifications are there for a reason you guys.
3479, most of the point of the theory is to describe the implicit strategy Trump seems to be using. Immigration is simply the easiest one of the issues he has made relevant to pick apart, probably because it was his first. His position and issue hopping makes sense, if we consider them as broad hot-button issues likely to resonate with a number of voters in the primary.
I guess a better way to phrase this theory would be as an algorithm of sorts:
1. find an issue which has a sharp division in the political positions
2. loudly and ridiculously defend the politically incorrect option
3. the disenfranchised voters perceive that their concerns are now validated by an authority
4. Understandably, they rush to defend and support the authority which did the validating
5. Repeat as needed
This does operate on the premise that these tribes of voters care about a singular issue to exclusion, a bit silly--really, but it is undeniable that some issues are more important than others. Which brings us to the clincher: these important issues are unique to differing tribes, by stoking the issue one tribe cares most about, he can "issue-hop" to appeal to different tribes without meaningfully alienating the majority of any other particular tribe.
If so, we would expect different Trump supporters to defend some of his positions more forcefully than others and dismiss his inconsistencies with a hand wave. Which can easily be demonstrated from our, admittedly small, sample here on this very thread.
Sure, but that doesn't mean his strategy will work with a majority of people in this country. I'm sure he can continue to pick issues, but he makes enemies each time he does it. There is a limit.
I'd love to believe that, we've been waiting for this joke to expire for eight months now. Yet here we are with Trump a stone's throw from the oval office. Its obvious that this problem won't just go away. His strategies are clearly working and we will need to take serious steps against him as a nation if we expect to prevent this tragedy from unfolding.
Yes and no. Yes, we need to take his candidacy seriously and work against him with all of our efforts. Yes, he's dangerously close (but so were any of the other fools running for R's nomination). Yes, there are elements within our nation that are self destructive or acting out of fear.
No, this won't be easy for Trump. No, it's not a forgone conclusion. No, we shouldn't treat him as the presumptive president because that's exactly what lead to his victory over Republicans. He calls himself a winner and everyone just agrees with him. We know he's not though. We know he's the biggest loser -!- of them all.
I refuse to accept that there's a majority of people in this country that support him. The data doesn't reflect it. I will believe that beating him will be a challenge and one we have to rise to. We can't treat him like a joke, we have to treat him like the threat he is. This man-child shouldn't be allowed into office.
I remember you asked me a little while back about if a person like Trump could be predicted. To be honest, it's hard to do that because of the way the silent majority works. Many Trump supporters aren't really that into politics. They are not going to eagerly participate in phone surveys (which is why the data don't show a lot of their presence). They may not vote every election cycle, they are not super-religious (and if they are they don't often go to church), and for the most part they are "common Americans" that can't relate to politicians rooted in the Beltway. For years politicians have largely ignored these people thinking they will always begrudgingly vote for whoever is the GOP nominee. Not anymore. Trump is their voice now.
Cthulhufthagen has the right idea. You cannot underestimate the silent majority. This forum laughed it off at the beginning of this thread's creation when Trump just started his campaign, but the silent majority is a very real thing. There is a reason why you see that phrase on the Trump signs people have. Nixon used it to get into office decades ago given that he coined the term to begin with.
The real obstacle for Trump is going to be if the support of the silent majority will be enough to overcome the GOP civil war + other non-Republicans who will actively vote to keep Trump from winning. Honestly, I have a hard time knowing how this election will turn out. A lot things can happen from now until November. A bad VP pick would be costly to either candidate. The RNC could still see some shenanigans on the floor (particularly from Cruz delegates/#NeverTrumpers) that shake up the party even though Trump will easily clinch the nomination. Gary Johnson could get into the debates and/or do severe damage in the general election. Hillary could get indicted by the FBI. This election cycle has already been crazy enough as it is. At this point anything is still possible. And that includes the very real possibility of President Trump.
I think people are confusing "silent majority" with "vocal minority" because that is what Trump supporters are. Trump has only taken the strict majority in a handful of recent contests and the primary system does not accurately represent the will of the voters so his delegate count says a lot less than people want it to. Unfortunately he is going to ride that count into increased popularity thanks to a very divisive Democratic opponent. Its a real shame, either party could have had a shoe-in victory if they had put forward a likeable candidate.
To be honest, it's hard to do that because of the way the silent majority works.
Trump supporters are neither silent nor a majority.
There is a reason why you see that phrase on the Trump signs people have.
Yes, because they have a completely distorted view of what America is, caused by the fact that they're ignoring all the people who aren't them. You might have perhaps noticed that there are quite a few people in America who are not older white men?
Or maybe you haven't, but take my word for it, they exist, and Trump sure as hell isn't polling well with them.
The real obstacle for Trump is going to be if the support of the silent majority will be enough to overcome the GOP civil war + other non-Republicans who will actively vote to keep Trump from winning.
Uh, no. The obstacle for Trump is the fact that he alienates nearly everyone who isn't an older white male.
As if the Republicans didn't have a problem with that already, as if the Republicans didn't already start out with a disadvantage of about 40 electoral college votes among states that strongly favor them vs. the Democrats, they also have to contend with the fact that Trump is the nominee.
As if the Republicans didn't have a problem with that already, as if the Republicans didn't already start out with a disadvantage of about 40 electoral college votes among states that strongly favor them vs. the Democrats, they also have to contend with the fact that Trump is the nominee.
And thats presuming the State Representatives in the Electoral College follow the popular vote in their States. From what I have read there is nothing stopping them from voting for Hillary even if their state has overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The large quantities of qualifications are there for a reason you guys.
3479, most of the point of the theory is to describe the implicit strategy Trump seems to be using. Immigration is simply the easiest one of the issues he has made relevant to pick apart, probably because it was his first. His position and issue hopping makes sense, if we consider them as broad hot-button issues likely to resonate with a number of voters in the primary.
I guess a better way to phrase this theory would be as an algorithm of sorts:
1. find an issue which has a sharp division in the political positions
2. loudly and ridiculously defend the politically incorrect option
3. the disenfranchised voters perceive that their concerns are now validated by an authority
4. Understandably, they rush to defend and support the authority which did the validating
5. Repeat as needed
This does operate on the premise that these tribes of voters care about a singular issue to exclusion, a bit silly--really, but it is undeniable that some issues are more important than others. Which brings us to the clincher: these important issues are unique to differing tribes, by stoking the issue one tribe cares most about, he can "issue-hop" to appeal to different tribes without meaningfully alienating the majority of any other particular tribe.
If so, we would expect different Trump supporters to defend some of his positions more forcefully than others and dismiss his inconsistencies with a hand wave. Which can easily be demonstrated from our, admittedly small, sample here on this very thread.
Sure, but that doesn't mean his strategy will work with a majority of people in this country. I'm sure he can continue to pick issues, but he makes enemies each time he does it. There is a limit.
I'd love to believe that, we've been waiting for this joke to expire for eight months now. Yet here we are with Trump a stone's throw from the oval office. Its obvious that this problem won't just go away. His strategies are clearly working and we will need to take serious steps against him as a nation if we expect to prevent this tragedy from unfolding.
Tragedy unfolding... where had you been for the 7.5 years of Obama?
And thats presuming the State Representatives in the Electoral College follow the popular vote in their States. From what I have read there is nothing stopping them from voting for Hillary even if their state has overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
Certain states actually do forbid this. I'm not sure whether the majority do or don't, though.
Just having a lookat this, whilst the electoral colllege is supposed to follow the states there is nothing stopping the electors from doing what ever the hell they want when actually called on to vote for the President/Vice President. 29 states + the District of Colombia do have laws in place to punish any Faithless Electors but those laws have not been enforced in previous instances of faithless electors.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
Tragedy unfolding... where had you been for the 7.5 years of Obama?
By most metrics the people of America are better off than they were eight years ago so to call Obama's presidency a tragedy does not hold up to scrutiny. If you want to have a discussion about feel free to make a new thread, we are here to discuss Trump.
And thats presuming the State Representatives in the Electoral College follow the popular vote in their States. From what I have read there is nothing stopping them from voting for Hillary even if their state has overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
Certain states actually do forbid this. I'm not sure whether the majority do or don't, though.
Just having a lookat this, whilst the electoral colllege is supposed to follow the states there is nothing stopping the electors from doing what ever the hell they want when actually called on to vote for the President/Vice President. 29 states + the District of Colombia do have laws in place to punish any Faithless Electors but those laws have not been enforced in previous instances of faithless electors.
Where are you folks getting your information?
Except for the electors in Maine and Nebraska, electors are elected on a "winner take all" basis. That is, all electors pledged to the presidential candidate who wins the most votes in a state become electors for that state. Maine and Nebraska use the "congressional district method", selecting one elector within each congressional district by popular vote and selecting the remaining two electors by a statewide popular vote.
For all the accusations about Trump supporters being dumb ignorant goats, I've found them on average to be more informed than the average voter.
For all the accusations about Trump supporters being dumb ignorant goats, I've found them on average to be more informed than the average voter.
A) That is not a high bar to set.
B) I have found the opposite in my experience. A Trump supporter by definition believes Trump's lies making them more misinformed than other people who don't get their information from Trump rallies.
Except for the electors in Maine and Nebraska, electors are elected on a "winner take all" basis. That is, all electors pledged to the presidential candidate who wins the most votes in a state become electors for that state. Maine and Nebraska use the "congressional district method", selecting one elector within each congressional district by popular vote and selecting the remaining two electors by a statewide popular vote.
For all the accusations about Trump supporters being dumb ignorant goats, I've found them on average to be more informed than the average voter.
Except for the electors in Maine and Nebraska, electors are elected on a "winner take all" basis. That is, all electors pledged to the presidential candidate who wins the most votes in a state become electors for that state. Maine and Nebraska use the "congressional district method", selecting one elector within each congressional district by popular vote and selecting the remaining two electors by a statewide popular vote.
For all the accusations about Trump supporters being dumb ignorant goats, I've found them on average to be more informed than the average voter.
Pot meet kettle.
Anyone with a basic understanding of the electoral college should know that the electors are not obliged to vote for the candidate they are pledged to. It is rare but it happens every few elections. So far it has never changed the outcome of an election but it theoretically it could happen.
eg. Trump wins the election but right before the electoral college officially votes it comes out that he is actually a communist sleeper agent planning to turn the US into a new Soviet Union. The electors pledged to him could then refuse to vote for him and instead cast their votes for Hillary or any other candidate on the ballot.
And thats presuming the State Representatives in the Electoral College follow the popular vote in their States. From what I have read there is nothing stopping them from voting for Hillary even if their state has overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
This is not a plausible scenario, even in a presidential election as screwed up as this one. Occasionally one or two will turn their coat. It won't decide the White House. And if it did, it would almost certainly cause a constitutional crisis.
For all the accusations about Trump supporters being dumb ignorant goats, I've found them on average to be more informed than the average voter.
Do you have actual data on this, or are you just relying on your own anecdotal experience and judgment? Because the data say the opposite. Although the fact that you think Trump voters are informed may bear out the "uninformed"/"misinformed" distinction.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
This is not a plausible scenario, even in a presidential election as screwed up as this one. Occasionally one or two will turn their coat. It won't decide the White House. And if it did, it would almost certainly cause a constitutional crisis.
Which we desperately need. The Electoral college is rusty and outdated. It let Bush get elected with less than half of the actual votes. A reform of some sorts would certainly be a good idea.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos Cartography - Check out my completed maps of Zendikar and Innistrad!
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
It let Bush get elected with less than half of the actual votes.
That's an intended feature, not a bug. Everybody got what they voted for; the votes were counted in a weird way, but that way was known to all beforehand. There's a big difference between that scenario and a scenario where an elector decides to change their vote after the fact.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
And thats presuming the State Representatives in the Electoral College follow the popular vote in their States. From what I have read there is nothing stopping them from voting for Hillary even if their state has overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
This is not a plausible scenario, even in a presidential election as screwed up as this one. Occasionally one or two will turn their coat. It won't decide the White House. And if it did, it would almost certainly cause a constitutional crisis.
The only time it almost mattered was in 1800 and it would have just flipped who was President and who would be Vice President. Afterwards the Twelfth Amendment was added to prevent that particular issue from coming up again. If faithless electors ever become a real concern, there will be another Amendment pushed through ASAP.
This is not a plausible scenario, even in a presidential election as screwed up as this one. Occasionally one or two will turn their coat. It won't decide the White House. And if it did, it would almost certainly cause a constitutional crisis.
Which we desperately need. The Electoral college is rusty and outdated. It let Bush get elected with less than half of the actual votes. A reform of some sorts would certainly be a good idea.
I disagree on this; its a check on power and makes getting voting exactly right (which is hard to do) less of an issue. Everyone deserves equal access to the balot box; but, the electoral college is not problematic. I'm increasingly of the opinion that moving senate elections to the popular vote was a mistake.
Actually, the Electoral College system was put in place because the founding fathers thought the average voter was too dumb to vote correctly. Which is probably still true (for different reasons today than back then), but it's not about checking power.
I'm increasingly of the opinion that moving senate elections to the popular vote was a mistake.
You know the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates? They were running for Senate -- before the Senate was elected by popular vote. What they were basically saying to their audience was, "If you want me to be your senator, vote for the state legislature candidate who has pledged to vote for me." So in practice, there's not a great degree of difference. And to the extent that there is a difference, it's in tying the vote for representation at the state level to the vote for representation at the federal level, which is probably a bad idea. What if you like Mr. Lincoln but your state-level Republican candidate is an incompetent or a crook?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
And idiotic. Because, clearly, a ruined economy, closed borders, alienated allies, widespread poverty, and disenfranchised women and minorities are better than chugging along with an unbalanced but operational system. Because that's how we make America great again.
That was sarcasm, if you couldn't tell.
Edit: Ya know, I've encountered a fair number of Trump's supporters at this point, and all of them argue circles about how Trump is better than the competition. You're the first to outright admit that the fact he's worse is the reason you're supporting him. Congratulations.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos Cartography - Check out my completed maps of Zendikar and Innistrad!
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
Let's say you get your Revolution. Do you *really* want to live through that period? Historically, nearly every political revolution has been epic suck for pretty much everybody who had to live through it, even if the end result was positive (which isn't even a sure thing). The most pleasant political revolution I can think of is Japan's postwar reconstruction.. as long as you conveniently ignore the whole "losing the war" thing.
I think this current environment, with two widely unpopular candidates, is fertile ground for that.
I perceive her as Obama-except-worse.
Writ simply, I see our country as teetering on the verge of defaulting on the National Debt, and the big government, tax-more-spend-more policies that seem to define the Democrats as a one-way ticket to doing so.
I remember you asked me a little while back about if a person like Trump could be predicted. To be honest, it's hard to do that because of the way the silent majority works. Many Trump supporters aren't really that into politics. They are not going to eagerly participate in phone surveys (which is why the data don't show a lot of their presence). They may not vote every election cycle, they are not super-religious (and if they are they don't often go to church), and for the most part they are "common Americans" that can't relate to politicians rooted in the Beltway. For years politicians have largely ignored these people thinking they will always begrudgingly vote for whoever is the GOP nominee. Not anymore. Trump is their voice now.
Cthulhufthagen has the right idea. You cannot underestimate the silent majority. This forum laughed it off at the beginning of this thread's creation when Trump just started his campaign, but the silent majority is a very real thing. There is a reason why you see that phrase on the Trump signs people have. Nixon used it to get into office decades ago given that he coined the term to begin with.
The real obstacle for Trump is going to be if the support of the silent majority will be enough to overcome the GOP civil war + other non-Republicans who will actively vote to keep Trump from winning. Honestly, I have a hard time knowing how this election will turn out. A lot things can happen from now until November. A bad VP pick would be costly to either candidate. The RNC could still see some shenanigans on the floor (particularly from Cruz delegates/#NeverTrumpers) that shake up the party even though Trump will easily clinch the nomination. Gary Johnson could get into the debates and/or do severe damage in the general election. Hillary could get indicted by the FBI. This election cycle has already been crazy enough as it is. At this point anything is still possible. And that includes the very real possibility of President Trump.
Yes, because they have a completely distorted view of what America is, caused by the fact that they're ignoring all the people who aren't them. You might have perhaps noticed that there are quite a few people in America who are not older white men?
Or maybe you haven't, but take my word for it, they exist, and Trump sure as hell isn't polling well with them.
Uh, no. The obstacle for Trump is the fact that he alienates nearly everyone who isn't an older white male.
As if the Republicans didn't have a problem with that already, as if the Republicans didn't already start out with a disadvantage of about 40 electoral college votes among states that strongly favor them vs. the Democrats, they also have to contend with the fact that Trump is the nominee.
And thats presuming the State Representatives in the Electoral College follow the popular vote in their States. From what I have read there is nothing stopping them from voting for Hillary even if their state has overwhelmingly voted for Trump.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
Tragedy unfolding... where had you been for the 7.5 years of Obama?
In his Second 100 days - Yawgmoth's Bargain is unrestricted in Vintage.
What is going to happen in the Next 100 days!!!
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
Where are you folks getting your information?
For all the accusations about Trump supporters being dumb ignorant goats, I've found them on average to be more informed than the average voter.
B) I have found the opposite in my experience. A Trump supporter by definition believes Trump's lies making them more misinformed than other people who don't get their information from Trump rallies.
You mean you find that they hold the same misconceptions that you do?
All of them know how the electoral college works for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector
Pot meet kettle.
Anyone with a basic understanding of the electoral college should know that the electors are not obliged to vote for the candidate they are pledged to. It is rare but it happens every few elections. So far it has never changed the outcome of an election but it theoretically it could happen.
eg. Trump wins the election but right before the electoral college officially votes it comes out that he is actually a communist sleeper agent planning to turn the US into a new Soviet Union. The electors pledged to him could then refuse to vote for him and instead cast their votes for Hillary or any other candidate on the ballot.
Do you have actual data on this, or are you just relying on your own anecdotal experience and judgment? Because the data say the opposite. Although the fact that you think Trump voters are informed may bear out the "uninformed"/"misinformed" distinction.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Which we desperately need. The Electoral college is rusty and outdated. It let Bush get elected with less than half of the actual votes. A reform of some sorts would certainly be a good idea.
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The only time it almost mattered was in 1800 and it would have just flipped who was President and who would be Vice President. Afterwards the Twelfth Amendment was added to prevent that particular issue from coming up again. If faithless electors ever become a real concern, there will be another Amendment pushed through ASAP.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
And idiotic. Because, clearly, a ruined economy, closed borders, alienated allies, widespread poverty, and disenfranchised women and minorities are better than chugging along with an unbalanced but operational system. Because that's how we make America great again.
Edit: Ya know, I've encountered a fair number of Trump's supporters at this point, and all of them argue circles about how Trump is better than the competition. You're the first to outright admit that the fact he's worse is the reason you're supporting him. Congratulations.
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
Twitch channel