Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Status
Not open for further replies.

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
The idea that Trump voters were more strongly motivated by Trump's racist rhetoric has no meaning to you? Economic issues didn't affect the decisions made by Trump's voters. It was the Wall, Mexican rapists, Islamic terrorists and right wing white supremacy.
Some, sure. I'd even concede a majority of Trump voters didn't care about economic policies. But even if there were 5% of Trump voters that would have been swayed by Bernies populist policies that would have been enough to tip the scale. The majority of the racist, white voters reside in southern states that no dem will carry regardless. I think his message would have resonated in Midwest swing states like MI, PA, WI, OH. Those were the states that mattered, and those were the states that swung to Obama.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Some, sure. I'd even concede a majority of Trump voters didn't care about economic policies. But even if there were 5% of Trump voters that would have been swayed by Bernies populist policies that would have been enough to tip the scale. The majority of the racist, white voters reside in southern states that no dem will carry regardless. I think his message would have resonated in Midwest swing states like MI, PA, WI, OH. Those were the states that mattered, and those were the states that swung to Obama.
So, then a close election? Hinging on a few swing states but in your opinion would swing to Sanders.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
So, then a close election? Hinging on a few swing states but in your opinion would swing to Sanders.
Hillary won the popular tally by what, 3 million votes? I think Bernie would have exceeded that, and carried MI, OH, PA, WI, and possibly Florida. I don't know what the electoral votes would have amounted to in that scenario, but that sounds like a pretty comfortable margin to me.
 

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
Hillary won the popular tally by what, 3 million votes? I think Bernie would have exceeded that, and carried MI, OH, PA, WI, and possibly Florida. I don't know what the electoral votes would have amounted to in that scenario, but that sounds like a pretty comfortable margin to me.
Lol, fucking bl0wavote....
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Hillary won the popular tally by what, 3 million votes? I think Bernie would have exceeded that, and carried MI, OH, PA, WI, and possibly Florida. I don't know what the electoral votes would have amounted to in that scenario, but that sounds like a pretty comfortable margin to me.
It's speculation. I'd like to think that MI, OH, PA and WI are not racist bastions. A majority of voters in those states were OK with voting for a white supremacist. Just saying, I'd never vote for somebody who says the things Trump did. I'm suspicious of anybody who would that they are a closet klansman or klanswoman.

And then again, consider single payer healthcare, which is a darling of Sanders supporters.

If a vote were put to the state of MI for state-level single payer health care with the tax bill per person at about 5,000 per person for all 10 million people or total tab of $50 billion, do you think it would pass? Similar measures in Colorado or Vermont didn't pass. Do you think after a cost for this is estimated and reported in the right wing media it would be a positive or a negative for Bernie?

By his primary policy positions, Bernie would be running on a national policy similar to this. Do you think once the cost is factored in, it would be a winning issue for him in Michigan?

Michigan hasn't passed a $15 minimum wage law. Do you think this policy would help or hurt him? If it helps him, why hasn't Michigan already passed that minimum wage into law?

2/3 of your state's representatives in Congress are Republicans. But then again, both your state's senators are Democrats so it's not clear which way your state leans from that survey. Not a liberal bastion, however.

I don't know, man. Once the issues get discussed and fake news comes to play, I wouldn't be as confident as you. Based on how they vote, voters say they are more conservative than the opinion polls you cite seem to indicate.
 
Last edited:

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
She was a weak candidate though. There are no good excuses to trot out when she lost to the most unpopular presidential candidate in the history of our country. A racist, sexist used car salesman. Donald fucking Trump!

It is no consolation to point to the fact that she ran up her vote totals in liberal states like California and NY. Every single person in the country, including Hillary, knows that in order to win the election you have to peel off some swing states. Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. She lost every single one of those states! To Donald Trump!

There is no good excuse to explain how *any* dem nominee could possibly lose to a candidate so woefully unprepared for office as Donald Trump.

As for Bernie, I tend to agree with you. He lost, and by a margin large enough to nullify the excuses being made by his supporters. I think he would have pummeled Trump head to head in the general, but we'll never know for sure....unless Bernie gets the nod in 2020 and Trump is still in office at that point. Probably unlikely on both counts.
She was weak by getting more votes than any candidate ever except Obama?

You've filled you head with too much Republican bullshit, sorry dude.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
It's speculation. I'd like to think that MI, OH, PA and WI are not racist bastions. A majority of voters in those states were OK with voting for a white supremacist. Just saying, I'd never vote for somebody who says the things Trump did. I'm suspicious of anybody who would that they are a closet klansman or klanswoman.

And then again, consider single payer healthcare, which is a darling of Sanders supporters.

If a vote were put to the state of MI for state-level single payer health care with the tax bill per person at about 5,000 per person for all 10 million people or total tab of $50 billion, do you think it would pass? Similar measures in Colorado or Vermont didn't pass. Do you think after a cost for this is estimated and reported in the right wing media it would be a positive or a negative for Bernie?

By his primary policy positions, Bernie would be running on a national policy similar to this. Do you think once the cost is factored in, it would be a winning issue for him in Michigan?

Michigan hasn't passed a $15 minimum wage law. Do you think this policy would help or hurt him? If it helps him, why hasn't Michigan already passed that minimum wage into law?

2/3 of your state's representatives in Congress are Republicans. But then again, both your state's senators are Democrats so it's not clear which way your state leans from that survey. Not a liberal bastion, however.

I don't know, man. Once the issues get discussed and fake news comes to play, I wouldn't be as confident as you. Based on how they vote, voters say they are more conservative than the opinion polls you cite seem to indicate.
Yeah, I could be wrong. Purely speculation on my part. I just feel like Trump should have been easy to beat, and the only reason Hillary lost is because of her substantial unfavorability.

As for Michigan, it's a purple state. The district lines have been messed with by the Republicans big time. State legislature and congressional districts suffer due to that, but in state wide races where district lines don't matter the Dems do well. As you pointed out, both senators are Dems, and Obama carried the state in 08 and 12.


Lol, fucking bl0wavote....
Great post Justy. Insightful as usual
 

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I could be wrong. Purely speculation on my part. I just feel like Trump should have been easy to beat, and the only reason Hillary lost is because of her substantial unfavorability.

As for Michigan, it's a purple state. The district lines have been messed with by the Republicans big time. State legislature and congressional districts suffer due to that, but in state wide races where district lines don't matter the Dems do well. As you pointed out, both senators are Dems, and Obama carried the state in 08 and 12.




Great post Justy. Insightful as usual
Bernie couldn't carry himself amongst Democrats in the primary.

I mean no offense but if he couldn't even win amongst Democrats how do you think he couldve beaten Trump?

He'd have just shouted him down with "wrong" "just words folks, they're just words", etc.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
She was weak by getting more votes than any candidate ever except Obama?

You've filled you head with too much Republican bullshit, sorry dude.
So you feel that it's acceptable that she lost the election? He was a formidable opponent? You were expecting a tight race because he was such a quality candidate?

Personally I think it's an embarrassment that she lost to him. He's quite possibly the worst candidate to ever run for any public office. I would expect ANY dem candidate to beat him. It should have been a lay up. To make excuses as to why she lost suggests it's you that has your head filled with BS.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Bernie couldn't carry himself amongst Democrats in the primary.

I mean no offense but if he couldn't even win amongst Democrats how do you think he couldve beaten Trump?

He'd have just shouted him down with "wrong" "just words folks, they're just words", etc.
So you're just going to dismiss the polls that showed Hillary beating him by 2-3 points, and Sanders beating him by 8? How do you explain that?

Saying that Bernie didn't win the primary, so therefor he couldn't win the general is a weak argument. He polled much better among independents than Hillary, and he wouldn't have lost near the number of votes that Hillary did due to the unfavorable numbers. She was really disliked. You are aware of that right?
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
The idea that Trump voters were more strongly motivated by Trump's racist rhetoric has no meaning to you? Economic issues didn't affect the decisions made by Trump's voters. It was the Wall, Mexican rapists, Islamic terrorists and right wing white supremacy.
Follow up question to this Fog....

If racism plays such a big role in our elections, how do you explain Obama winning twice?? I'm not saying that some voters aren't motivated by race, but if it were such a huge deal then Obama would have been trounced, no?
 

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
So you feel that it's acceptable that she lost the election? He was a formidable opponent? You were expecting a tight race because he was such a quality candidate?

Personally I think it's an embarrassment that she lost to him. He's quite possibly the worst candidate to ever run for any public office. I would expect ANY dem candidate to beat him. It should have been a lay up. To make excuses as to why she lost suggests it's you that has your head filled with BS.
I feel like the Electoral College system is outdated as fuck and keeps giving us Republican Presidents against the popular vote...

But sure, keep bashing Clinton like the useful idiot cucks your Bernie Cult has become.
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
I feel like the Electoral College system is outdated as fuck and keeps giving us Republican Presidents against the popular vote...

But sure, keep bashing Clinton like the useful idiot cucks your Bernie Cult has become.
How did Obama manage to win in 08 and 12 then? He dealt with the same EC rules that Hillary did.

What was the difference between Obama winning twice (very comfortably) and Hillary losing?
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
So you're just going to dismiss the polls that showed Hillary beating him by 2-3 points, and Sanders beating him by 8? How do you explain that?

Saying that Bernie didn't win the primary, so therefor he couldn't win the general is a weak argument. He polled much better among independents than Hillary, and he wouldn't have lost near the number of votes that Hillary did due to the unfavorable numbers. She was really disliked. You are aware of that right?
I know the question wasn't directed at me but what the hell.

Sanders wasn't running at the time of the poll. As stated here,
Sanders wasn't running against the right wing and Putin orchestrated disinformation campaign. If he had won the primary, those same fake media guns would have been pointed at him. You cited a poll asking if Sanders would win without any opposition, unlike Clinton.

Trump beat a field of 5 or so candidates when his run at the party nomination had been declared dead on arrival by most "in the know". I think you are in good company in underestimating the attraction his racist and bigoted words had after 8 years of a black man in the White House. I showed you clear evidence that racism, not economic policy were the main reasons why Trump voters chose him. Trump was a formidable candidate for the very reasons that we think he's deplorable. To say the Democratic nominee's win should have been a slam dunk is your opinion. If your opinion is mainly based upon that poll you cite, then your opinion is not well founded, especially since you disregard evidence to the contrary.

Also, in the past 50 years, only one candidate for president succeeded an 8 year president of the same party (GHB). There is resistance to keeping the same party in power after a full 2-terms are up.

I agree that Sanders could have won in a close election but a slam dunk? No.
 

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I could be wrong. Purely speculation on my part. I just feel like Trump should have been easy to beat, and the only reason Hillary lost is because of her substantial unfavorability.

As for Michigan, it's a purple state. The district lines have been messed with by the Republicans big time. State legislature and congressional districts suffer due to that, but in state wide races where district lines don't matter the Dems do well. As you pointed out, both senators are Dems, and Obama carried the state in 08 and 12.




Great post Justy. Insightful as usual

Dude, you don't get it. The election was rigged with precision. How is it easy to beat an opponent that is backed by a Russian propaganda army, funded by Russain oligarchs and the Koch brothers? After the access Hollywood tape dropped, Trump\russia had to reach to their connections in the FBI to reopen Hillary's fucking E-mail investigation. Face it, Trump was not your average opponent. I'm certain even you felt Hillary would win.
 
Last edited:

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Follow up question to this Fog....

If racism plays such a big role in our elections, how do you explain Obama winning twice?? I'm not saying that some voters aren't motivated by race, but if it were such a huge deal then Obama would have been trounced, no?
Fair question.

The big difference is Trump.

In the article I linked to earlier: http://people.umass.edu/schaffne/schaffner_et_al_IDC_conference.pdf

Go to page 19. In figure 4 on that page, it shows Trump as standing out among everybody else, McCain, Romney, Clinton, Obama in how he attracted people who have racist attitudes. Later on, on page 22, same difference with Romney. Trump was loved by sexists.
 
Last edited:

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Some, sure. I'd even concede a majority of Trump voters didn't care about economic policies. But even if there were 5% of Trump voters that would have been swayed by Bernies populist policies that would have been enough to tip the scale. The majority of the racist, white voters reside in southern states that no dem will carry regardless. I think his message would have resonated in Midwest swing states like MI, PA, WI, OH. Those were the states that mattered, and those were the states that swung to Obama.
Oh, but on this we have data; remember that 12% of those who voted for Bernie in the primary voted for Trump in the general. That alone would have been plenty!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top