Open Thread for May 2, 2017
The Real Reason Why Hillary Lost. Spoiler Alert: It’s exactly what we thought:
Indeed, the voters who flipped from Obama to Trump in just four years have amassed 70 percent of the reason why Clinton lost the election. (In other words, it wasn’t just racism.) The real reason?:
Clinton lost was unable to persuade working class white voters mainly because she didn’t differ from the status-quo, and Trump was a candidate that ran on abolishing the establishment class, even though he was never actually going to anyways.
For that guy who derided any criticism of Clinton over here as consorting with the enemy, you were wrong!
Great Chance for A D Congressional Pickup. Of course, she was one of the most moderate of Republicans and, of course, there’s no guarantee that the D will be any better. Me? I’ll wait to see who Debbie Wasserman Schultz endorses and then send money to the other candidate.
This Is Ridiculous. $120 mill for Trump’s Family Security?: Another issue that D’s should be hammering away at.
Congrats to Dogfish founder Sam Calagione, 2017 Beard Award Winner! It’s gotten to the point where Dogfish Head rivals ‘tax-free shopping’ as Delaware’s chief identifier. BTW, didja know that Valerie Bertinelli was still alive? I didn’t.
General Assembly Struggling With Senior Property Tax Break: I like Rep. Kim Williams’ approach. Truth-in-advertising: If it’s means-tested, we’ll probably lose the break, and I’m totally fine with that. As long as it protects Delaware seniors on fixed incomes.
Must-Read of the Day (from yesterday): How the Right Wing Came to Love Them Some Russia.
Whaddayathink?
So sick of cheapskate retirees moving here to escape property taxes in their states. They sell some 1970’s rancher in some crap hole city for 750 K then move here and buy some generic ugly beige plastic house for 300K or more that no one who lives or works here could afford or would want. The POS multinational real estate investment parasites bulldoze every tree and pollute the landscape with ugly low quality abominations. And of course Sussex County Council asks nothing of the parasitic land raping developers and we get nothing from them including jobs which go largely to non English speaking undocumented workers they use as slave labor.
Regarding one shiny new study on Obama-Trump vote flippers…..what do you really know about the sample, size, composition? Or the questions? Many other studies have revealed the racism you are so eager to dispatch. Racism and financial instability can be wrapped up in one vote motive, can’t it? You’ve seen the evidence of the racism……white flight, Reagan Democrats, school re-segregation, to name some evidence. Dig deeper.
Pelosi has blamed the Dems loss on their stance that abortion should be legal. So, the CLEARLY have learned their lesson.
Uh, Stan? This was extensive polling specifically commissioned by the national Democratic Party to dig for answers.
This is what THEY found, I just provided the link to one of a number of articles about it.
But deny the obvious to your heart’s content.
Gee, Hillary was out of touch with the everyday white working middle class?
Who knew?
Anyone who watched her crash and burn during Trumps NAFTA/Trade attacks in the debates.
Racist is kind of a weird attack given the ticket was white.
Pulling resources out of states was genius, too.
It was also obvious when watching her squirm while being pinned down about a $15 minimum wage, finally being asked – “Will you sign it if it comes to your desk?” Sheesh – just the thing to warm the heart of an hourly worker.
El Somnambulo, Read the Priorities USA geographic descriptor carefully, The polling and focus groups were run in Wisconsin and Michigan. The findings should be no surprise. The results do not reflect the views of Democrats writ large. This is to not deny the seriousness of the the DNC and national campaigns not listening to their local parties, funding local regional issues research to localize messaging, which has been a huge problem since the demise of the Dean 50 state strategy. Plenty of evidence too that the DNC and Hillary campaign did not listen to Michigan and Wisconsin Dem leadership and seek their counsel.
Stan, the working hypothesis here is that, had Clinton done better at winning over voters like the ones in Michigan and Wisconsin, she wouldn’t have lost the election. Appealing to those voters on economic grounds would not have lost her any support among other Democrats.
Hence the focus on those two states.
When studying deviations from established patterns among a subset of the population, you can’t include the remainder of the population that continued to behave according to the established pattern, except maybe as a control group. There is nothing amiss about the survey methodology as you describe it.
Aurochs, I didn’t say anything was amiss with the Michigan/Wisconsin study. What I said was applying those results/analyses to the whole Dem universe as many now are doing is potentially erroneous.
I’m not sure who HERE was doing that. In fact, this is the first I’m hearing of this study. That it doesn’t apply to the Dem universe as a whole is clearly reflected in Clinton’s popular vote.