What's new
By:

The Biden Administration and All Things Politics

fishonjazz said:
My guess? He would have been shouted down and worn down by trump and everyone saying he is a socialist and socialism never works. He would have been labeled as crazy. A far left extremist who wants to take your guns. He would have been placed into the culture wars. Im sure bernie would be supportive of the gays and trans community. He would get labeled as a weak sissy. He would be a marxist communist. Russia still would have been pumping out the misinformation in an effort to assist trump. SSDD. (I liked bernie a lot. I voted for him. And he MIGHT have been able to beat trump because of how bad trump sucks and he isn't a woman. But maybe not.)
Click to expand...

dunno From memory wasn't his polling against Trump pretty good ??
 
fishonjazz said:
I didn't vote for, just talk about. I never hear anyone ever talk about anti trust laws. Never see articles about it. Thread about it. Etc.
How do things get on the ballot? Why is immigration and inflation on the ballot this election?
Click to expand...

Now we're getting somewhere. Look up the term "manufactured consent"
 
Douchebag K said:
dunno From memory wasn't his polling against Trump pretty good ??
Click to expand...
LOL. Hillary was supposed to win in a landslide according to the polls.
 
Safetydan said:
Macroeconomic measures are woefully inadequate. When the average person in the US reads articles like this while they're on the struggle bus it feels like gaslighting. There's a reason economics is 2, arguably 3 of the top 4 issues for voters this election.

View attachment 17463

Is it because they're too dumb to know that they're actually doing great? No. come on. It's because their economic prospects are genuinely poor and getting worse.

Unfortunately many are being manipulated into voting for DJT who will only add gas to the dumpster fire. This is a reality that the Democrats have refused to reckon with for a long time now.
Click to expand...
So what are the specific things that the democrats (kamala in this case) should have been campaigning on? What should the messaging have been regarding the economy. Be like " the economy sucks, and while i was part of the administration that it got real sucky I had nothing to do with it. It was all bidens ideas that caused the bad economy. I had great ideas but no one would listen to me because im a woman." "I'm gonna prevent any future pandemics so there are never any supply chain issues.". "If there ever is another disaster and Americans need financial help then I won't help them with stimulus money". I mean she has said she is going to go after price gouging and make the wealthy pay their taxes. First time home buyer credit/assistance. Those things are too extreme for some voters already lol.
 
Last edited:
fishonjazz said:
LOL. Hillary was supposed to win in a landslide according to the polls.
Click to expand...
If I remember Bernie was polling even better. I think lack of enthusiasm and thus turnout is what lost Hillary the election. I think Bernie would have energized the base.

To Safetydan's point, it's even crazier that the Democratic party doesn't lean into the base to energize them and increase turnout because turnout is and has been the biggest factor in winning vs losing for the Dems. It is why the Republican party brazenly fights to suppress voters. I mean they don't care who sees them trying to make voting harder for the sake of making it harder.
 
Sardines said:
If I remember Bernie was polling even better. I think lack of enthusiasm and thus turnout is what lost Hillary the election. I think Bernie would have energized the base.

To Safetydan's point, it's even crazier that the Democratic party doesn't lean into the base to energize them and increase turnout because turnout is and has been the biggest factor in winning vs losing for the Dems. It is why the Republican party brazenly fights to suppress voters. I mean they don't care who sees them trying to make voting harder for the sake of making it harder.
Click to expand...
I keep seeing these vague phrases like lean into the base. Energize the voters. I want some specifics of what exactly that looks like.

Bernie would have energized the base, and scared everyone else due to all his extreme ideas and anti american changes. (people are generally scared of change. Its why our healthcare has sucked forever and will continue to suck.)
And lost accordingly.
 
fishonjazz said:
I keep seeing these vague phrases like lean into the base. Energize the voters. I want some specifics of what exactly that looks like.

Bernie would have energized the base, and scared everyone else due to all his extreme ideas and anti american changes. And lost accordingly.
Click to expand...
You might be right.

But by leaning into the base I mean to advocate for and deliver realistic plans to achieve progressive objectives. Climate change, gender and race equality, narrowing the wealth gap, providing universal health care... and legalizing pot nationally, improved education, support for low income parents, etc..

None of that is extreme in my humble opinion. It can be presented, and carried out, in ways that have high support amongst voters.
 
Douchebag K said:
Ok. Good chat
Click to expand...
Well, it's true. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-polls-were-mostly-wrong/

In the weeks leading up to the November 2016 election, polls across the country predicted an easy sweep for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.


Redirect Notice

www.google.com
President Trump's victory in 2016 came as a shock to many Americans. National polls showed his opponent, Hillary Clinton, leading the race up until the election. Even the Clinton campaign was confident she would win. All data they were looking at seemed to predict her victory.

Nationwide opinion polling for the 2016 United States presidential election - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org
Most polls correctly predicted a popular vote victory for Hillary Clinton, but overestimated the size of her lead

I could provide dozens of links for this.


Ya Bernie was a male so he night have polled better than Clinton against trump. But once trump started calling Bernie names and giving him nicknames and Insulting his wife and calling him unAmerican and extreme leftist and saying Bernie would take our guns etc etc etc his polling numbers might have dropped down to where Hilary was.

No way to know. I would love to find out though.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
Sardines said:
You might be right.

But by leaning into the base I mean to advocate for and deliver realistic plans to achieve progressive objectives. Climate change, gender and race equality, narrowing the wealth gap, providing universal health care... and legalizing pot nationally, improved education, support for low income parents, etc..

None of that is extreme in my humble opinion. It can be presented, and carried out, in ways that have high support amongst voters.
Click to expand...
I love all those things. But holy crap whoever were to run on those policies/issues would guaranteed be labeled an extreme leftist anti American communist Marxist more than any candidate prior.
Maybe it would work. Would be extremely risky though.

If this is a slam dunk winning platform then I'm pretty sure a candidate would have employed it by now. They want to win the election.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
fishonjazz said:
So what are the specific things that the democrats (kamala in this case) should have been campaigning on? What should the messaging have been regarding the economy. Be like " the economy sucks, and while i was part of the administration that it got real sucky I had nothing to do with it. It was all bidens ideas that caused the bad economy. I had great ideas but no one would listen to me because im a woman." I mean she has said she is going to go after price gouging and make the wealthy pay their taxes. First time home buyer credit/assistance. Those things are too extreme for some voters already lol.
Click to expand...
You asked the same thing to me in the other thread, so I'll respond here.

First on the messaging front. You don't have to tie the bad economy to Biden, It's clear that the economy has been moving in a certain direction for a while now. income inequality and qol indicators have been on the decline for median-income earners since the 80s. You, as a democrat strategist, could argue that Brandon did the hard work of undoing the damage of the trump admin and now its time to go in a bold new direction. I don't think this is difficult.

As for Specific Policy, I have a wish list but realistically, at the very least, they could have taken Tim Walz's economic accomplishments which are extremely popular in Minnesota and rolled them out to the nation. https://mn.gov/governor/accomplishments/accomplishments.jsp You can add things like M4A, Climate Change Initiatives, stronger protections for Unionized Labor, updating national infrastructure, public transportation improvements. You said they're doing a few of these things but I mean compared to what Walz accomplished in Minnesota, most of what they're proposing is tame, neutered, or off the table.

Sure, Fox news would lampoon them as socialist or whatever but they do that with everything. Let them denigrate feeding hungry kids and lowering poverty (and as a result, crime) as socialism.

What do you want to see the government focus on? I think if you, as an average guy, wanted something, that that thing would be broadly popular. Don't let people tell you that the things that are objectively good for a nation's citizens are unrealistic and broadly hated. I don't buy it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top