Current Topics
Our Embarrasment of a White House
by logtroll
01:22 AM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by logtroll
12:07 AM
CNN's lawsuit over White House ban of Jim Acosta
by NW Ponderer
11:45 PM
Election Day
by Jeffery J. Haas
11:40 PM
Abraham Lincoln, The Gettysburg Address, November 19, 1863
by rporter314
05:48 PM
Round table NOVEMBER 2018
by pdx rick
11/18/18 07:17 PM
Trump's legal woes
by pdx rick
11/18/18 05:50 PM
The Passing Parade: Obituaries: 2018
by Golem
11/17/18 01:18 AM
RED ALERT: Obstruction of Justice on Overdrive!
by pondering_it_all
11/16/18 04:05 AM
the economy
by pondering_it_all
11/11/18 04:25 AM
Happy Birthday, United States Marine Corps
by Greger
11/10/18 08:45 PM
What Left?
by Greger
11/09/18 02:42 AM
Sleazy Slimeball or Slimy Sleazebag?
by NW Ponderer
11/08/18 06:25 PM
The rising tides are upon us
by pondering_it_all
11/08/18 01:15 AM
People who remember every second of their life - Total recall | 60 Minutes Austr
by Jeffery J. Haas
11/04/18 10:42 PM
Frontline: Facebook Dilemma
by Jeffery J. Haas
11/04/18 10:27 PM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Golem
11/04/18 09:22 PM
Roundtable for October 2018
by logtroll
10/30/18 11:06 PM
An Open Letter to My Teenage Son (Vietnam War era artifact)
by Jeffery J. Haas
10/29/18 05:02 AM
Media and Trump
by Jeffery J. Haas
10/28/18 08:09 PM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16416 Topics
282841 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#307348 - 07/10/18 05:10 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1089
You can't make the argument anymore than I can from the information given that when the point spread is greatest between activist and the self identified 'average voter' of either party you will lose the election. That seems to be the takeaway. It could also mean that the larger the alienation of a large faction of a party the greater your odds are of losing the election due to low voter turn out. I didn't see, in the study, what the turnout rates were like. Or the commodity price of coffee or the hem lines on woman's skirts, etc...
Centrists like to think of themselves as the 'realists' in the room. Yes, you have a bar graph that shows the point spread between activists of a party and moderates and a whole bunch if 'what this may mean' and 'it can be seen as' type of interpretations regarding a living constantly fluid political process. It's reductionism at it's core and it's looking at a past thru the lens of a narrow set of numbers. Yet it's taken as gospel by the democratic leadership today in spite of racking up historic losses.
Clinton had low voter turnout. That's what cost the Democrats the election. She had fewer voters than Trump. Now the party seems hell bent on punishing those who didn't fall in line with the pie charts.
Again Tiabbi called it:

Low yute turnout. Can't say as I blame em.


Edited by chunkstyle (07/10/18 05:11 PM)

Top
#307351 - 07/10/18 06:27 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14376
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Clinton had low voter turnout. That's what cost the Democrats the election. She had fewer voters than Trump.

Um...actually she had 3 million more voters than Trump...
It was a pretty weird election. By all rights, Clinton should have won. She'd have been a decent President and buoyed by Sanders overwhelming popularity during the primaries(which, by all rights, he should have won) Clinton would have been emboldened to go farther left than she'd planned.
We'd be living the dream right now instead of Republicans.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#307357 - 07/10/18 08:23 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: Greger]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1089
Originally Posted By: Greger
Quote:
Clinton had low voter turnout. That's what cost the Democrats the election. She had fewer voters than Trump.

Um...actually she had 3 million more voters than Trump...
It was a pretty weird election. By all rights, Clinton should have won. She'd have been a decent President and buoyed by Sanders overwhelming popularity during the primaries(which, by all rights, he should have won) Clinton would have been emboldened to go farther left than she'd planned.
We'd be living the dream right now instead of Republicans.


Yeah, I stand corrected. I should have said she had fewer votes than Trump where it mattered most. I believe the turnout in 2016 was low.

Again, she had a set of statistics that her campaign was staring at that informed the logic of her strategy. The reliance on quants or past empirical evidence was a trap they laid for themselves in much the same way they are resetting it again. They seem to be obtuse to the political changes going on with this backward looking logic.

Here's a graph showing wealth inequality and labor union participation:

What political implications can we draw from this?

One can draw the conclusion that centrist third way democrats have been pursuing their own interests and those of their professional class at the detriment of their base of support. What the graphs are showing us is anyone who voted for third way democrats are eroding working class fortunes and destroying the parties base for the benefit of the top 10%. Just look at the chart...



Edited by chunkstyle (07/10/18 08:24 PM)

Top
#307360 - 07/11/18 03:20 AM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Online   content
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16306
Lord, chunk, the leaps you make are astounding. There is literally no correlation between the chart you posted and your conclusion. It's not that I don't agree with your goals, it's the skipping between fact and conclusions without any connections that bugs me.

Oh, and turnout in 2016 was almost the same as 2012.

Top
#307361 - 07/11/18 11:41 AM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1089
Your exasperation of my leaps of logic is mirrored by my own with all the excuses given for our current political predicament. Crude russian memes and comment postings, fictional Sanders supporter defections, Jill Stien voters, etc..
Ironically, your PBS link pointed to the low voter turn out and lack of enthusiasm in key battle ground states she lost. There has been much reporting of Brookyln not responding to the frantic distress calls of state party chairs. They were ignored because Brooklyn had similar number analysis that you thought to reference.

Then there was the alienation of younger voters that are seeing thru the phony quisling positioning of her centrist politics. That you can't win elections in the U.S, without going right.
Forget the string of election victories in the U.S. For a moment and looking across the pond you can see the mythology of centrism being shattered despite unrelenting attack. Corbyn could be seen as a successful analog to Sanders and the comparisons are not unrelated. Both faced harsh disproportionate attacks from the press, their own party leadership, etc... Despite this Corbyn has gone on and shown the pie charts and bar graphs of 'new Labour's' pearl clutching prediction of doom for the party to be nothing more than self serving perpetuation of the status quo. New Labour still can't draw the meaning from the snap election results of 2017.
Neither can third way democrats take the meaning of Cortez's upset victory. The leadership, like Brooklyn, is only interested in listening to money and looking at pie charts that supports that logic.
For a short walk in the tulips of the last few years of Corbyns treatment by the third way party ( of which Tony Blair belongs ), Jacobin has done a good peice:

Corbyns' quislings

It reads much like our own centrists vs. center left struggle.



Edited by chunkstyle (07/11/18 11:51 AM)

Top
#307362 - 07/11/18 01:04 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: Greger]
Jeffery J. Haas Online   sick


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13350
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Greger
By all rights, Clinton should have won. She'd have been a decent President and buoyed by Sanders overwhelming popularity during the primaries(which, by all rights, he should have won) Clinton would have been emboldened to go farther left than she'd planned.
We'd be living the dream right now instead of Republicans.


SHE wouldn't have "been emboldened" but had we preserved the Senate majority, Sanders would have made her go farther left because he'd have been in a position to do so.
She wouldn't have had much choice if she wanted to achieve anything in Congress.
The simple fact is, a Democratic president simply HAS to have Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, or they can't accomplish very much, and as we now see, anything short of that means that their accomplishments can be undone by simple strokes of Trump's pen.
Therefore, no matter how "Republican-Lite" Hillz is, if she had Congressional Democrat majorities, she would have had to move a bit more to the Left.
_________________________
"The Left ones think I'm Right, the Right ones think I'm wrong."
Leon Russell - Magic Mirror"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-H1iQ5Y6Eg

Top
#307364 - 07/11/18 05:59 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1089
I'm not sure how much pressure one senator could produce to make Clinton go left, Jeff. As you said, Sanders is not even a democrat and it's not hard to imagine a concerted effort to sideline him by the corporate wing of the Democratic party.
As the linked article describes, the assault on Corbyn by his own parties 'new Labor' members would lead me to believe the push back on sanders would be just as large as it was in the primaries. Billions of dollars are on the line and live stock to be slaughtered.

Top
#307365 - 07/11/18 06:46 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2153
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Sanders is a perfect example of the problems of the left. Sanders continues to call himself a 'socalist' even though he is not espousing government ownership of all means of production. Not doing that makes him a lousy socialist. I think that means that he is something called a 'democratic socialist'. Still, he is not a member of the Democratic party. The Dems can win EVERYTHING if they can convince everybody, from the left and center, who do not support the actions of the present Republican party, to vote Democratic. That is not going to happen when they can't even get their nomenclatures clear. So, again, if a person votes, disagree with most of what the Republican party is doing under the jackass, then they are, by definition, Democratic voters! If they can do that much they can win it ALL! Better yet, if you agree with the Republicans that greed should be in charge then vote Republican, otherwise you are a Democratic voter! Seems simple to me.

The Republicans, on the other hand, have melded. The Libertarians are now Republicans and supporters of the Jackass. The Evangelicals, now, are Republicans and supporters of the jackass. The conservatives that remain in the Republican party are now Republicans and supporters of the Jackass. They no longer discriminate between brands and are in lock step. I have no idea how long they can hold it together but, right now, they have melded, march in lockstep, and vote the party line as given to them by the Jackass.

As far as I can tell the Republican party is a party of one voice - that of the Jackass. The only thing truly missing is they are not yet raising their right arms, palms out whilst shouting the name of the Jackass.

Top
#307367 - 07/11/18 07:14 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
chunkstyle Offline
member

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 1089
Ummmm....
I don't know how supporting the government owning the means of production define socialism but I'd be happy to learn.
I thought it meant WORKERS owning the means of production?
Isn't this symantic sidelining of Sanders platform anyhow? Fretting over a platform that was legacy to New Dealist democrats from decades past? For me all sanders did was reintroduce that political philosophy to a generation who's parents turned away from with the election of Bill Clinton.

Top
#307368 - 07/11/18 08:16 PM Re: Pie Chart Fight [Re: chunkstyle]
Greger Online   content

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14376
Loc: Florida
so·cial·ism

noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

The "community as a whole" can be interpreted as the STATE. But the state can and should regulate industry heavily, there's no need to actually assume ownership or "nationalize" banks and railroads and such.

Sanders' version of Social Democracy is working all over the world and could work equally well here. Don't be afraid of the "S" word. Be
very afraid of the "F" word....Fascism.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 49 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2