![]() |
We'll see whether what happens in Indiana on Tuesday will affect Trump's likelihoods. And we'll see what happens if Clinton and Trump get their nominations. I don't know how effective the anti-women, racist Trump message will continue to be in the future. I think he'll be able to rebrand himself. 1) he doesn't have a political history, 2) he's good at communicating, 3) he's able to be more liberal, or at least speak more liberally than other Republican candidates. A lot of people don't take seriously that Donald Trump's a racist and see those early remarks as preaching to the choir. Once he has to appeal to all voters he'll change his tack and I think a lot of people are going to buy it.
|
Quote:
There are two main possibilities. One, as you have been suggesting, is that Trump becomes a normal candidate, the race becomes a normal presidential election, blue states vote blue, red states vote red, and swing states split up their votes. Or maybe they all vote D like in 2012, but allowing for several republican incumbent senators to stay in office anyway. Or maybe even Trump wins because stuff happens. Nothing really happens and everything will be up for grabs again in four years. The other possibility, which makes RNC memebrs stay awake at night, is very different. Trump, who is an "outlandish comment", runs as an "outlandish comment" because that's who he is. Hispanics and minorities feel that when he's going on tirades about "illegal immigration", he's actually saying "all non-whites", reinforced by tons of clips in which he's just saying "Mexicans" and a million quotes from the campaign. Minorities (and tons of women) show up to vote against Trump, and he does lose by 7-10 points as polls suggest right now. Blue states become bluer, all swing states become Lean D and Lean R states become swing. Not only that, but a ton of "innocent" republicans -reps, senators, governors, state legislators- go out on Trump's anti-coattails because all those people showing up to vote against Trump simply go straight D when filling up their ballots. And, as a bonus, most of those people decide that a party who has allowed someone like Trump to happen is clearly not for them and are turned off from ever voting Republican for a generation, setting in stone all those gains. A Democrat's pipe-dream? A crazy dystopia? No, California. And that fact that it already happened is what makes it all the more terrifying for the RNC. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Since that year, the Republican party only won one statewide election -with Arnold Schwarzenegger- and are largely irrelevant in the state, because all those latinos keep voting democratic over and over and over, 20 years down the road. They took every statewide office, supermajorities in the Legislature... virtually every position down to dog-catcher is filled by a Democrat, except in tiny pockets of Republican support. All of that because a Republican decided to run in a harsh anti-illegal-immigrants platform in the 90s that hispanics felt a direct attack to them. Can the same thing happen again, on a nationwide level? That's the fear that's making scores of Republican officials pretend Trump doesn't exist, hoping he won't stick. Because his rhetoric feels eerily similar. |
I'd like to add that here in California we only elected Schwarzenegger in a recall election when far fewer people turn out, and that even though he was a Republican he was fairly good when it came to the environment. The Republicans out here are rather moderate on average compared to what you see in other parts of the country. More business Republican than religious Republican.
For something like this to happen nationally, or even in a couple of states, sounds like a dream. Call me cynical, but I don't think it's likely to happen regardless of how badly Trump or Cruz does in the election. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Well, it's their problem, not mine. But if the Democrats manage to make all hispanics see the Republican party as "the party who killed immigration reform and then voted for Trump because they actually want to kick every one of you out of the country" (insert video of one of Trump's thugs telling US reporter Jorge Ramos "Go back to your country" here), then it can take years to clean it up. Lots of years. |
I also find it interesting that it took Jerry Brown and a Democratic supermajority in the legislature to balance the budget after decades of financial window-dressing and crises.
Anyway, I'm quite close to tuning out the Primaries altogether, but California being relevant for now is keeping my eyes glued to it. In the Democratic side it's just become pretty negative with Bernie being accused of egotism ala Trump (which ticks me off...this is why we should just have a nationwide primary, let everyone's vote count properly) for having the gall to stay in the race all the way to the convention. But still the rhetoric is a replay of 2008 with the pro-Hillary PUMA's that popped up around this time in the primary though I don't remember calls for her to drop out back then at this stage...I seriously do think this is indicative of a undercurrent of ideological struggle within the party. Sanders gets accused of "not being a real Democrat" when he certainly represents a significant faction in the party. Though the Republican intransigence really does enforce party unity once elections are over on both sides as the sorting of the parties pretty much finish. |
States like California will stay blue for the forceable future, several electoral cycles down the road because the Democratic party has a such a hold on the levels of government there, it would take a long-term serious generational shift from voters in addition to a major re-branding of the GOP there to compete. Short term, a swing to the GOP there just isn't feasible. The "swing states" with large minority populations are currently swinging left/blue in opposition to GOP immigration stances, among other things, and will probably stay that way for some time as well, barring a major policy shift for the GOP which probably won't happen for some time also, because of the Tea Party and the current status-quo within the party and among its top officials.
Texas is interesting because it could go blue by 2028 or 2032, if the Hispanic population continues to grow there like it has been the past 15, 20 years. The border states of New Mexico, Arizona, etc., would follow suit with their burgeoning minority populations, and also swing blue, and suddenly Democrats have New York, Texas, California, Colorado, Illinois, the coasts, and possibly all the Great Lakes states accounted for before the election even begins - It would be over before it even starts, incredibly enough. And this is all because demographically speaking, America is becoming more ethnically and racially diverse, and democratic party membership is more representative of a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic America than the GOP is. It's happening right now, as we speak. |
This is going a bit off topic (not that I mind, just acknowledging), but it would appear that a rebranding of the Republican party is just a matter of time. "Correct" social policy will evolve over time but small government will always be in fashion.
|
A rebranding or a split, because under Nixon, the "small government" conservatives entered an alliance with the Southern segregationists. That was the "southern strategy", which was supposed to take all those states which used to vote democratic back when the Ds were the racist ones, and lock in the electoral college for a generation- which it did. The problem is, population changes are not only making the religious, nationalist, racist wing an ever-decreasing minority, they are also making it a liability for the "just business" wing of the party, which could arguably offer actual ideas to those minorities if they weren't straight-up turned off by the racists chanting "get out of my country! speak english! segregated bathrooms!" in the background. Either they ditch them, the Tea Party spuns off into a "Dixiepublican" party, or the Democrats will now be the ones with a near-lock on the White House for years to come.
You can rebrand the party all you want, but if your own members keep pushing policies against what the leadership of the party thinks are their best interests because those memebrs legitimately believe the Republicans stand for "anti-gay discrimination laws" and "build a wall with Mexico", either you kick those members out, or they'll keep passing those proposals and voting in representatives that believe in them. |
I wonder what the future of the Democratic party will be. Like the Republicans they are also having a (less intense) ideological battle ala Clinton v Sanders. They don't have the same pressures of a shrinking voter bloc the GOP has, nor are they necessarily as big on ideological purity, but I wouldn't rule out a schism of sorts. In California (not to keep bringing up my state) our elections are now between the two best candidates, whether they're of the same party or not, and it looks like the senate race is going to be between two Democrats. They're almost going to be forced into having ideological differences.
|
TED CRUZ DROPS OUT OMGWTF
The Republican Party has decided to unite behind Trump after all. So much for all that contested convention talk. |
Well this is going to be a fun general US Presidential election campaign.
"If this election were a satirical novel I would abandon it halfway through as way too heavy-handed." - Tom Tomorrow Also lol: http://i.imgur.com/qdbLiDB.png |
Bernie won Indiana, but how much does that affect Hillary's chances of securing the nomination, if at all? It's my understanding that this win is just a morale boost for his camp and not much more, unfortunately.
|
Hello President Clinton!
Kasich and Co. are still vowing to take it to the convention, so we shall see. California's primary is still looming and I'd wager he has a pretty decent shot there, so I won't rule anything out just yet. If the RNC is throwing in the towel and going with Trump gong forward, then this point in time is the proverbial edge of the abyss, the point of no return. Let's see where it leads us. |
Quote:
|
And Kasich is out, Trump is the last man standing. GG
I think Clinton will increase pressure on Sanders to drop out and unite the party in light of what's happened in the GOP. |
Quote:
Also, technically, Clinton can't be the nominee without the super delegates. I know this sounds like Berniecrat on a sinking ship, but it's still possible that those super delegates could switch their votes for Bernie. This is assuming he does well in the remaining states, and since even Nate Silver predicted Clinton would win Indiana I think there's still space for Bernie to pull a big win in places like California. |
Best thing Sanders can do is try to push for Warren as VP :P
Anyway Kasich just dropped out. Trump is now the presumptive nominee for the GOP. Republicans just committed seppuku I think. |
Amidst all the hubbub the continued disintegration of the American middle class goes unnoticed.
|
Quote:
And yes, one single poll out of two dozen, especially if it's one from Rasmussen Reports, the lone pollster that predicted a Romney win in almost all swing states in 2012, isn't anything worth being considered so far. After all, if you consider that, according to 538's pollster ratings, Rasmussen has an average bias of R+2.3, actually... Clinton was still leading in that poll, by 0.3%. Anyway, the topic shouldn't be "can Trump win?" but rather "What the hell is Trump doing as the presidential candidate of an US party?", "What is wrong with the US political system, since it's pretty clear something is pretty wrong?" and "Can the Republican Party be saved, or has the rot gone way too far and it's now just a political machine for racists, demagogues and radicals?", and finally "Should actual bona-fide conservatives -like say, Kasich- just run away and build their own party?". That is the actual topic on hand. Because the media machine can just act like Donald J. Trump is normal, valid presidential candidate and treat this race like every previous one but this is not normal and Donald J. Trump should not be the president of anything under any circumstance- let alone the United States. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:52 AM. |
![]()
© 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.
Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.