U.S. Politics | Page 1729 | The Popjustice Forum

U.S. Politics

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Veritaserum, Feb 16, 2016.

  1. Or they have the highest name recognition and that’s why they are the preferred second choice of each other’s supporters.
  2. It seems to me that racism, sexism and homophobia would have a lot to do with Biden and Sanders's stronger performances in general head to heads.
  3. This seems like an odd suggestion of influence in 1-vs-1 polls that don't allow for 3rd party/don't know answers. Warren, for example, is around 90% name recognition nationally. She's not Marianne Williamson.

    As well, Biden & Sanders' overlapping base likely has more to do with how both resonate amongst low-income Americans. Like how the more Elizabeth has become known, her 2nd-choice has changed to Kamala, which isn't surprising given that both resonate more with degree-holding Americans than non-degree holding Americans like Sanders & Biden have.

    Looking at Warren's polling, do you believe she can win the rust belt in spite of her underperformance with young people, poor people, and people of color when Clinton's underperformance amongst the same groups handed Trump his wins in MI, WI & PA?
  4. Yeah I think people are still underestimating how many people aren’t paying close attention close attention. We’re are rare breed around here who’s paying this close attention. Biden and Sanders are still benefiting from larger name recognition and built in supporters.

    Especially with the large field right now. The vast majority of my friends have barely been paying attention to the primary.

    I suspect once things get narrowed down to the core 5 candidates the race will start to change.
  5. She’ll campaign heavily there in the general election. No one will be making the same mistakes Hillary’s campaign did.

    I’m confident her policies will resonate with voters once she starts getting her message out there more extensively.
  6. I suppose the real question is will Bernie get behind Warren if she wins so we can hopefully be spared Biden...
  7. A mass media campaign that frames her as a Democratic frontrunner is not extensive?

    The groups where her message doesn't resonate are particularly difficult to reach out to. I worry some people are under the same false pretense Clinton was that every voter eventually has to make a decision either way when, as we saw, an almost majority just don't. Low-motivation voters have to be brought into the fold, not just expected to become interested by default.

    For some reason - despite being a frontrunner - Warren's campaign makes little waves amongst the hardest to reach groups. It feels lazy to just claim poor people as low-information voters. Low-motivation =/= low-information. Warren is a well-known figure. It doesn't hurt to examine what's not inspiring people. Surely every single 2020 candidate will have to be vetted for their demographic weaknesses, in the very same way many were eager to vet Sanders in 2016 similarly?
    Mr Blonde and Lost Boy like this.
  8. I don’t think it’s odd at all to think a 2% difference in their performance vs Trump is explainable by a >2% difference in their name recognition.

    If you have something on your mind, you can just say it. You don’t have to quote me and pretend in it’s in response to something I said.

  9. If they were smart they'd start building a coalition and run together or something.
  10. The only state where she"s only 2% behind Sanders in overcoming Trump is Florida, which likely means both lose it horribly come general election since polling is largely overly too favorable to Dems and overshoots assumed turnout when skewing.

    I think any Sanders supporter knows Florida is a no go. We at least understand why though. We know his socialist identity cuts into his Latinx base in Flordia where a significant portion of the Latinx population breaks away from others in the country and are right-wing. Of course a communist will never win Florida, which is why anyone having smaller projections of victory vs Trump compared to a communist is concerning. We should examine why Warren"s messages don't resonate with specific people. Of course sexism obviously plays a role, but to portray that as the only factor likely erases several important stories. Like it wouldn't shock anyone if Native American women broke far more in Sanders' favor than Warren's and we would all know why. Like how it can be true that Kamala has to overcome sexism and racism while we also know why she polls awfully amongst trans Americans. Or how Clinton in 2016 had to overcome sexism as any woman does but it didn't *really* shock anyone that Arab Americans, including Arab American women, didn't fuck with her.

    Which is why everything I said was in direct response to you, even if you don't feel it was due to having an unsavory view of Sanders. You don't believe polling data is indicative of her having weak messaging but more-so having just no reached people, which is fair, but it's also then fair to question how Warren will reach the low-motivated voters of these groups if her messaging is just doing alright amongst the high-motivation voters of these groups.

    *gestures to article*

    If everyone would just listen to what I've been saying.

    Though of course Sanders' inability to win old rich people is framed as a crises and him "having long-time trouble expanding his base" while Warren being able to overcome Sanders outdoing her 2:1 amongst black voters is just an assumed thing that will magically happen and a total non-issue. Bernie truly has the corporate girls scared.
    Leona Clarkson and nooniebao like this.
  11. Lowkey all this mess just means we are getting more Trump.

  12. I think @Sanctuary makes an interesting point about Benard and Warren's relative appeal to voters based upon interest in politics. I imagine that Warren's strength with voters who have a high degree of interest in politics could be a continued advantage to her in the primary. But, you could argue that B's advantage with voters who are not interested in politics could be advantageous in the general. Of course, that is if he can motivate voters who are "not interested in politics" to actually come out to the polls.

    I do think it's a bit early to suggest that either of them couldn't close their respective gaps before a general election, though.
  13. I was watching the docuseries The 2000s on Netflix last night and reminisced over 2007-2008. I always forget that Obama was not the frontrunner at all back in 2007 and that him winning a a lot of the Denprimaries was a total shock to people, even those following politics, in 2008. That gives me some more hope for next year.
    HorseTears and Hyrulian like this.
  14. Which is why Kamala Harris is the one that keeps the Republicans up at night, as far as I've heard.
    Floppie likes this.
  15. At this point the only nominee I would be upset with is Biden. Nightmare would be a Biden / Buttigieg or a Biden / O’Rourke ticket
  16. I believe ol' Newt continues to see Kamala as Trump's biggest threat.
  17. I do think Kamala would do a decent job, but her flip flopping really makes me uncomfortable.
    HaveASit, TheDangerZone, LiK and 2 others like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.