Karl Rove goes through Democrats' election 'excuses'

[smilesammich 10,727]

Calling West Virginian coal miners, Pennsylvanian factory workers and Iowan farmers "privileged racists" didn't work?

i must have missed that soundbite, when did this happen?

[JayJayH 546]

i must have missed that soundbite, when did this happen?

Frankly, this has been the subtle undertone of the social justice left for the past three years. Obviously, college activists on the extreme left get the most media attention because they scream the loudest, helped in great lengths by publications like Salon, Slate, clickbait pages like Occupy Democrats and questionable opinion pieces in more serious media outlets.

The Democrats win when the "boogeyman" is Wall Street and rich bankers. They lose when the "boogeyman" is their own base.

What the social justice left has done is to basically create a blue-collar ethnic white voting bloc, and Hillary failed to keep that from happening. Rather, Trump was able to capitalize on it, and he did to full extent. But too much focus has been put on Trump's ability to capitalize on it, rather than the left's utter failure to keep a candidate like him from doing so in the first place.

Legitimate issues like immigration and border security were completely off the table for the Clinton campaign. She offered an amnesty bill, sure, but did she offer a single policy for how to prevent a new generation from growing up undocumented? No. I read through the entire Clinton campaign website. Bullet pointed policies for amnesty, an "office of immigrant affairs", ending family detention etc. Not a single, not one policy on prevention. Discussing border security was deemed racist. When Bill Clinton went on a tirade against BLM protesters at a rally in Pennsylvania, he was quickly made to "almost apologize" on national TV, even though he brought up valid points that were at least worthy of discussion.

This is why the "Basket of Deplorables" was such a damaging gaffe for Hillary Clinton. On the surface, it was nothing compared to some of Trump's statements, but it reinforced every single stereotype of a "coastal liberal elite" pointing the finger at anyone who doesn't agree with the approved and in vogue points of view.

In the end, Donald Trump, with his 32% favorable rating won by slim margins in key battleground states. Republicans won most of what else there was to win in congressional and state legislature elections. Can you imagine the landslide had it been Kasich or Rubio rather than Trump?

Edited December 20, 2016 by JayJayH

[smilesammich 10,727]

Frankly, this has been the subtle undertone of the social justice left for the past three years. Obviously, college activists on the extreme left get the most media attention because they scream the loudest, helped in great lengths by publications like Salon, Slate, clickbait pages like Occupy Democrats and questionable opinion pieces in more serious media outlets.

The Democrats win when the "boogeyman" is Wall Street and rich bankers. They lose when the "boogeyman" is their own base.

What the social justice left has done is to basically create a blue-collar ethnic white voting bloc, and Hillary failed to keep that from happening. Rather, Trump was able to capitalize on it, and he did to full extent. But too much focus has been put on Trump's ability to capitalize on it, rather than the left's utter failure to keep a candidate like him from doing so in the first place.

Legitimate issues like immigration and border security were completely off the table for the Clinton campaign. She offered an amnesty bill, sure, but did she offer a single policy for how to prevent a new generation from growing up undocumented? No. I read through the entire Clinton campaign website. Bullet pointed policies for amnesty, an "office of immigrant affairs", ending family detention etc. Not a single, not one policy on prevention. Discussing border security was deemed racist. When Bill Clinton went on a tirade against BLM protesters at a rally in Pennsylvania, he was quickly made to "almost apologize" on national TV, even though he brought up valid points that were at least worthy of discussion.

This is why the "Basket of Deplorables" was such a damaging gaffe for Hillary Clinton. On the surface, it was nothing compared to some of Trump's statements, but it reinforced every single stereotype of a "coastal liberal elite" pointing the finger at anyone who doesn't agree with the approved and in vogue points of view.

In the end, Donald Trump, with his 32% favorable rating won by slim margins in key battleground states. Republicans won most of what else there was to win in congressional and state legislature elections. Can you imagine the landslide had it been Kasich or Rubio rather than Trump?

whoa. did she actually say that or not? i'm not arguing that the dnc/hillary were completely out of touch. they paid the price for ignoring their voters, they lost and were exposed fully to their base. but that doesn't change that i don't recall seeing or hearing hillary call wva coal miners, pa factory workers or iowan farmers 'privileged racists'...that to me sounds more like your personal take on the entire white privilege discussion. actually, i know that's all you. because privilege and racism don't actually go hand in hand, that's the slant you put on it.

trump won because he knows television/entertainment. he knows how to manipulate mass media. he knows slogans. this is why he tells outright lies over and over and over to suit his agenda. he knows that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes truth to those who don't know any better. lock her up. build the wall. on repeat the entire election. the man is not even inaugurated and he's already laying the ground work for his back peddling path. anyone who doesn't see that is kool aid drunk.

hillary running was the damaging gaffe, not her basket of deplorables comment. i think that was the most honest, truthful statement she made in the whole campaign. maybe if she had the balls to stand by the comment and drive it home she could have earned some respect from voters. trump has the unashamed support of proud racists and white nationalists, deplorables describes that bunch pretty well. if a bunch of working white america was able to look beyond that deplorable support (and beyond the gawd awful troll that is trump) and sincerely thought they were voting for a person who had their best interests at heart then they're just the gullible sort. end of the day, hillary lost and apparently was the last to know that not too many progressives liked her to begin with. this is what happens when you surround yourself with supporters who are riding your coattails hoping for success.

[JayJayH 546]

whoa. did she actually say that or not? i'm not arguing that the dnc/hillary were completely out of touch. they paid the price for ignoring their voters, they lost and were exposed fully to their base. but that doesn't change that i don't recall seeing or hearing hillary call wva coal miners, pa factory workers or iowan farmers 'privileged racists'...that to me sounds more like your personal take on the entire white privilege discussion. actually, i know that's all you. because privilege and racism don't actually go hand in hand, that's the slant you put on it.

trump won because he knows television/entertainment. he knows how to manipulate mass media. he knows slogans. this is why he tells outright lies over and over and over to suit his agenda. he knows that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes truth to those who don't know any better. lock her up. build the wall. on repeat the entire election. the man is not even inaugurated and he's already laying the ground work for his back peddling path. anyone who doesn't see that is kool aid drunk.

hillary running was the damaging gaffe, not her basket of deplorables comment. i think that was the most honest, truthful statement she made in the whole campaign. maybe if she had the balls to stand by the comment and drive it home she could have earned some respect from voters. trump has the unashamed support of proud racists and white nationalists, deplorables describes that bunch pretty well. if a bunch of working white america was able to look beyond that deplorable support (and beyond the gawd awful troll that is trump) and sincerely thought they were voting for a person who had their best interests at heart then they're just the gullible sort. end of the day, hillary lost and apparently was the last to know that not too many progressives liked her to begin with. this is what happens when you surround yourself with supporters who are riding your coattails hoping for success.

She never said it, no. And frankly, I don't think she believed it. But I'm not the person who needs convincing. I'm an LPR with no voting rights living in one of the bluest states in the country. What I'm saying is, the far left has been running the rhetoric of the Democratic Party for the past half decade. Bernie Sanders managed to counter and quell some of that because he used a lot of the same economic-populist rhetoric as Trump did - "Screw the banks and special interests."

"No human is illegal" is an approved point of view in Hollywood and on college campuses. But it doesn't actually solve anything what so ever. And while it might win the hearts of George Clooney and gender studies majors, it doesn't win elections.

Hillary's problem was that on economic issues, she was often to the right of Trump. On foreign policy, there really wasn't much difference between her and ####### Cheney. Her "progressive credentials" came from social issues, and she pandered to that for all it was worth. She didn't have to call anyone 'privileged' or 'racist.' BLM, campus activists, Salon, Slate, Buzzfeed, HuffPost, The Young Turks, MSNBC etc. etc. etc. have been doing that for her by default for the past 2 years.

She could have let Bill loose on them. Bill was great at punching to the right and left. But she didn't. The "basket of deplorables" wasn't a 'shocking' revelation. Rather, it was a confirmation to millions of blue collar voters who might have been on the fence, that "this is what the Democratic Party thinks of us." In essence, "I support my gay friend's right to get married, and I support my born again baker's right to refuse service to anyone. So I'm a deplorable homophobe."

The last time Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin went Republican was in 1988 (even California went red in '88). These are often voters who love their unions, love their medicare and social security, don't care too much about abortion, recently warmed up to same-sex marriage, love their military, love their police officers, don't meet too many minorities, but don't spend their weekends at KKK camps either. What they saw in the Democratic Party was a party that was more concerned about transgender bathrooms, gay wedding cakes, "nothing to do with Islam" and white privilege than they were manufacturing jobs.

Donald Trump will not magically bring back tens of thousands of outsourced jobs. But does Crest White Strips sell because they make everyone's teeth bright, pearly white? No. But while Trump was selling pearly whites, Clinton was unwittingly selling gay wedding cakes.

Populism is a powerful thing. Bernie Sanders was a populist. But populism can go either left or right. And when you take people's legitimate anger, put it in the garbage and label the bin 'racism', you'll end up with a working class switching from Bernie to Trump.

Edited December 20, 2016 by JayJayH

[JayJayH 546]

####### Cheney didn't pass family filter ^

Let's refer to the former VP as Richard Cheney from now on.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Populism is a powerful thing. Bernie Sanders was a populist. But populism can go either left or right. And when you take people's legitimate anger, put it in the garbage and label the bin 'racism', you'll end up with a working class switching from Bernie to Trump.

i don't see how that switch is logical. but i don't see the logic in illegal people either.

[JayJayH 546]

i don't see how that switch is logical. but i don't see the logic in illegal people either.

When Ford moved one of its auto manufacturing plants from Michigan to Mexico in September, Donald Trump held a rally in Michigan promising a 35% import tariff on imports from Mexico. Hillary Clinton didn't visit Michigan until late October when her number crunchers said black turnout in Detroit may not be close to what it was in 2012. So she brough Jay-Z and Beyonce for a rally in Detroit. She didn't visit Wisconsin once during the entire campaign. In late October however, her campaign spent millions of dollar running television ads across the Midwest about how racist Donald Trump is.

Out of 17 Republicans and 5 Democrats running for nomination this year, there were two candidates vehemently opposed to NAFTA; Donald trump and Bernie Sanders.

Out of 17 Republicans and 5 Democrats running for nomination this year, there were two candidates calling for major infrastructure investment; Donald trump and Bernie Sanders.

Out of 5 Democrats running this year, there was one candidate bringing up the question about immigration and jobs; Bernie Sanders.

The notion that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are on opposite sides of the political spectrum is junk. The only way you can come to that conclusion is if you take the social justice route. They're both economic populists and die hard protectionists. They had very similar messages on economic issues, wrapped in very different rhetoric. If you were a Bernie voter in Youngstown, Ohio given the choice between Clinton and Trump, the switch was entirely logical.

"It's the economy, stupid."

Edited December 20, 2016 by JayJayH

[JayJayH 546]

You could argue that Bernie lost the Democratic primary because of superdelegates and a rigged DNC. The truth is, he lost because he didn't play identity politics and he didn't pander to ethnic voting blocs. Hillary did, and Bernie lost the Democratic primary popular vote by 12 percentage points.

Hillary won in the south and on the west coast. Bernie won in rural, blue-collar America - The Midwest.

Hillary eventually lost the general election. In rural, blue-collar America - The Midwest.

Case in point. Divide and conquer identity politics will be the doom of the Democratic Party, unless they self-reflect.

Edited December 21, 2016 by JayJayH

[OriZ 3,157]

When Ford moved one of its auto manufacturing plants from Michigan to Mexico in September, Donald Trump held a rally in Michigan promising a 35% import tariff on imports from Mexico. Hillary Clinton didn't visit Michigan until late October when her number crunchers said black turnout in Detroit may not be close to what it was in 2012. So she brough Jay-Z and Beyonce for a rally in Detroit. She didn't visit Wisconsin once during the entire campaign. In late October however, her campaign spent millions of dollar running television ads across the Midwest about how racist Donald Trump is.

Out of 17 Republicans and 5 Democrats running for nomination this year, there were two candidates vehemently opposed to NAFTA; Donald trump and Bernie Sanders.

Out of 17 Republicans and 5 Democrats running for nomination this year, there were two candidates calling for major infrastructure investment; Donald trump and Bernie Sanders.

Out of 5 Democrats running this year, there was one candidate bringing up the question about immigration and jobs; Bernie Sanders.

The notion that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are on opposite sides of the political spectrum is junk. The only way you can come to that conclusion is if you take the social justice route. They're both economic populists and die hard protectionists. They had very similar messages on economic issues, wrapped in very different rhetoric. If you were a Bernie voter in Youngstown, Ohio given the choice between Clinton and Trump, the switch was entirely logical.

"It's the economy, stupid."

I agree with alot of what you've said in this thread and even +1 some of it, but, I can't agree with the bolded part. While they are definitely on the same side when it comes to certain things, they also are in fact on opposite sides when it comes to others(tax brackets, lower taxes vs higher taxes, universal healthcare vs private, etc). Trump is not a socialist, Bernie is, and he's proud of it. Trump calls himself a free market person, but he is and he isn't, it depends what you're looking at. Not saying there are no similarities, and as I've mentioned before I even know people who supported Bernie in the primaries but voted for Trump over Clinton(a situation which val called "weird" lol) precisely for those. But to say they are the same is no more off base than to claim they are the complete opposite.

Edited December 21, 2016 by OriZ

[JayJayH 546]

I agree with alot of what you've said in this thread and even +1 some of it, but, I can't agree with the bolded part. While they are definitely on the same side when it comes to certain things, they also are in fact on opposite sides when it comes to others(tax brackets, lower taxes vs higher taxes, universal healthcare vs private, etc). Trump is not a socialist, Bernie is, and he's proud of it. Trump calls himself a free market person, but he is and he isn't, it depends what you're looking at. Not saying there are no similarities, and as I've mentioned before I even know people who supported Bernie in the primaries but voted for Trump over Clinton(a situation which val called "weird" lol) precisely for those. But to say they are the same is no more off base than to claim they are the complete opposite.

I'll agree with this.

The point is that on many economic issues, their rhetoric was far more similar than Bernie and Hillary's, particularly when it comes to big banks, Washington elitism, free trade and protectionism.

[OriZ 3,157]

Yeah especially the last 3 I agree with. Trump didn't really talk a big talk on banks, nor do I think he will act in any way that wouldn't benefit them, but I'm hoping I'm wrong. Time will tell and one thing I won't be is shy about what I think of it.