a clown car full of millionaires: the 2016 presidential primary thread

xx-post

But there's another question, what would the consequences be for minorities in US, for immigration reform, police reform, the fight against racial wealth inequality, etc, if Dems realized they could win the presidency through white populism, without minority support.

See, this is where I don't think you get Bernie Sanders. That is the kind of question a pandering, calculating closet racist candidate would ask themselves. What has he ever done to make you think he is this cynical? And "white populism" is what Trump is up to, not Sanders!

it's a stupid question because no candidate can win the presidency without minority support, those days are over.

https://twitter.com/JimWebbUSA/status/653997961551192070

there's always Voter ID laws to "disincentivize" the unwanted

the crucial endorsement of Carl "The Dig" Diggler

Was hoping that tweet was just "I'm alive! Really!"

I hope that Jim Webb thoroughly read that article before retweeting it

lol

But there's another question, what would the consequences be for minorities in US, for immigration reform, police reform, the fight against racial wealth inequality, etc, if Dems realized they could win the presidency through white populism, without minority support.

About the same thing that's happening now?

ie, the issue would be used as a wedge differentiator to appeal to white voters who lean left and practical advancement on it would be blocked by the power stalemate in Washington

Clearly Obama's executive orders are inconsequential, Frederik

i want to meet this mythical 1 in 20 white person / 1 in ten black or latino person who has never heard of hillary clinton

Ever knocked on doors to register voters? There are lots of people of every race who can't name a single US politician, perhaps excluding people who were President in their adult lifetime. Not because they're out of touch, just because politics is something lots of people don't care about at all.

yep

sometimes i wish i was one of them

yeah, but the pivotal line in your post there is "perhaps excluding people who were President in their adult lifetime." Hillary has been in the public eye more or less nonstop for the past 25 years at least.

i'll buy that 5 in 10 voters don't know most of the lineup but i have to feel like for the 25 and over set Trump and Hillary are plainly known commodities as figureheads even if nothing else.

can we lol @ T.I.: “Not to be sexist, but I can’t vote for the leader of the free world to be a woman. Just because… every other position that exists, a woman could do well. Every other position. But the president… it’s kinda like… I just know that women make rash decisions emotionally.”

i think if nothing else, we can trust Hillary Clinton to be as cold blooded as any man

"I just know that women make rash decisions emotionally,” said the man responsible for jumpstarting Iggy Izalea's career/

tbf, in the same interview he said travis scott is iggy in a black man's body so you can see what he's getting at here

and please let me know when you do

NY Times taking the nuthin-to-see-here angle:

A Debate That May Show How Little Democrats Differ

(Which little Democrats?)

Re: favorability vs. support - again this is where seeing trends over time and comparing them to past races would give these numbers some kind of context. If people like Sanders once they get to know him, I'd rate that as being at least as significant as the fact that they're not currently planning to vote for him. Certainly, it's better than people getting to know him and running away in droves once they do. The primaries remain months away so there's a long time for someone who just heard of Sanders last week (and came away favorably disposed to him) to build into someone ready to vote for him. Obviously, comparisons to 2008 are pretty limited here, but if memory serves, Obama was pretty well-liked by most Hillary voters all through the primary - they just preferred Hillary. In early 2008 as the primaries became a real thing (and especially after Iowa) a lot of people apparently shifted allegiances. Not saying that will happen here but that it is a thing that happens, and once again, someone's position in these polls in the October before the primaries is not their destiny. Unless they're down at 1% in which case I'd say yeah, it's a write-off.

Obama comparisons are so irrelevant to Sanders - Obama was much more of a party insider, had the appeal of a messianic black figure, etc. Sanders is way less palatable to the Dem establishment, and (so far) to key voting blocs

It's October 2015. No one who isn't Mark Halperin or on ILX cares about the minutiae of primaries. Frederik's complaints about Sanders' outreach and his construction of HRC as formidable are true, yeah, but only insofar as it matters to anyone who pays attention before New Year's Day.

Obviously, comparisons to 2008 are pretty limited here

Again, all I'm saying is that people who don't hate a candidate might eventually switch to voting for that candidate, especially if they went directly from knowing nothing about them to having a favorable opinion of them. 2008 was just an example where it happened in a major way. At no point in this thread have I predicted that Sanders is going to win or to pull an Obama '08. Just trying to push back against Frederik's comments:

For what is worth, he has perfectly fine favorability ratings with black respondees who actually know him, it just doesn't translate into support. (...) And with 58% recognition and 8% support, Sanders is clearly not going to change the course through more recognition alone, no?

yeah sorry it looks like I was calling you out on that point but it wasn't really my intention - it's just a point of comparison I've seen trotted out by Sanders supporters and in various news articles, and it usually comes off as lazy to me.

Oh, well, if we're talking Sanders supporters with terrible arguments I'm right there with you. The commenters under basically any article that mentions him are unreadable for all the fact-blind zealotry. This could be generalized to the commenters under any article that mentions anything, obviously.

yeah, but the pivotal line in your post there is "perhaps excluding people who were President in their adult lifetime." Hillary has been in the public eye more or less nonstop for the past 25 years at least.

She wasn't President. I'm sure there were tons of people in 1980 who had never heard of Ted Kennedy or Tip O'Neil or Henry Kissinger. Lots of people in 2000 who had never heard of Newt Gingrich. I'm sure there are lots of people who have never heard of Tom Brady or Derek Jeter, and they've been in the public eye a long time, too.

she's the most famous American 'betrayed wife' of the 20th century (w/ poss exception of Jackie Kennedy, but i doubt it)

Between Benghazi and email servers, I think she's pretty known by anyone with a television.

nobody cares about that shit

The people who still watch television are voting for the Republican.

once we arrive at "I'm sure there are lots of people who have never heard of Tom Brady", i'm not even sure what we're talking about anymore. like... yeah... but one in ten?
nevermind, it's not an argument worth getting into

i gotta think first ladies in the WH are better known to americans than ted kennedy or tip o'neil or henry kissinger

The people who still watch television are voting for the Republican.

A very good point.

let the record show i am a social progressive television watcher

what about ppl going thru The Wire for the fifth time?

That right there could drive a sane man bizzerk.

The Wire is not teevee, it's a lifestyle choice

http://www.cafe.com/the-digs-debate-preview-why-the-smart-moneys-on-jim-webb/

wow, the "m"s in that font are really tough on the eyes

but yeah lol at webb tweeting that

What is this?
CAFE is the only place where people read and watch things on the internet. The pieces we’ve created about news & politics have changed the very nature of our existence as a species.

Many Economist subscribers have been forced to read one of our articles at gunpoint and they’ve said things like “Where am I?” and “Why are you doing this to me?”

creeping borowitzism

new site with Matt Binder (and others)

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/1-percent-hillary-clinton-polls-2016-118437

Percentage of registered voters who haven't heard of Hillary is more or less 1 percent, and as that's less than half the margin of error in these polls it could be closer to zero. Even among those who haven't yet registered it's probably well within the single digits.

This promises to be lame.

Virtual reality? What is this, 1992? Wait a minute...

tip: avoid people who use "smart money" in lexicon

the return of virtual reality as a thing is kinda mindblowing to me, just a few years ago whenever we went to a bio conference i had a standing offer to anyone else w/ me of ten dollars to anyone that raised their hand during a q&a session and asked 'yes, can you tell me the implications of all this and...virtual reality?'