Author Topic: I may have to vote for Trump  (Read 72212 times)

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #50 on: May 06, 2016, 12:20:08 PM »
Quote
Hillary's choices for the courts, especially the Supreme Court, will be dramatically different from Trump's.  Hillary's choices for her cabinet, and their choices for the staff, will be dramatically different from Trump's.

In which ways do you think they will have important differences as far as Supreme Court nominations?  Perhaps freedom of the press?  Not significant enough to really matter. Yes they will have different cabinet level choices which might make for some annoying decisions, but that is really only four years.  If she is nominated - then the Democratic machine gets the message that rigging the elections is perfectly ok and gets them the results they want.  Nominating Trump, her losing to literally the least electable individual in the history of the US - might get meaningful change in the nominating process for both parties.  That is probably worth the pain of a Trump Presidency.

JoshuaD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #51 on: May 06, 2016, 01:18:21 PM »
You wouldn't vote for Mussolini to keep Hitler out of power?

No. I would vote for someone I liked. I wouldn't vote for Mussolini if he and Hitler were the only two major party candidates.

Quote from: Wayward Son
To articulate AI's point, you should only do that if you seriously believe that the two top candidates are essentially equal.  In other words, one is just as bad as the other.

Because, as ugly as it may be, a lesser of two evils is still a lesser evil.

Yes, I understood the argument. I don't agree.

I don't think Trump and Hilary are "equal". I do think they would both be bad for our country.

I am not going to lend my voice to someone I don't think is a good choice.

Game theory gets us into an ugly corner here. The most important power in democracy is to decide the options that people are voting between.

Vote for a 3rd party candidate if there's one you like. Vote for the guy down the street if you can't find a 3rd party candidate.

Politics shouldn't be a team sport. When we let it be that, we all lose. The only way to stop it from becoming that is to, each one of us, refuse to play it like a game. Vote honest.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #52 on: May 06, 2016, 01:27:51 PM »
Part of the problem is that by the time of the general election, 90% of the opportunity for change is already gone. Especially given how the system (doesn't) work in the US. By the time a voter makes a choice in November, they've already made years of choices. Even the primaries are rather late to be getting involved, so coming in from outside the system for a primary run still results in substantial obstacles. That's what's kept Sanders from winning.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #53 on: May 06, 2016, 02:34:49 PM »
I think you can think of the political establishment as an almost immovable object and none of the candidates on either side of the aisle as anything like irresistible objects.  Trump comes closer than Sanders, however, because he isn't encumbered by personal history or any kind of sense of teamwork.  In that way he's like a born dictator more than a member of any party, not even having risen through the ranks of the business world.  It would take someone of his ilk to perturb the system enough to achieve meaningful change, but he's just not the right guy for the job.

JoshuaD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #54 on: May 06, 2016, 03:06:10 PM »
Part of the problem is that by the time of the general election, 90% of the opportunity for change is already gone. Especially given how the system (doesn't) work in the US. By the time a voter makes a choice in November, they've already made years of choices. Even the primaries are rather late to be getting involved, so coming in from outside the system for a primary run still results in substantial obstacles. That's what's kept Sanders from winning.

Yea, I think this is just an absurd statement.

If we don't like the candidates put up by the two parties, we can elect a third party candidate. We have that power. We can vote whoever we want into office.

The fact that a bunch of people are (probably) going to choose to vote for one of the two candidates I think are deplorable really doesn't mean much to me at all.

I'm going to vote for the person I like best. Sure, if I mostly like someone and they have a real shot at winning while the guy I like the absolute best has no shot, I'll support the person who has the real shot. But I'm not going to vote against Hillary or against Trump by voting for the other. They both disgust me.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #55 on: May 06, 2016, 03:20:54 PM »
Quote
In which ways do you think they will have important differences as far as Supreme Court nominations?

Just think about any recent controversial Supreme Court decision you may or may not have liked.  Which party was for it?  Which was dead-set against it. The parties will try to stack the court for or against such a decision.  That is the important difference.

They may not succeed, in that the judge may not vote the way they want him or her to, but he or she will be at least sympathetic to that side.  And it very well could make a difference (as the recent 4-4 decisions attest to).

Quote
Yes they will have different cabinet level choices which might make for some annoying decisions, but that is really only four years.

You can cause quite a bit of damage in four years. Just look at WWII. :(

Or look at what the National Review fears.

Quote
Politics shouldn't be a team sport.

But unfortunately, it is a team sport.  It has always been.  Since the first group of chimps ganged up on the second group of chimps, it has always been team against team.  Because numbers matter in a fight.  While politics is not open warfare, it is a type of warfare.  And you don't win wars alone.

I admire you for standing up for your principles.  And even when choosing sides, one should not completely give up on them.  But in politics you need allies.  Standing alone won't make you win.  If you truly believe that it won't make a significant difference which one of the major contenders wins, then you might as well vote your conscience.  But if you think there would be a difference, then you may be allowing the worse contender to win.  And that does no one any good.

JoshuaD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #56 on: May 06, 2016, 03:47:56 PM »
Quote
I admire you for standing up for your principles.  And even when choosing sides, one should not completely give up on them.  But in politics you need allies.  Standing alone won't make you win.  If you truly believe that it won't make a significant difference which one of the major contenders wins, then you might as well vote your conscience.  But if you think there would be a difference, then you may be allowing the worse contender to win.  And that does no one any good.

Yea, like I said, I think the plain-rational game theory fails here. It's an exploit. Don't walk into it. Be super-rational.

Reject the premise that only a major party candidate can win. Convince other people to reject that premise. It's only true because everyone says it's true. It's a self-proving illusion that falls apart the moment we all decide.

The two parties have put up candidates that a lot of us find unpalatable. It's time to find an alternative. Maybe it won't happen this election. Maybe it won't happen next election. But if we keep voting our conscience (rather than playing a game where the powerful-elite make up the rules) then it will eventually start mattering.



NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #57 on: May 06, 2016, 05:21:36 PM »
Yea, I think this is just an absurd statement.

If we don't like the candidates put up by the two parties, we can elect a third party candidate. We have that power. We can vote whoever we want into office.

The fact that a bunch of people are (probably) going to choose to vote for one of the two candidates I think are deplorable really doesn't mean much to me at all.

I'm going to vote for the person I like best. Sure, if I mostly like someone and they have a real shot at winning while the guy I like the absolute best has no shot, I'll support the person who has the real shot. But I'm not going to vote against Hillary or against Trump by voting for the other. They both disgust me.
How is it absurd? The system is set up, deliberately and with malice aforethought, to make it almost impossible for a third party candidate to win. If your political engagement is limited to voting in general elections, or even primaries, you will not change the system. Voting for a third party may satisfy your principles but it won't have any material effect.

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #58 on: May 07, 2016, 11:46:38 AM »
I am reading a fascinating chapter in a book
Quote
America's Unwritten Constitution: The Precedents and Principles We Live By
; the premise is that although there is very limited mention of political parties in the Constitution, vitrually all of the Amendments were in fact generated because of partisan concerns (many of  of the bill of rights, for example, protected the newly emerging political opposition).  The author's thesis is that many of the earlier Amendments were passed on a partisan basis; starting in the 20th century many of them passed on a bipartisan basis as the two parties were vying for potential future voters (including women's suffrage, lowering the voting age to 18, etc.)

In a second quote I put in its own thread, the structural basis for favoring a two party system is the legal (not Constitutional) principle of electing a single Representative in each district (as opposed to, for example, a state with 12 Representatives having a single election in which the 12 highest vote-getters would be elected)

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #59 on: May 07, 2016, 02:33:56 PM »
Quote
vitrually all of the Amendments were in fact generated because of partisan concerns
"partisan" didn't explicitly refer to parties at the beginning, but more to competing visions for how the Republic should be organized and managed.  I recently read a book on Madison's efforts to get the Constitution ratified.  It was iffy all the way to the end, where the Bill of Rights damped down the opposition enough to push it over the top.  It didn't take long for those competing views to harden into Parties, but the Parties we have today don't look, sound or believe anything like what the first ones did.  It's just easier to garner votes when there is a flagpole to rally around.  I can't think of any nation with a functioning government that doesn't elect its leaders by some version of the incumbent-loyal opposition paradigm with two dominant parties vying.

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #60 on: May 09, 2016, 10:21:07 AM »
Now Trump is going truther against the abundently successful efforts to reduce atmospheric ozone
Quote
“You know, you’re not allowed to use hairspray anymore because if affects the ozone. You know that, right?” he said to laughter. “I said, ‘You mean to tell me’ — ’cause you know hairspray’s not like it used to be, it used to be real good,” he added, to more laughs. “Give me a mirror. But no, in the old days, you put the hairspray on, it was good. Today, you put the hairspray on, it’s good for 12 minutes, right?”

“I said, ‘Wait a minute — so if I take hairspray and if I spray it in my apartment, which is all sealed, you’re telling me that affects the ozone layer?'” “‘Yes.'” I say, no way, folks. No way!”

scifibum

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #61 on: May 09, 2016, 05:35:35 PM »
God help us if we elect someone who so flagrantly appeals to anti-intellectualism.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #62 on: May 09, 2016, 07:55:54 PM »
God help us if we elect someone who so flagrantly appeals to anti-intellectualism.

I think there's a difference between anti-intellectualism and anti-intelligencia. The danger is in adopting the former in the attempt to adopt the latter. In fact, that danger can even be precipitated by the former acting like the latter, which can create additional confusions.

Bottom line, when smart people treat the public like a dupe or an idiot, the people aren't wrong to ignore them, even though they're right much of the time. This is what happens when academia sometimes walks in lockstep with politics.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #63 on: May 09, 2016, 09:41:48 PM »
God help us if we elect someone who so flagrantly appeals to anti-intellectualism.

I think there's a difference between anti-intellectualism and anti-intelligencia. The danger is in adopting the former in the attempt to adopt the latter. In fact, that danger can even be precipitated by the former acting like the latter, which can create additional confusions.

Bottom line, when smart people treat the public like a dupe or an idiot, the people aren't wrong to ignore them, even though they're right much of the time. This is what happens when academia sometimes walks in lockstep with politics.

Bad things usually start to follow when Academia and Politics are in lockstep with each other. It always sounds like a great "enlightened" idea, after all, Academia is supposed to be populated by scholars and men of learning after all. So that should be an indicator of "an enlightened electorate." Sadly, what it usually is an indicator of is that the halls of learning have become politicized despite the many traditions and practices that are supposed to prevent such things from happening.

But otherwise, once again, Trump demonstrates he's a terrible candidate, but at this point, maybe he is the candidate America deserves. As to his statement, I'm sure someone could explain it to him, it's just a matter of whether or not the person he was speaking to was one of those people or not, and if he would bother to listen.

"Yeah, you might be in a sealed room, but the chemicals released are airborne, and eventually the air in that room is going to be changed out. Which means those chemicals that were in your room, are now outside in the environment at large. While one or two people doing that may not be problem, ten or twenty million people doing that starts to become a big problem. Kind of like someone having a 'roadside emergency' and stopping their car to pee behind a bush. Not too big of a deal by itself, but if we have 10 other people stop and pee behind that same bush on that same day, and several more on the next day, and so on. That bush is going to be dead, and there are likely to be a few other issues present at that location besides that."

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #64 on: May 10, 2016, 12:05:30 AM »
Donald Trump is sounding more like Sarah Palin to me every day. And by the way, I do find both of them to be charismatic speakers. It's almost as if the words don't matter .If you have ever had training for media or presentations, those courses usually say that something like 70% of communication is non-verbal, and most of the rest is about tone rather than content. It doesn't really matter what speakers say as long as they seem confident saying it. That appears to be how some of our politics is working.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #65 on: May 10, 2016, 05:27:41 AM »
Quote
I think there's a difference between anti-intellectualism and anti-intelligencia. The danger is in adopting the former in the attempt to adopt the latter. In fact, that danger can even be precipitated by the former acting like the latter, which can create additional confusions.
Yes, I find that confusing.

Quote
Bad things usually start to follow when Academia and Politics are in lockstep with each other. It always sounds like a great "enlightened" idea, after all, Academia is supposed to be populated by scholars and men of learning after all. So that should be an indicator of "an enlightened electorate." Sadly, what it usually is an indicator of is that the halls of learning have become politicized despite the many traditions and practices that are supposed to prevent such things from happening.

You both are warning against letting people whose strongly held principles and policies come from secular halls of learning.  Do you really think that is worse than being led by a Party whose ideas come from a mix of bibleism and red-meat populism?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #66 on: May 10, 2016, 10:15:32 AM »
Politics as a reality game show, a mix of survivor and apprentice. Trump seems to have learned a lot from the worst of those who play the game.
Sad that so many Americans are falling for the entertainment of it   

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #67 on: May 10, 2016, 12:03:54 PM »
Everyone sees trump through a lens. His main trait is arrogance.

He doesn't care what people think.
He thinks America is "#1" rather than one nation among many (even using America First as a slogan)
He says whatever random thought pops into his head.
He seems entirely guileless, never understanding or planning what he says.
He never apologizes for anything, or admits a mistake.

I couldn't ever see myself supporting such a person, when every word you say could start an economic, political, cultural, or military conflict. Buh-lieve me.

Other people absolutely adore him for the exact same traits.

And then I look at Hillary, in many ways the polar opposite. Polished, consummate politician who never makes a statement without having contemplated how people will react. And who refuses to get pinned down on almost anything, who shifted closer to Sanders as soon as he came out as a legitimate challenge to her candidacy.

I'm glad I don't have to pick one, and I can vote for the Libertarian or not vote at all.

scifibum

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #68 on: May 10, 2016, 12:26:41 PM »
God help us if we elect someone who so flagrantly appeals to anti-intellectualism.

I think there's a difference between anti-intellectualism and anti-intelligencia.

In theory, maybe, but in practice there's a lot of overlap. 

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #69 on: May 10, 2016, 12:42:07 PM »
In theory, maybe, but in practice there's a lot of overlap.

That's the problem with blowback. When people are annoyed and mistrustful they will reject everything wholesale. It's not 100% rational but it's entirely predictable. The anti-intelligencia vote made its mark strongly in Bush vs Gore, and maybe now it will again. I'm not unsympathetic to this mentality, since it is not false that rich people in think tanks believe they should have more of a say than the American people about how the country should be run. That there isn't a direct parallel between think tanks/lobbyists and academics isn't something the average person can parse, so as you say the overlap often can't be distinguished from the non-overlap. This is even true for me, who takes time to try to study these things. It's not just easier, but to an extent required, to make generalizations and err on one side or the other.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #70 on: May 10, 2016, 05:37:09 PM »
And then I look at Hillary, in many ways the polar opposite. Polished, consummate politician who never makes a statement without having contemplated how people will react.
Really?  What about the statement on coal mines and coal miners?  Or the retraction?

No question Hillary runs on message a far greater percentage of the time, but when she has to shoot from the cuff she's as prone to poorly thought out statements as any other politician (of course Trump isn't a politician and he's way on worse on this measure).

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #71 on: May 10, 2016, 05:46:52 PM »
I think the reason anti-intellectualism appeals so much, is that's intellectualism has been so abused that it's not trusted anymore.  You can talk to any person in the country and they can give you an example of a food science told them to eat, then told them not to eat (and often then told them to eat again).  You can look at any newspaper headline on a recent scientific discovery in the social sciences and find a piece of advocacy, and if you read the study you can find that the advocacy piece is wrong or overstated.

When people deliberately inject politics into science to try and make arguments from authority to argue in favor of a solution that serves other masters when other solutions are viable it degrades the respect for any intellectual argument.  People don't trust the objectivity of the arguments and want to prove it to themselves (which is honestly, something that many aren't really capable of doing).

You can't have it both ways.  Either take the advocacy out of arguments from authority or understand that the advocacy will be challenged, and as collateral damage parts that people can't distinguish from advocacy will go as well.  The whole mess around client change is a great example of that, so many poorly conceived arguments have been made with green or redistributionist agendas claiming a scientific  mandate that many people no longer trust any of the science on topic.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #72 on: May 10, 2016, 07:23:12 PM »
Seriati,

the issue is mostly the reporting and not the science itself.  Sensationalistic inaccurate reporting of science with grossly exaggerated claims has long been a major problem with science reporters.  Some of it is just ignorance (most science reporters can't read science papers), some of it is deliberate misrepresentation, and a lot of it choosing of advocacy groups to report on rather than asking the scientists.  Scientists make boring and reasonable claims, but advocates make colorful and extreme claims - so reporters quote the advocates.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #73 on: May 10, 2016, 07:39:34 PM »
LetterRip,

Unfortunately, its not just the reporting.  There is tons and tons of advocacy driven science, and tons of science where the researchers are themselves advocates.  In fact in the social sciences I'd guess its more common for it to be advocacy driven than not.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #74 on: May 10, 2016, 08:02:50 PM »
Seriati,

I agree with you when it comes to certain subtopics in the social sciences - lots of studies on gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and economics are often advocacy rather than quality research.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #75 on: May 10, 2016, 09:43:06 PM »
The distinction between the social sciences and the hard sciences is another problem. The average joe likely thinks of both arenas as basically being "science", and this lack of distinction is greatly exacerbated by certain people in the social sciences who make it a point to define their field as scientific (for the purposes of self-adulation). The fact of the matter is that the so-called social sciences are at present not sciences at all in the meaning of the scientific method. Sure, they do studies, make hypotheses and weigh the results, but since science is nothing if not methodology then we can identify without much difficulty that any 'science' involving the study of complex human interactions cannot possibly have a rigorous enough (or even necessarily coherent at all) methodology to qualify as science. Right now it's more like statistics, if anything.

This is, to be sure, debatable, but we can in any case make a blatant distinction between social psychology and particle physics in terms of which offers hard results and which offers educated opinions. But when anyone studying...well, pretty much anything, calls themselves a "scientist" a layman can hardly be blamed for thinking "scientists" are full of it when an economist says something stupid. The problem is when serious scientists like chemists and physicists make a public claim and their claim is treated as if it was an economist or social psychologist saying it.

But it gets worse, because the word "scientist" is even becoming somewhat dated in media parlance, as now we have "experts" taking their place, which broadens the fields involved even beyond the hard sciences and social sciences and now basically encompasses all fields within the liberal arts. So now we have "leading experts" saying thing as reported in news media, and the statements are trumpeted as if they came from a physics lab after a conclusive result came in. And even in physics it takes years to verify these things.

I agree with LetterRip that the reporting is a big part of the problem, but I think the reason the reporting is happening in this way is largely because of either direct advocacy or indirect memeing advocacy where authors jump on the meme train and start repeating what they hear, even if they aren't directly benefiting from the advocacy.

Without learning a substantial amount about each discipline it's not really believable that an average reader will be able to parse "experts" from "scientists" from "members of a CalTech team." To them it's all academics making claims, and while it's sad that loose studies get lumped in with CERN results in the papers, it's also inevitable that this confusion will ensue when science is the new religion and everyone is already sick of religion.

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #76 on: May 10, 2016, 10:14:26 PM »
Seriati, I strongly suggest you listen to Jon Oliver's comedy/editorial on science studies from two days ago - he digs into the difference between science on TV and actual science

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw

 

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #77 on: May 10, 2016, 11:52:15 PM »
Seriati,

I agree with you when it comes to certain subtopics in the social sciences - lots of studies on gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and economics are often advocacy rather than quality research.

What about climate change? Plenty of AGW advocacy groups with money to burn, as well as other groups with social agendas that such a harbinger is highly useful for when it come to giving people people reasons to back their agenda... Even if it has little to actually do with it.

Or more recently government agencies that get flooded with cash if they're willing to undertake studies that presuppose a certain scenario happens while dodging any analysis of the merits of said scenario. ;)

Scientists are people too, they'll go to where the money is too, very few of them are in a place professionally where they can turn down work they'd otherwise consider dubious at best.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #78 on: May 11, 2016, 08:22:34 AM »
Quote
the issue is mostly the reporting and not the science itself.  Sensationalistic inaccurate reporting of science with grossly exaggerated claims has long been a major problem with science reporters.  Some of it is just ignorance (most science reporters can't read science papers), some of it is deliberate misrepresentation, and a lot of it choosing of advocacy groups to report on rather than asking the scientists.  Scientists make boring and reasonable claims, but advocates make colorful and extreme claims - so reporters quote the advocates.
Reporters have to eat, like everyone else, but you can't leave out the reporting media outlet, which also has a point of view and turf to defend.  In the case of FOX, the leaning is always to find a way to diminish or demonize Democrats.  The most famous example today is how they sneer at climate science, as if it is nothing but a hoax to support a partisan money machine.  Even Michelle Obama is harshly criticized for her "science based" recommendations about children's diets.  But when there's no political agenda behind the misleading reporting, no story gets on the air if it can't capture your eyeballs.  If a neutral scientific finding is reported, use an attractive woman news reader to give it, or have someone stand on top of a mountain or on a beach (with attractive women) to point out that scientists are "concerned" and the study needs more investigation.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #79 on: May 11, 2016, 09:58:28 AM »
This was interesting. I don't totally agree with it since if it's true that means I'm a victim of it, but it was fun to read and think about anyway.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2016/03/21/donald-trump-will-win-in-a-landslide-the-mind-behind-dilbert-explains-why/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na

Donald Trump will win in a landslide. *The mind behind ‘Dilbert’ explains why.

"...  On the stump, the real-estate mogul is not running on the knowledge of his numbers or the dissection of the data. He is running on our emotions, Adams says, and sly appeals to our own human irrationality...."

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #80 on: May 11, 2016, 10:16:28 AM »
Adams assumes that Trump can successfully appeal to the emotions of enough people to win the election. He's done so well enough to win the Republican primary but the broader electorate is more diverse and less tolerant of his hindbrain quips. I think he's also going to damage his apparent sincerity and straight-shooter image if he tries to adopt positions that are more palatable to the general public. He's mired in his racist/sexist schtick and that's not going to fly nearly as well outside of the primaries.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #81 on: May 11, 2016, 10:21:21 AM »
The catch is he doesn't have to win over the majority.  He just needs to make enough potential voters against him stay home out of disgust for the whole system.  That is a MUCH lower bar. 

I still like to think that can't happen but we shouldn't get comfortable by thinking he will never get a majority of people on his side.  He just needs a majority of people who show up to vote.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #82 on: May 11, 2016, 10:24:59 AM »
He risks motivating people to go out specifically to vote against him. I think he'll do a lot to make up Clinton's enthusiasm deficit. I think there's better than even odds that minority voters will show up in significant numbers (equal to Obama's highest, at least).

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #83 on: May 11, 2016, 10:34:11 AM »
Also, that is a distressingly insightful link.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #84 on: May 11, 2016, 10:38:33 AM »
NH, I think if he threw out a the rhetorical bones of campaign finance reform (he didn't need the machine, he'll say) and increased transparency, he will maybe not win over converts, but temper their hatred for him. 

I think those two things could give some of his opponents pause without alienating his base.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #85 on: May 11, 2016, 10:45:01 AM »
Great, so white people will be able to elect plutocrats without overt interference by corporations and special interest groups and Muslims will know exactly how much the government is spending to keep them in camps. [/hyperbole]

Campaign finance and transparency are a weaknesses for Clinton but it does nothing to alleviate the concerns raised by Trump's rhetoric. You'll also note it wasn't enough to get Sanders the nomination.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #86 on: May 11, 2016, 10:54:44 AM »
I'm still living the dream.  So I'd add "yet" to the Sanders thing.  ;)

I'm not trying to suggest I want Trump to win or even that I think it's inevitable.  I just don't think Hillary winning is the "sure thing" I once did.  The democratic party has what it needs to insure Trumps defeat.  We'll find out what happens soon enough.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #87 on: May 11, 2016, 11:31:09 AM »
He risks motivating people to go out specifically to vote against him.

How many people would likewise go out to vote against Clinton? Enough that they cancel each other out? I don't know how to measure this, but I wouldn't be surprised if the net dislike of each of them was roughly equivalent.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #88 on: May 11, 2016, 12:07:31 PM »
That is an interesting article--and it includes the reason why Trump probably will not win, and certainly will not win in a landslide.

The last point, #6, is that Trump deals in identity politics.

That is the reason he surged in the Republican primaries; he was able to associate himself with what makes people identify as Republicans.

But the problem with identity politics is that, by definition, it must exclude those who are not part of the identity.

By winning the support of "American, Alpha Males, and Women Who Like Alpha Males," he has automatically excluded "angry women [i.e. those who feel screwed by Alpha Males], beta males, immigrants, and disenfranchised minorities [i.e. those who feel screwed by Alpha White Males]."  Which encompasses all Democrats, and a good portion of independents.  Not to mention a number of the Republican party, too.

And that is a far more sizeable chunk of America than the writer realizes.

What Hillary has to do is energize those who don't fit with the identity of Trump supporters, which simply means constantly pointing out that those who aren't part of that identity will get screwed if Trump wins.  Who's going to pay for The Wall if Mexico won't?  Trump's group?  Hardly.  Who's going to be deported, even if they were born in this country?  Trump's group? Don't bet on it.  Who's going to pay for all the police to track down and deport illegals?  Trump's group?  Forget it.  "Losers" don't make the rules and don't win prizes.  They give prizes to the "winners."

It won't take much rhetoric like that to put fear into the hearts of those outside his group.  And while hatred is a great motivator, fear is even better.

Hillary will have to be smart enough to turn up the heat on Trump like that.  But she is surrounded by smart people.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #89 on: May 11, 2016, 01:13:49 PM »
Quote
How many people would likewise go out to vote against Clinton? Enough that they cancel each other out? I don't know how to measure this, but I wouldn't be surprised if the net dislike of each of them was roughly equivalent.
I doubt there's any equivalence.  The bulk of negatives against Hillary are based on "feelings" related to pseudo-scandals and misrepresentations of her actions and statements.  OTOH, I think Hillary could just run loops of Trump's actual statements and thoroughly poison people in almost any voting bloc against him.  The man is a walking cesspool of mean-spirited comments.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #90 on: May 11, 2016, 02:25:03 PM »
The bulk of negatives against Hillary are based on "feelings" related to pseudo-scandals and misrepresentations of her actions and statements.

No.

scifibum

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #91 on: May 11, 2016, 03:20:15 PM »
If Adams is right and people vote based on emotions, all the people who are pissed off about Trump's success in the primaries and hate him intensely are going to be hard to overcome. 

Adams is, I think, just making a long shot bet.  If he ends up right, he looks like a genius and sells a lot more books.  If he ends up wrong, he loses essentially nothing (he intersperses all his confident predictions with lots of "hey I'm just a cartoonist, don't take me too seriously" stuff). 

On the other hand, some people think he's evincing some kind of mania, so that could explain his wild predictions too.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #92 on: May 11, 2016, 03:37:59 PM »
Who's going to pay for all the police to track down and deport illegals?  Trump's group?  Forget it.

Funny thing on that one, is that the claims vs reality on this are so wildly different. With databases available today and everything else, you don't really need more cops, you just need cops with access to more of the right information, and empowered with the ability to do something about it. Local (and even Federal types local to those areas) Law enforcement in many areas knows with a high degree of certainty who the illegal immigrants are, and where to find them. Thing is, immigration isn't in the jurisdiction of BATF, FBI, BLM, Forest Service, Park Service, or a wide range of other Federal Agencies, and as the Obama Admin is big on exercising Federal Supremacy on this issue in particular, state and local agencies can't do anything regarding immigration currently. They(other Federal Agencies and State/Local Agencies) have been specifically prohibited from enforcing those laws, and have basically either been restricted from passing the information along, or have long since learned that passing it along the relevant information chain doesn't accomplish anything.

And as Arizona demonstrated, even if the local LEO does correctly identify an illegal immigrant and detain them, it doesn't do a lick of good if INS refuses to follow through on the report, as they'll eventually have to release the person as they can't press charges, they need INS to do that.

All it would really take is empowering all law enforcement to intercept and detain illegal immigrants, rather than expanding INS officer rolls by 10,000% so they could "try to find them," and you'd see the Illegal immigrant population disappear in short order. Then the problem becomes processing the millions of illegals, and handling of their children(anchor babies, and not-so anchor babies alike given how long many illegals have been in country), and getting their home countries to accept the large inflow of nationals heading back to the nation of their birth.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #93 on: May 11, 2016, 03:54:41 PM »
Quote
Then the problem becomes processing the millions of illegals, and handling of their children(anchor babies, and not-so anchor babies alike given how long many illegals have been in country), and getting their home countries to accept the large inflow of nationals heading back to the nation of their birth.
Which is going to cost a lot of money. Will Trump's group pay for it?

There are a lot of good reasons to dislike Clinton but the people who would hate her enough to vote for Trump instead probably aren't sticking to demonstrable facts. They're probably already going to vote for Trump. My guess is that they also tend to belong to groups which turn out regularly for election to vote Republican. The people Trump is motivating to vote against him are groups that tend to have lower turnouts and are pivotal to the Democratic coalition.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #94 on: May 11, 2016, 04:03:43 PM »
The people Trump is motivating to vote against him are groups that tend to have lower turnouts and are pivotal to the Democratic coalition.

Do you have data on this? From the limited exposure I have to chatter about Trump on social media, all the people I've seen railing against Trump were already hard-and-fast liberals who would never in a million years vote Republican.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #95 on: May 11, 2016, 04:11:10 PM »
It's that they're potential non-voters, not potential Republican voters. I don't have data on hand though.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #96 on: May 11, 2016, 04:36:50 PM »
I have heard reports, though (on our local Public Radio), of Trump inspiring groups to get unregistered Latinos to register and vote.  At least in San Diego, he is inspiring a get-out-the-vote movement. :)

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #97 on: May 11, 2016, 04:45:16 PM »
The bulk of negatives against Hillary are based on "feelings" related to pseudo-scandals and misrepresentations of her actions and statements.

No.
Ah, ok then, thanks for clarifying.  You could provide some further thoughts on this, but I would hope you will avoid those feelings I described above.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #98 on: May 11, 2016, 04:53:52 PM »
It's that they're potential non-voters, not potential Republican voters. I don't have data on hand though.

A lot of them are young people, so maybe that fits. Then again it seems like a lot of them are Sanders fans as well, and there appears to be some controversy right now about whether it's 'proper' for a Sanders supporter to turn to Hillary in order to stop Trump, or whether the protest vote against Hillary is more important to get Sanders' message across. It may be hard to make sense of it right now since it's mostly cross-talk.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: I may have to vote for Trump
« Reply #99 on: May 11, 2016, 04:55:11 PM »
The bulk of negatives against Hillary are based on "feelings" related to pseudo-scandals and misrepresentations of her actions and statements.

No.
Ah, ok then, thanks for clarifying.  You could provide some further thoughts on this, but I would hope you will avoid those feelings I described above.

I just mean that your statement was wrong. It was a statement of fact, and I'm just saying that it actually is not a fact. That's pretty much it :)

It might be true for some people, but is not any kind of rule.