What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[grumbler]

when was the last time measured arguments and plans won over rampant populist slogans? Never. Ever.

  Ignorance of history is no excuse for ignoring history.  Look it up, rather than making stupid statements.

Bill Clinton (the rational, practical candidate) won out over populist Jerry Brown.  George W. Bush crushed populist Pat Buchanon in the primaries and again in the general election.  Hillary Clinton beat the populist Bernie Sanders.   I can name those off the top of my head.

2016 was generally the year of the Populist, no doubt.  Trump's major foe was the populist Ted Cruz.  Brexit was a populist vote.  Etc.  But, to claim that, because populists have done well over the last year, they always win, is simply ignorant.

[DontSayBanana]

She made plenty of efforts to appeal and pander.  It is one of her most constantly mocked qualities because she is so hilariously bad at it.

Pandering isn't the same as working to draw broad appeal.  Pandering alienates the people not being pandered to, and she did it with so many groups, occasionally even contradicting herself in the process, that what she ended up doing was fracturing the base.  She had separate and disjointed black and hispanic messages, clean energy messages, feminist messages, and labor messages.  What she was missing was some glue to make those groups feel like they would be part of a larger group that she would successfully represent.

[grumbler]

dems just need to run someone who isn't radioactive and scandal prone. easier said than done, but those people exist.

Jim Webb.

[The Minsky Moment]

(new reuters poll on the immigration ban)
http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/USA-TRUMP-IMMIGRATION-POLL/010031NQ3V0/index.html

than focusing on a pure obstructionist strategy. it might be obvious to some why the immigration ban is a terrible idea, but it's not obvious to a ton of people

What this poll tells me is the support on this is very soft.  People aren't buying that it makes them appreciably safer, and even some of those who agree with it don't think it is good policy.  You're correct this isn't THE issue that breaks Trump or the GOP Congress.  But it's making the same mistake the Democrats made  - they are playing to the people that are already with them in a way that has no meaningful impact on their lives anyway, while mobilizing and firing up the other side. 

[viper37]

bernie was the only dem candidate who had anything close to an approach for securing those voters

so, according to you, the only way to win back electors is to lie to them?  comfort them in their fears?  give them a loosely identifiable target for their hate?

How about bringing back rationality?  Or are we not there yet?

[derspiess]

dems just need to run someone who isn't radioactive and scandal prone. easier said than done, but those people exist.

Jim Webb.

He's a little goofy, but would have won 2016 in a landslide.

[LaCroix]

bernie was the only dem candidate who had anything close to an approach for securing those voters

so, according to you, the only way to win back electors is to lie to them?  comfort them in their fears?  give them a loosely identifiable target for their hate?

How about bringing back rationality?  Or are we not there yet?

I said "anything close" to an approach. I didn't say he had the "only" approach. there's a big difference between the two.

[viper37]

the working class want jobs back home.

unemployment rate for the US:
January 2009: 7.8%
June 2016: 4.9%.

I'd say Obama delivered on that.

[LaCroix]

What this poll tells me is the support on this is very soft.  People aren't buying that it makes them appreciably safer, and even some of those who agree with it don't think it is good policy.  You're correct this isn't THE issue that breaks Trump or the GOP Congress.  But it's making the same mistake the Democrats made  - they are playing to the people that are already with them in a way that has no meaningful impact on their lives anyway, while mobilizing and firing up the other side.

the point of my posting the poll is there's a big gap of uncertainty. democrats need to hit this gap aggressively.

[LaCroix]

unemployment rate for the US:
January 2009: 7.8%
June 2016: 4.9%.

I'd say Obama delivered on that.

national unemployment rates don't equal actual jobs for wisconsinans, etc.

[Fate]

the working class want jobs back home.

unemployment rate for the US:
January 2009: 7.8%
June 2016: 4.9%.

I'd say Obama delivered on that.

no, the real unemployment rate is 40%. so said The Donald every opportunity he had before he got into office.

now I think he'll find the "real" unemployment number to be ~5% and a terrific success. the greatest employment gain in history. something alternative reality wisconsians can really sink their teeth into!

[Valmy]

She made plenty of efforts to appeal and pander.  It is one of her most constantly mocked qualities because she is so hilariously bad at it.

Pandering isn't the same as working to draw broad appeal.  Pandering alienates the people not being pandered to, and she did it with so many groups, occasionally even contradicting herself in the process, that what she ended up doing was fracturing the base.  She had separate and disjointed black and hispanic messages, clean energy messages, feminist messages, and labor messages.  What she was missing was some glue to make those groups feel like they would be part of a larger group that she would successfully represent.

I am not denying that was a terrible campaigner. I was just denying she failed to try. She tried, she just sucked.

[Admiral Yi]

I think somewhere between 1988-2016 the strategies that got the democrats firm victories in the blue wall states started to fail, but those voters kept voting democrat either for similar reasons as solid republican states or because the republicans didn't really reach out to them. ohio being an exception for reasons I don't know why. this is the year of brexit and trump, and it's because of the working class not being compensated for industries leaving. the democrats could offer to compensate them somehow with a massive plan -- expensive, yeah, the democrats need to be willing to drop other expensive plans.

I don't think the democrats really sat down before this election to think about how to help the working class in a substantive way that forces them to sacrifice in other areas, because they didn't need to sit down before this election -- their previous strategies worked. if the republicans manage to steal those voters from them on a long term basis, then the democrats are fucked for a generation.

You have a tendency--particularly evident in our little post chain, but I suspect more generalized--to walk away from assertions when challenged.  We started off with your bizarro defense of Trump voters against the accusation of populism. You walked away from that without conceding anything and started talking about how easily Democrats could come up with a solution to working class blues.  You walked away from that when challenged and started talking about the political necessity of coming up with a solution to working class blues.  If you can't come up with reasonable arguments to defend your assertions it might be time to consider that your positions are wrong.

[viper37]

national unemployment rates don't equal actual jobs for wisconsinans, etc.

if it works everywhere but in Wisconsin, then maybe it's a matter for the State Governor to fix?  Maybe look at what works in other States, what is wrong is their own State?

Just sayin'.

Coming from a province where Canadians and Americans are constantly blamed for our relative poverty, I can see the multiple failings in my government's policies, and most of them can be fixed at the provincial level.  I'm not gonna vote for a guy who promises the fix the economy by destroying my provincial government, that's silly.

[viper37]

the working class want jobs back home.

unemployment rate for the US:
January 2009: 7.8%
June 2016: 4.9%.

I'd say Obama delivered on that.

no, the real unemployment rate is 40%. so said The Donald every opportunity he had before he got into office.

now I think he'll find the "real" unemployment number to be ~5% and a terrific success. the greatest employment gain in history. something alternative reality wisconsians can really sink their teeth into!

yeah, I suspect you are right