2016 elections - because it's never too early

[The Minsky Moment]

I found this article about how the Republican party lost sight of the issues its voters care about rather interesting:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-voters.html

Yeah, pretty much. For years people on the left and center of US politics have been complaining that American white blue collar workers do not vote in accordance with their own interests - now they act surprised when they have finally started to.

Trump's tax plan consists of big cuts to the top marginal income tax rate, cutting corporate tax rates in half, and eliminating estate tax.  His health care plan is to repeal Obamacare (which subsidizes working class and prevents redlining) and replacing it with financial accounts. 

If it is in the interest of the working class to pay more for health care and/or lose insurance, and to have everyone else except them enjoy tax cuts, then they are voting their interests. 

[The Brain]

Because it is currently world destroying on both human & nature scales?

Is there a period in history that you think had a better international status quo?

[Eddie Teach]

Because it is currently world destroying on both human & nature scales?

And how would Quebec libre change all that?

[The Minsky Moment]

The current international status quo needs to be upended, I don't think Sanders could do it but Trump is crazy enough to do it.

Dear Hod. Why? Why does the status quo need to be shattered? Not enough wars and death out there for you?

Says the neo-Jacobin.

[Zanza]

Trump's tax plan consists of big cuts to the top marginal income tax rate, cutting corporate tax rates in half, and eliminating estate tax.  His health care plan is to repeal Obamacare (which subsidizes working class and prevents redlining) and replacing it with financial accounts.

If it is in the interest of the working class to pay more for health care and/or lose insurance, and to have everyone else except them enjoy tax cuts, then they are voting their interests. 

You seem to make the same mistake the GOP elites are accused of in the NYT article. Taxes and even repealing Obamacare don't seem to be what interests people and it certainly isn't a distinguishing feature between Trump and his opponents in the GOP as they all want to lower taxes and abolish Obamacare. Trump has a orthodox GOP position here. 

However his opposition to free trade and immigration is a distinguishing factor. If these issues are important for voters, he seems to be the only candidate adressing them.

[katmai]

Holy crap though. Sanders is winning big with those pinko traitors in Alaska and Washington. Fuck you Northwest commies.

Apparently all of 500 people participated in Alaska.

um no.

Sen. Bernie Sanders won Alaska's Democratic caucuses on Saturday in a landslide, pulling in nearly 81 percent of the vote to Hillary Clinton's 19 percent, according to state party officials.

More than 10,600 people headed to schools and community centers around the state Saturday morning to cast votes in the caucuses, which were organized by the Alaska Democratic Party. Unexpectedly high turnout at some locations overwhelmed volunteers and led to long lines, delays and, at least in Anchorage, warnings from fire marshals.

Supporters said a combination of grass-roots organizing and outreach to rural communities helped bolster his bid.

"I think (Sanders') message appealed to the independent spirit of Alaskans," said David Karabelnikoff, 34, an Alaska Native from Anchorage and a Sanders campaign volunteer.

It's the second time Clinton, a former senator and secretary of state, has endured a dramatic defeat in the Alaska caucuses. In 2008, Barack Obama claimed three-quarters of the vote over Clinton.

Close to 8,900 people voted in the 2008 Democratic caucuses, and while party officials said they were expecting higher turnout on Saturday, there were some surprises.

Roughly 4,500 people showed up at the caucus site in Anchorage, twice the number recorded at the state's last Democratic caucuses in 2008.

[Eddie Teach]

http://www.adn.com/article/20160326/sanders-dominates-early-results-packed-alaska-democratic-caucuses

10,600 according to this. Sanders won 81% of the votes.

[CountDeMoney]

However his opposition to free trade and immigration is a distinguishing factor. If these issues are important for voters, he seems to be the only candidate adressing them.

Luckily, voters have the option of going with "Let's go back to the gold standard" Cruz.
So they've got that going for them.

[MadImmortalMan]

Does he really want to go back to the gold standard?

What a goof.

[alfred russel]

You seem to make the same mistake the GOP elites are accused of in the NYT article. Taxes and even repealing Obamacare don't seem to be what interests people and it certainly isn't a distinguishing feature between Trump and his opponents in the GOP as they all want to lower taxes and abolish Obamacare. Trump has a orthodox GOP position here. 

But he doesn't have an orthodox position. The orthodox GOP position is to unrealistically cut income taxes in a way the benefits go to those paying the highest tax rates. That doesn't describe the Trump position because his plan is that on steroids, HGH, and bovine growth factor. His plan is a farce compared to the "establishment" plans, which are farces themselves but that is beside the point.

[Valmy]

Says the neo-Jacobin.

Well....ok you got me there.

[The Minsky Moment]

You seem to make the same mistake the GOP elites are accused of in the NYT article. Taxes and even repealing Obamacare don't seem to be what interests people and it certainly isn't a distinguishing feature between Trump and his opponents in the GOP as they all want to lower taxes and abolish Obamacare. Trump has a orthodox GOP position here. 

However his opposition to free trade and immigration is a distinguishing factor. If these issues are important for voters, he seems to be the only candidate adressing them.

I don't think I'm making the same mistake as "GOP elites" - as you suggest, Trump's actual program, as opposed to his rhetoric, is for the most part a pretty standard variety GOP program, a paleo one in fact.

I am interpreting "interest" in the sense of that which benefits or harms, and not in the plain language sense of what which is interesting.  No question Trump wins in terms of being "of interest."  I also don't question that trade and immigration issues are "of interest."  However, although there have been times in US history where one could argue that massive immigration could be negatively impacting unskilled worker incomes, this is not one of those historical times.  There is also no logical connection between any of Trump's trade proposals and any benefit to workers, nor has Trump identified any such connection.

[HisMajestyBOB]

Secret Service has shot down the petition to allow open-carry at the GOP convention:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/28/more-than-42000-people-have-signed-a-petition-to-allow-guns-at-the-republican-national-convention/?tid=pm_pop_b

Naturally, I expect GOP leaders to appeal against this decision, as making the convention a gun-free zone will only make everyone unsafe by attracting violence and terrorism.

[The Minsky Moment]

Let's look a little more closely on Trump's trade position.  His only program relates to China.  It consists of the following elements.

1) Declare China a currency manipulator
Trump is correct that China is presently manipulating its currency.  But he is wrong about the direction.  At present the yuan is over-valued, not under - China is trying to avoid devaluation while expanding the money supply, and appears to be doing it through surreptitious capital controls.  Thus the result of a policy of forcing a true free float would likely be a decline in the value of the yuan.

2) Enforce stronger IP protections.  This is an existing policy.  Even if Trump can improve compliance, the connection to improving US workers standard of living is tenuous at best.

3)  "Eliminate" export subsidies: the only concrete action Trump proposes is continuing to pursue an already existing WTO case.

The rest of his "trade" program consists of: reducing corporate tax rates to 15%, reducing the deficit, "deploying [the military] appropriately in the East and South China Seas" (?).

His rhetoric on trade is fiery, his program either irrelevant, ineffectual, or non-existent.

[Eddie Teach]

I think Trump's basic program could be summed up thus:

Step 1- Elect him President.
Step 2- ...
Step 3- Profit!