Election 2016

[BurtReynolds]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

[BurtReynolds]

I got a letter about open enrollment for Obamacare. No need to worry about that now, right?

[Green Habit]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[BurtReynolds]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

[Simple Torture]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

Democrats have been working with the black community for more than half a century now and they do, in many ways, speak their language: that is, they have a sense of what issues matter to the community as a whole. During the debates, Clinton had some shaky moments (besides the Parkinson's! lol) where she lumped blacks and Latinos together as if they were one homogeneous community, and it came across as tone deaf. Just because Tim Kaine speaks Spanish doesn't unlock a magic key for them.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[Simple Torture]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

Maybe it's labor? I'm just spitballing here, but lots of the organizational effort behind Hispanic turnout in Nevada seemed to be centered around unions, and that went pretty well for Clinton (although it was closer than some predicted).

[BurtReynolds]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

I wonder what the logic is here? Perhaps legals dislike illegals for not "paying their dues"? I don't get it.

I can't pretend to know all the reasons, but I assume they have the same immigration debate as anyone else. Many consider themselves American, and many don't have the cultural ties white non-hispanics assume they have.

I mean, whites aren't necessarily pro-European immigration just because they share a race, so it only stands to reason it would be the same for hispanics.

then you add catholicism and abortion, and it's all up in the air.

[Green Habit]

Interesting thing I just noticed is that the only region Trump seemed to lag in was in the West. The only Western state he absolutely crushed Clinton in (i.e., greater than 60%) was Wyoming. Perhaps a generation from now the West in general is a Democratic stronghold.

I could see MT getting there by the 2024 election. You think Idaho is remotely close, though?

Trump only did 3 points better in ID than in MT. Of course, Clinton did 9 points worse, but in this hypothetical it takes the combination of increased marginalized Hispanic populations (much bigger in ID than MT), increased urbanization (Boise metro is way bigger than any MT metro), and LDS members becoming increasingly disillusioned of a Trumpist GOP (though this would obviously affect Utah way more than any other state.) A lot has to be in line, but weird shit happens during any political realignment.

Man, I am really out of touch with Idaho. I think I'm still holding on to my childhood memories of the place, more than what it is today. Thanks for this.

Here's a nutshell of the recent political history:
--East ID has always been super-GOP due to a high LDS population. We shall see if Trumpism tests that loyalty.
--North ID used to be fairly labor Dem leaning due to union membership in timber, mining, and other industries. However, the triple whammy of Right to Work in the mid 80s, timber mills shutting down in the early 90s, and a massive influx of conservative Californians in the mid 90s (Mark Fuhrman is the most famous example) turned North ID hard right. About 1995-2005 was the apex of GOP dominance in the state.
--SW Idaho (of which Boise dominates) was/is largely solidly Republican in the more traditional sense of Western conservatism that dominated almost every state from Eisenhower to Reagan. However, starting about mid-2000s Boise proper took a hard turn left, and holds a fair amount in common with other similar top 100 western metro core cities like Seattle, Portland, SLC, Denver, etc. But since Boise proper is only one third of the metro the greater area still leans GOP overall.

[digster]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

I wonder what the logic is here? Perhaps legals dislike illegals for not "paying their dues"? I don't get it.

I can't pretend to know all the reasons, but I assume they have the same immigration debate as anyone else. Many consider themselves American, and many don't have the cultural ties white non-hispanics assume they have.

I mean, whites aren't necessarily pro-European immigration just because they share a race, so it only stands to reason it would be the same for hispanics.

then you add catholicism and abortion, and it's all up in the air.

One caveat is that Hispanic support for the Republican candidate has dropped fairly significantly from the margins Bush enjoyed. Maybe not a sign of a long-term decline, but I do wonder what four years of a Trump presidency would do to that margin.

[Green Habit]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

Resistance may not be limited to just immigration.

[Green Habit]

One caveat is that Hispanic support for the Republican candidate has dropped fairly significantly from the margins Bush enjoyed. Maybe not a sign of a long-term decline, but I do wonder what four years of a Trump presidency would do to that margin.

In retrospect, Bush really did have a master plan for getting the GOP Hispanic support nationwide. He pulled it off well in Texas. A shame for him the nascent Trumpist faction undid him.

[bart]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

I wonder what the logic is here? Perhaps legals dislike illegals for not "paying their dues"? I don't get it.

I enjoy the fact that your idea of the hispanic population appears to break down to "legals" and "illegals." Good thing you're not one of those racist Trump supporters, huh?

[McParadigm]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

Earth. What a shit hole.

What do you think Bi_3, is it "absurd overreaction hyperbole" to be terrified by this move?

This massive, hurried step towards fulfilling one of his most alarming campaign promises is a perfect revealer of why this very traditional "relax, politicians don't actually try to go to the extremes they talk about" stuff is being said way too early: Trump is not a politician, and the extremity of his promises was not beyond the scope of his approach to life in general.

[Rangi Guy]

One thing's for absolute certain: Any hopes from the left that Hispanics will line up behind democrats the way blacks do is a complete pipe dream. Much of that demographic lines up with the Republican platform, and I've met many that are very anti-illegal immigration.

It's going to depend very much on how Trump truly treats them. I've spoken many times on how there's a good chance a generation from now Latinos may assimilate and self-identify more as "white". But that's tougher to do if you keep getting otherized in society.

Many do identify that way now, and I don't think trump can do much to jeopardize that. Immigration isn't the deal breaker many democrats assume it is.

I wonder what the logic is here? Perhaps legals dislike illegals for not "paying their dues"? I don't get it.

I enjoy the fact that your idea of the hispanic population appears to break down to "legals" and "illegals." Good thing you're not one of those racist Trump supporters, huh?

Shit - everyone's turning on everyone up in here today!

[digster]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

Earth. What a shit hole.

What do you think Bi_3, is it "absurd overreaction hyperbole" to be terrified by this move?

This massive, hurried step towards fulfilling one of his most alarming campaign promises is a perfect revealer of why this very traditional "relax, politicians don't actually try to go to the extremes they talk about" stuff is being said way too early: Trump is not a politician, and the extremity of his promises was not beyond the scope of his approach to life in general.

This. My concern is not necessarily about Trump's ideology; much of what he says is pretty odious, but I don't really think he ever illustrated a consistent ideology. My concern is about his instinctual reaction to issues, problems and questions, and I thought he was pretty consistent when it came to that throughout the campaign.

[Bi_3]

This paragraph from Michael Wolff is the perfect summation of what I'm feeling angry about (emphasis mine):

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/m ... res-945733

And it was a failure of modern journalistic technique too. It was the day the data died. All of the money poured by a financially challenged media industry into polls and polling analysis was for naught. It profoundly misinformed. It created a compelling and powerful narrative that was the opposite of what was actually happening. There may be few instances, except perhaps under authoritarian regimes, where the media has so successfully propounded a view of events not only of its own making but at such odds with reality. Trump is a simple proof: forget polls — they say what you want them to say.

The whole country should angry about this. Not only did it support Trumps bullshit, it creates a false sense of complacency in voters. I saw a great quote about this earlier: "the media took Trump literally but not seriously and his supporters took him seriously but not literally"

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE