This is something I have yet to take a side on, largely because your argument about Trump is interesting.
He is making the reasonable arguement that trump would be dangerous to the idea of liberal democracy. There is a lot to that. But I think this arguement potentially misses three important points.
1. It overstates the amount of direct authority the president has in a number of areas
2. It downplays the already serious threat the modern day Republican Party poses to democratic process. There is just no veil with trump - no obfuscation. And having to endure a trump regime might force us to confront that in a potentially healthy way. Trump getting the nomination and losing requires the party to rethink the tactics and strategy that made trump an inevitability (we went into overdrive with Palin, though the has been building since Gingrich in the late 70s/early 80s). And should he win the presidency it forces reasonable people on both sides to start walking back the adversarial culture that is undermining the possibility of good governance - and to take the class grievances empowering trump seriously. But should someone beat trump for the nomination this just plays out again in 2020
3. I continue to believe that the substantive differences are not that great between trump and others. I can read that second paragraph and insert Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz and other than replacing vanity with ideology it works
But trump is a demagogue in the worst send of the word. That does make him dangerous. I just don't know that particular flavor of danger is qualitatively worse.
turned2black wrote:Also, I'd be shocked if that number in CNN's demo story about Bernie actually "winning" the Hispanic vote in early exit polling held true. I'm guessing that included a broad spectrum of rural areas and a small sampling of LV.
Nevada's hispanic population is centered around LV (Clark County) and they had some insanely long lines, so I'd guess she actually "won" that demographic.
I knew those numbers were shady as fuck.
The actual election returns in Las Vegas’s Clark County hint at a different story. Analyzed neighborhood by neighborhood, they suggest that Mrs. Clinton might have won the Hispanic vote by a comfortable margin. She won about 60 percent of delegates in heavily Hispanic areas, a result that calls the finding of the polling into question.
Someone else may have actually predicted it first, but I've spent the better part of 6 months trying to convince 4/5 and Chud that this election was different and Trump had a real chance.
turned2black wrote:Someone else may have actually predicted it first, but I've spent the better part of 6 months trying to convince 4/5 and Chud that this election was different and Trump had a real chance.
This is something I have yet to take a side on, largely because your argument about Trump is interesting.
He is making the reasonable arguement that trump would be dangerous to the idea of liberal democracy. There is a lot to that. But I think this arguement potentially misses three important points.
1. It overstates the amount of direct authority the president has in a number of areas
2. It downplays the already serious threat the modern day Republican Party poses to democratic process. There is just no veil with trump - no obfuscation. And having to endure a trump regime might force us to confront that in a potentially healthy way. Trump getting the nomination and losing requires the party to rethink the tactics and strategy that made trump an inevitability (we went into overdrive with Palin, though the has been building since Gingrich in the late 70s/early 80s). And should he win the presidency it forces reasonable people on both sides to start walking back the adversarial culture that is undermining the possibility of good governance - and to take the class grievances empowering trump seriously. But should someone beat trump for the nomination this just plays out again in 2020
3. I continue to believe that the substantive differences are not that great between trump and others. I can read that second paragraph and insert Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz and other than replacing vanity with ideology it works
But trump is a demagogue in the worst send of the word. That does make him dangerous. I just don't know that particular flavor of danger is qualitatively worse.
Good stuff.
I think what scares me most about Trump is what kind of Cabinet he would build. Perhaps he could defer to Republican strategists, but what I worry about is if he just appoints a bunch of Trump sycophants who end up way in over their heads.
stip wrote:Hey, if trump wins the nomination was I the first person on RM to predict it?
turned2black wrote:Someone else may have actually predicted it first, but I've spent the better part of 6 months trying to convince 4/5 and Chud that this election was different and Trump had a real chance.
Yeah, for one reason or another, I went through this thread and looked at when each candidate was mentioned and who mentioned them first. t2b has been warning of the Trump scenario that appears to be playing out since early September, I think.
11/26/14 - Clinton and Bush (96583UP)
12/16/14 - Ted Cruz (chud)
7/2/15 - Sanders (LV)
7/2/15 - Trump (Biff)
8/6/15 - Rubio (darth_vedder)
8/6/15 - Kasich, Graham (Argo)
8/6/15 - Huckabee (GH)
8/6/15 - Fiorina (ruddo, who wondered aloud if she's fuckable)
8/7/15 - O'Malley (ABNorman, who put a question mark next to his name)
8/9/15 - Rand Paul (Burt)
8/10/15 - Carson, Walker, Christie (Skitch)
8/10/15 - Santorum (GH)
8/11/15 - Rick Perry (darth_vedder)
9/16/15 - Bobby Jindal (simple torture)
9/16/15 - George Pataki (t2b)
10/13/15 - Jim Webb, Lincoln Chafee (simple_torture)
12/9/15 - Jim Gilmore (4/5 with a deep cut!)
Is it weird to anyone else that Cruz and Rubio tried to hit Trump hard on the fact that he's been audited by the IRS for a few years running? Doesn't every single one of these guys want to dismantle the IRS because it's corrupt and has too much power? Doesn't Trump's story actually support their own narrative?
I gave a talk about Trump's appeal in early October and I remember how incredulous everyone was about him as a candidate. I argued that we wouldn't know for sure until we see if his support translates into turnout, but I was trying to prep the audience for this. I forgot when I started thinking he was more likely to win than not.
I feel like Trump would implode and he'd end up being impeached. Being that he is an "outsider" I feel like he doesnt really understand how government works. He wants to be a dictator and when he gets in office and realizes that is not how our government will work, he will completely unravel, or become completely useless.
I dont know. *Shrugs*
A president can't fire everybody, can't sue every body. Government is bigger than the president.
turned2black wrote:Someone else may have actually predicted it first, but I've spent the better part of 6 months trying to convince 4/5 and Chud that this election was different and Trump had a real chance.
Sigh. Yeah.
In my defense, betting against "this time is different" is almost always the right move.
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle
