Bernie's big thing has been how corrupt the system/establishment/Wall Street has been. Hillary is the epitome and poster child of them.
They heavily voted for Trump. That's the biggest reason Trump clearly won the South. However, they become a problem during general elections because the nominee has to pander to them which turns off alot of independents. Goldwater hated them and felt they had no place in the party, but Reagan embraced them for votes and they've had an influence ever since.
Lol both party establishments fighting bitterly to ignore huge swaths of their loyal electorate. The republican party as it was during Reagan's presidency is gone, no doubt about it.
for the 99%, or 90%, party loyalty has returned nothing.
Median net worth has declined for all segments except the top (the top includes the millionaire Congressmen, judges, etc) where the median net worth up 100%+ in the past 15 years.
Neither party will even try to address the decline of the 99%, and the gerrymandered, safe-seat, voter-suppressing, ideological extremist, astro-turf Repugs would block it anyway.
Agree.
Michael Lind thinks the voters have already realigned and that policies are just starting to catch up:
Today’s Republican Party is predominantly a Midwestern, white, working-class party with its geographic epicenter in the South and interior West. Today’s Democratic Party is a coalition of relatively upscale whites with racial and ethnic minorities, concentrated in an archipelago of densely populated blue cities.
In both parties, there’s a gap between the inherited orthodoxy of a decade or two ago and the real interests of today’s electoral coalition. And in both parties, that gap between voters and policies is being closed in favor of the voters — a slight transition in the case of Hillary Clinton, but a dramatic one in the case of Donald Trump.The culture war and partisan realignment are over; the policy realignment and “border war” — a clash between nationalists, mostly on the right, and multicultural globalists, mostly on the left — have just begun.
The outlines of the two-party system of the 2020s and 2030s are dimly visible. The Republicans will be a party of mostly working-class whites, based in the South and West and suburbs and exurbs everywhere. They will favor universal, contributory social insurance systems that benefit them and their families and reward work effort—programs like Social Security and Medicare. But they will tend to oppose means-tested programs for the poor whose benefits they and their families cannot enjoy.
They will oppose increases in both legal and illegal immigration, in some cases because of ethnic prejudice; in other cases, for fear of economic compe ion. The instinctive economic nationalism of tomorrow’s Republicans could be invoked to justify strategic trade as well as crude protectionism. They are likely to share Trump’s view of unproductive finance: “The hedge-fund guys didn’t build this country. These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky.”
The Democrats of the next generation will be even more of an alliance of upscale, progressive whites with blacks and Latinos, based in large and diverse cities. They will think of the U.S. as a version of their multicultural coalition of distinct racial and ethnic iden y groups writ large. Many younger progressives will take it for granted that moral people are citizens of the world, equating nationalism and patriotism with racism and fascism.
The withering-away of industrial unions, thanks to automation as well as offshoring, will liberate the Democrats to embrace free trade along with mass immigration wholeheartedly. The emerging progressive ideology of post-national cosmopolitanism will fit nicely with urban economies which depend on finance, tech and other industries of global scope, and which benefit from a constant stream of immigrants, both skilled and unskilled.
While tomorrow’s Republican policymakers will embrace FDR-to-LBJ universal en lements like Social Security and Medicare, future Democrats may prefer means-tested programs for the poor only. In the expensive, hierarchical cities in which Democrats will be clustered, universal social insurance will make no sense. Payroll taxes on urban workers will be too low to fund universal social insurance, while universal social benefits will be too low to matter to the urban rich. So the well-to-do in expensive, unequal Democratic cities will agree to moderately redistributive taxes which pay for means-tested benefits—perhaps even a guaranteed basic income—for the disproportionately poor and foreign-born urban workforce. As populist labor liberalism declines within the Democratic party, employer-friendly and finance-friendly libertarianism will grow. The Democrats of 2030 may be more pro-market than the Republicans.
Do monrats are ing scared less of The Donald
Lind trying to be visionary for future accolades, but I don't see it happening.
Repugs' white, male, low-wage, low-info, working class, ex-urban/rural base has been ideologically voting against its own best financial interests for decades. That's gonna change? nope
google "redmap". Repugs have cemented control and/or strict obstructionism, of Congress (esp spending) for many years to come, after the 2010/2014 Congressional elections under re-districting/gerrymandering, voter suppression.
Lind really thinks politicians execute, in policy, in law, in regulations, the preferences of voters? Recent Princeton study says that almost NEVER happens.
Lind seems ignorant of the proven fact (Princeton study, etc) that voters are totally disenfranchised, in effect.
Why is Trump always yelling and raising his voice in his speeches? It's like we have our own Hitler running for president.
Even if you watch him speak with the volume muted, his body language and mannerisms are aggressive.
I am hard pressed to think of a more out-of-touch-with-reality post that didn't originate with Cosmored.Do monrats are ing scared less of The Donald
Every Democrat I have talked to about any bit of strategy for the election is over the moon happy that Trump has the nomination.
Up and down the ballot, they get to ignore their actual opponent, and run against this buffoon.
I guess we will get to see what happens, but it seems fairly obvious that Trumps bloviating is damaging, and will continue to damage the GOP brand.
You going to try teaming up with moonbat about faked moon landings next?
They still have control of Texas but at large I don't think that they ever have. It just became a huge selling point to pander to when all the white trash came over with Nixon. If you look at social issues since, that doesn't get any legislative play outside of certain state assemblies.
Instead its been trickle down economics as well as blaming immigrants and the poor for societies ills. Trump still does that too.
This is looking more likely every day.
He told teh GOP to be quiet or he will "lead" all by himself.
The moron needed their money last week and now he's saying he'll do it alone? I want to see the day where he puts up a billion out of his own pocket to sustain his general election campaign. Goodbye Trump.
Mitch Your thoughts?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
