Appealing To His Base?

[Albion]

Both parties strategize based on demographics, voting, trends , etc. The winner on a close race loves the Electoral College, the loser hates it. It’s silly to pretend either party has some noble belief in any strategy but the one that works.

You can say that, but it is undeniable that the Democrats did everything they could to invalidate the 2016 election, fueled by the notion that it was unfair for the candidate who won according to the rules to be declared the winner. Their actions were unprecedented. And also that, even yet, prominent Democrats insist that the president is an "illegitimate" president or "not my president" simply because the Democrat lost the election.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Yeah, insulting people you disagree with is a winning strategy. Just look how it won Hillary the nomin--oh...

The difference is leftists were turned off from Hillary when her unsavory comments came to light while Trump only becomes more and more popular with his base when he insults people they don't like.

 

[cow451]

You can say that, but it is undeniable that the Democrats did everything they could to invalidate the 2016 election, fueled by the notion that it was unfair for the candidate who won according to the rules to be declared the winner. Their actions were unprecedented. And also that, even yet, prominent Democrats insist that the president is an "illegitimate" president or "not my president" simply because the Democrat lost the election.

You’re going to go deaf spending so much time in your echo chamber. If Trump had lost:

• “It’s rigged!”
• “I was robbed!”,
• “ “3 million Illegal immigrants voted!”
• “Voter fraud”

Still don’t get it?

 

[Albion]

The difference is leftists were turned off from Hillary when her unsavory comments came to light

What would give you that impression? All the evidence is that they were with her right up until election day at the least. That's long after she'd made her "unsavory comments."

 

[Albion]

You’re going to go deaf spending so much time in your echo chamber. If Trump had lost:

• “It’s rigged!”
• “I was robbed!”,
• “ “3 million Illegal immigrants voted!”
• “Voter fraud”

Still don’t get it?

I get that you want to discredit what has actually happened by giving me an alternate scenario that did not happen (but which I'm supposed to treat as identical).

 

[Rion]

The difference is leftists were turned off from Hillary when her unsavory comments came to light while Trump only becomes more and more popular with his base when he insults people they don't like.

No, they weren't.

 

[Colter]

Trump has never been so clear in his views. He doesn't want immigrants from places like Haiti, El Salvador and Africa. He would prefer that immigrants came from places like Norway.

Obviously, mainstream Republicans were aghast (but shouldn't have been surprised)
Reaction to Trump's comments on Africa and Haiti

BTW, I don't think that we should insult the 35-40% of the country that still supports Trump by saying that they are his "base". The base that Trump's racist comments appeal to is much smaller. Many who support Trump, his policies and his presidency are not his base; the simply hold their noses and accept the policies of Trump, policies that they believe have been good for the country.

His base are what Hillary called the deplorables, those who Trump's racist remarks appeal to.

Trump's '[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]hole' remark is the latest in long string of racial provocations
======
The strange thing is that immigrants from African countries like Nigeria are better educated by far (on average) than Trump's supporters. And, no, they don't have have huts to return to in one of the largest economies in the world.

The irony of the Left is that, they are the ones who have been saying how horrible these countries are that illegal aliens would be forced to return to! Trump is just agreeing with them!

 

[GoldenBoy89]

What would give you that impression?

She had the numbers to win and still lost. That's lack of support and I think any votes she did end up getting were mostly from people like myself who were only trying to prevent Trump from winning. Her comments did not ring well with the typical Democratic voter.

All the evidence is that they were with her right up until election day at the least.

What evidence was that, the polls you guys tell us we shouldn't trust?

That's long after she'd made her "unsavory comments."

You really believe she was popular with Dems, don't you?

If she was, this thread would be about something President Clinton had said.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Not by a longshot. If Norway and Nigeria were identical in all other respects, you might have a point, but the president was apparently saying that they are not (which is obviously true).

Can you elaborate on what makes the people from Norway better than the people from Nigeria? Because that is what's truly being discussed here, not the relative merits of the countries themselves.

In addition, he is not saying that Africa is the place we need to be cautious about. There are other problem states, and their residents are racially unlike the Nigerians.

Why specifically mention only Haiti and Nigeria then? Why not bring up the real problem states?

Besides, we all know that he was being gracious to his guest from Norway.

We do?

We don't actually long to have more immigration from that country.

We don't?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

No, they weren't.

They were or she'd be Madam President right now.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I get that you want to discredit what has actually happened by giving me an alternate scenario that did not happen (but which I'm supposed to treat as identical).

Trump won and still said all those things.... And I'm supposed to believe he would have gone quietly had he lost?

 

[Rion]

They were or she'd be Madam President right now.

She had the popular vote, remember? Especially in blue states. You, among others, have continued to denigrate Trump voters when they complained about the elitist attitude of the left.

 

[Colter]

Dick Durban is claiming that the term “chain migration” is offensive because it reminds people of slaves in chains. Funny, it never occurred to anyone except Durban.

Curious, did anyone else here think “chain migration” was a dog whistle to blacks??

 

[GoldenBoy89]

She had the popular vote, remember? Especially in blue states.

Yes and she would be the president if Democrats actually wanted her and had come out to actually support her as their candidate and not just try to avoid this disaster we have now instead. The only thing really motivating Democrats to vote last election was Trump.

You, among others, have continued to denigrate Trump voters when they complained about the elitist attitude of the left.

That's because the idea that Trump voters don't also look down on us is baloney. I don't buy for a second they aren't elitists themselves in a lot of their mentality.

 

[LoAmmi]

That's because the idea that Trump voters don't also look down on us is baloney. I don't buy for a second they aren't elitists themselves in a lot of their mentality.

Indeed!

 

[Colter]

 

[Basil the Great]

I just checked the Electoral Vote totals. If she had won MI and WI, she still would have lost the Election by a 280-258 margin. If somehow she could have won PA and MI, she would have come very close, but Trump still would have won 270-268. Now if she could have won PA and MI and snared the one vote in the Northern Maine Congr District, then we would have had a 269-269 tie. However, the fact remains that in order to win outright, she needed all three normally Dem states that she lost: MI, PA and WI. Logically, she should have won MI. She only lost by about 10,000 votes and she really only devoted much time and money there near the end. As to WI, word has it that she never campaigned there even once. I do not know how much she spent on tv ads there, but the margin was less that 23,000 votes, so she probably could have won WI with time and resources. So, that leaves PA. The problem here is that she lost PA by 44,000, the largest margin of the three states and she spent the most time and money there by far. I doubt very much that Clinton could have done anymore that she did already to carry PA. The problem is that outside of Allegheny County, she got beat badly in traditionally Dem SW PA, no doubt due to her anti-coal message. She also lost traditionally Dem Wilkes Barre and barely carried traditionally Dem Scranton, both in NE PA coal country. It would appear that more than any other single factor, her anti-coal message cost her the Presidency. Yes, maybe, maybe..... if Comey had not come out near the end with his statement about more emails, maybe she could have barely carried PA, MI and WI. MI seems the most likely to have flipped, but WI and PA not so certain.

 

[Colter]

Yes and she would be the president if Democrats actually wanted her and had come out to actually support her as their candidate and not just try to avoid this disaster we have now instead. The only thing really motivating Democrats to vote last election was Trump.


That's because the idea that Trump voters don't also look down on us is baloney. I don't buy for a second they aren't elitists themselves in a lot of their mentality.

We think Leftist have many of the faults that they accuse Trump voters of but enjoy a kind of “immunity from scrutiny” by identifying with the (D) Party.

 

[cow451]

I get that you want to discredit what has actually happened by giving me an alternate scenario that did not happen (but which I'm supposed to treat as identical).

Just trying to get you to understand the importance of not drinking the koolaid on either side.

 

[Albion]

I'm sure we already know and agree to that in principle. But one side is actually drinking it.