Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[Vampyr]

Speaking for myself, I don't hate either of these candidates. I just don't think either of them should be President.

 

Well, one of them will be, so you might want to vote for the one that is not terrifying. You may find Clinton not to be a very exciting candidate, but she is unlikely to do major harm.

[Vampyr]

If this convention does not convert some among the undecided, I don't know what will. Listening to Joe Biden felt like being at home talking with a friend. His sober argument as to why we simply cannot have Donald Trump as president matches mine both in logic and in emotion.

 

We will see where this goes. But as with Michelle Obama the other night, I found this authentic. Not something I usually say about a political speech.

 

Good luck to us.

 

Are undecided people really spending their evenings watching both conventions? It seems to me that conventions are mainly about preaching to the converted.

[mike777]

Well, one of them will be, so you might want to vote for the one that is not terrifying. You may find Clinton not to be a very exciting candidate, but she is unlikely to do major harm.

 

 

Here in the US we have 3 "equal" branches of government. Now in practice one branch or the other seems to wield more political power. The branches are engaged in endless conflict.

 

Dont think of it as in the UK where basically one party controls the levers of great power.

 

 

If by chance you dont like the choices for the executive branch, you can try and game the system to give another branch more political power. If all of that sounds confusing, it is.

 

=====

 

 

For example imagine a UK where the PM is a Tory and his cabinet, Parliament run by the Labour Party, and supreme judges who tend to favor the Green party policies.

 

 

Oh btw now add 60 million, yes 60 million people from 100 different countries and cultures living in the UK!

 

 

Welcome to America

[Phil]

Latest poll from California shows Trump ahead by 7 points.

 

What poll is that? 538 shows otherwise:

 

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/california/

[shyams]

Well, one of them will be, so you might want to vote for the one that is not terrifying. You may find Clinton not to be a very exciting candidate, but she is unlikely to do major harm.

Here in the US we have 3 "equal" branches of government. Now in practice one branch or the other seems to wield more political power. The branches are engaged in endless conflict.

 

Dont think of it as in the UK where basically one party controls the levers of great power.

 

 

If by chance you dont like the choices for the executive branch, you can try and game the system to give another branch more political power. If all of that sounds confusing, it is.

 

=====

 

 

For example imagine a UK where the PM is a Tory and his cabinet, Parliament run by the Labour Party, and supreme judges who tend to favor the Green party policies.

 

 

Oh btw now add 60 million, yes 60 million people from 100 different countries and cultures living in the UK!

 

 

Welcome to America

Wow! I did not know any of this until your post!!!

Thank you for your insightful non sequitor.

[Zelandakh]

A question occurs to me. Who is switching? Who will switch? I am not sure that I know anyone who is remotely likely to change his/her mind about Trump versus Clinton.

A question occurs to me Ken. How many truly working class people, living on or below the bread line, do you actually know? Most reports seem to suggest that Trump's support is heavily concentrated in this section. Who is switching? I think you could look at some of the Brexit statistics for a reasonable idea of the profile to look for. Right across the Western world, people in this group are angry and scared. The situation reminds me quite strongly of the 1930s, just replace Communists with IS/Isis, Jews with bankers and gypsies with refugees (or Latinos in America I suppose). I hope we have enough people aware of history that we do not start repeating it.

[billw55]

Actually, I am fairly confident that Trump will shoot himself in the foot before November. That won't matter to the hardcore bigots, but it might to give pause to the rest.

I can't imagine what he could do at this point to drive away someone who was going to vote for him. They are fine with all of it so far, what is left? They willfully ignore his past statements for gun control and abortion choice, rapturously soaking in the lies of convenience he offers today. Maybe the only thing would be to backtrack on racism.

 

I hope we have enough people aware of history that we do not start repeating it.

Sadly I fear it has been too long. Not enough vets and survivors left now. Trump may lose for other reasons, but not for history.

 

 

[Winstonm]

I can't imagine what he could do at this point to drive away someone who was going to vote for him. They are fine with all of it so far, what is left? They willfully ignore his past statements for gun control and abortion choice, rapturously soaking in the lies of convenience he offers today. Maybe the only thing would be to backtrack on racism.

 

 

Sadly I fear it has been too long. Not enough vets and survivors left now. Trump may lose for other reasons, but not for history.

 

No, I don't think those voters will change their minds, but I do look for a substantial amount of voter turnout from those who normally don't vote or who would normally vote Republican being spurred to turn out and vote for Clinton in order to prevent a Trump presidency.

The crazier Trump projects himself, the greater the likelihood of spurring these folks to action against him, IMO.

[mike777]

No, I don't think those voters will change their minds, but I do look for a substantial amount of voter turnout from those who normally don't vote or who would normally vote Republican being spurred to turn out and vote for Clinton in order to prevent a Trump presidency.

The crazier Trump projects himself, the greater the likelihood of spurring these folks to action against him, IMO.

 

 

I dont see any evidence that there will be a substantial amount of voter turnout from those who dont normally vote.

 

I do see a bit of evidence that voter turnout will be less since a black man is not running.

 

At this point I would not be surprised if Clinton ends up close to 350 votes(270=win) With less than 50% of the actual voters and far less than 50% of all possible voters.

[awm]

Ok, let me rephrase my question. Was there anything that the DNC staff did that was improper, for which there was no evidence last week, and for which there is evidence now?

- The debate scheduling was ridiculous, but possibly counter-productive (no surprise that Hillary's campaign pushed to change this).

- The voter database row was publicised back then (and there seemed to be justification for their actions); any more news about that in the leaked emails?

- I used NY Times and 538 as my news sources on the status of the race, and I don't even remember whether they included superdelegates. I only cared about the non-superdelegate count, and it was easy to find that, I don't remember having to jump through any hurdles. Meanwhile, any evidence in the emails that the DNC controlled how other news organisation reported on the race?

- Any evidence in the emails for nefarious dealings with your other allegations?

 

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz denied on many occasions that the DNC was intentionally "stacking the deck" for Hillary Clinton despite the many events which seemed like they were. The emails mostly provided evidence that she was lying about this. I don't think they revealed any new activities by the DNC of this sort -- rather they revealed internal conversations which confirmed that actions which favored the Clinton campaign were not merely coincidental but intentionally so.

 

If the result of all this is more transparency at the DNC and reducing or eliminating super delegates, that will be a positive. Like I said, Hillary gets the nomination anyway -- her huge margins in the south were too much to beat when Bernie was hardly running up margins anywhere and it's proportionate representation. All this DNC stuff is maybe a couple percent in a few states.

 

Hillary will be a fine president, but I'm glad Bernie pulled her to the left on a few issues and I hope she will stick to them. Really the thing that bothers me is the feeling that our country is becoming an oligarchy (two Bushes and now two Clintons? And both recent Republican nominees super-rich businessmen who are the sons of super-rich businessmen?)

[Winstonm]

Speaking for myself, I don't hate either of these candidates. I just don't think either of them should be President.

 

So you are good with the possible next President asking Putin to interfere in the election?

 

This election is not about who we like or don't like, who we think should or should not be President; this election is about rejecting a threat to our stability as a democracy.

 

That risk tramples our personal likes and dislikes.

[kenberg]

A question occurs to me Ken. How many truly working class people, living on or below the bread line, do you actually know? Most reports seem to suggest that Trump's support is heavily concentrated in this section. Who is switching? I think you could look at some of the Brexit statistics for a reasonable idea of the profile to look for. Right across the Western world, people in this group are angry and scared. The situation reminds me quite strongly of the 1930s, just replace Communists with IS/Isis, Jews with bankers and gypsies with refugees (or Latinos in America I suppose). I hope we have enough people aware of history that we do not start repeating it.

 

A very fair question. Living on or below the bread line? Well, it depends on the meaning. Working class? More than a few.

I don't want to start making a list and then argue about who qualifies and who doesn't but perhaps an example or two. My wife's son has a high school education, works with his hands installing electronic equipment, is decently paid but not rich. He has a wife and a child, and they recently bought a nice but modest house. He and I get along very well. Going back in history, my father installed weatherstripping. I grew up in a nice but modest house. He was an independent contractor, which I suppose would make him an entrepreneur, we jazz up all titles today, but what he did in the morning was to drive to a building and get to work with a hammer and nails. My younger daughter is part owner of a canine boarding kennel, another entrepreneur, but she spends most of her time with the dogs. And yes, I do know people on food stamps. Make that SNAP, we have to go with the jargon.

 

When I hear Joe Biden, it sounds like home. If the Dems want to win, they need his natural supporters. That would be me.

 

Yes I have a Ph.D. My father never had any idea why on Earth I would want to do such a thing. He didn't object, it just made no sense to him why a person who is reasonable competent physically would want to spend all that time with books. Part way through college I gave some thought to dropping out. I was making good money, I was enjoying the physical work I was doing, I was getting a little tired of listening to professors. But it was a passing whim, I decided to stick with where I belonged. It was the right decision.

 

 

I am not advertising myself as just another blue collar guy. I am not. Neither is Joe Biden. But I liked his speech. And I do know people who live closer to the line than is comfortable.

[Zelandakh]

is decently paid but not rich.

It is a funny thing but I have learned over time that almost noone likes to announce themselves, or even think of themselves, as rich. Instead you get phrases such as comfortable. This is to a large extent a matter of perspective. As I was growing up, I lived with my divorced mother who was a part-time cleaner. So my perspective on who is poor is perhaps different from the majority of bridge players. Certainly your first family sounds thoroughly middle class to me. They are only working class if you go by the old measure of "working with his hands", which does not hold up in the current economy. The other examples are all people who cannot actually lose their jobs, so again not really high up on the Trump target list. The food stampSNAP families, if they are seeking work and losing out to immigrants, well their private opinions of Trump would be interesting. It would not surprise me if at least one ended up voted for him, even if they were not advertising it to you publicly. What is missing from your list is someone whose job is directly threatened by globilisation or who has security fears and decides a "Daddy" president is required in the current climate. These are prime candidates for the Republicans and there are enough of them in the key states if things run badly for HC.

[Zelandakh]

It is a funny thing but I have learned over time that almost noone likes to announce themselves, or even think of themselves, as rich. Instead you get phrases such as "comfortable". This is to a large extent a matter of perspective. As I was growing up, I lived with my divorced mother who was a part-time cleaner. So my perspective on who is poor is perhaps different from the majority of bridge players. Certainly your first family sounds thoroughly middle class to me. They are only working class if you go by the old measure of "working with his hands", which does not hold up in the current economy. The other examples are all people who cannot actually lose their jobs, so again not really high up on the Trump target list. The food stampSNAP families, if they are seeking work and losing out to immigrants, well their private opinions of Trump would be interesting. It would not surprise me if at least one ended up voted for him, even if they were not advertising it to you publicly. What is missing from your list is someone whose job is directly threatened by globilisation or who has security fears and decides a "Daddy" president is required in the current climate. These are prime candidates for the Republicans and there are enough of them in the key states if things run badly for HC.

[Winstonm]

It is a funny thing but I have learned over time that almost noone likes to announce themselves, or even think of themselves, as rich. Instead you get phrases such as comfortable. This is to a large extent a matter of perspective. As I was growing up, I lived with my divorced mother who was a part-time cleaner. So my perspective on who is poor is perhaps different from the majority of bridge players. Certainly your first family sounds thoroughly middle class to me. They are only working class if you go by the old measure of "working with his hands", which does not hold up in the current economy. The other examples are all people who cannot actually lose their jobs, so again not really high up on the Trump target list. The food stampSNAP families, if they are seeking work and losing out to immigrants, well their private opinions of Trump would be interesting. It would not surprise me if at least one ended up voted for him, even if they were not advertising it to you publicly. What is missing from your list is someone whose job is directly threatened by globilisation or who has security fears and decides a "Daddy" president is required in the current climate. These are prime candidates for the Republicans and there are enough of them in the key states if things run badly for HC.

 

I doubt these people look at the economic impact of their votes - what they look at is their lives and how they feel. They are afraid and insecure about their futures. According to this notion, severe fear and anxiety translate into support for an authority figure such as Trump.

 

MacWilliams studies authoritarianism — not actual dictators, but rather a psychological profile of individual voters that is characterized by a desire for order and a fear of outsiders. People who score high in authoritarianism, when they feel threatened, look for strong leaders who promise to take whatever action necessary to protect them from outsiders and prevent the changes they fear.

 

....He polled a large sample of likely voters, looking for correlations between support for Trump and views that align with authoritarianism. What he found was astonishing: Not only did authoritarianism correlate, but it seemed to predict support for Trump more reliably than virtually any other indicator.

 

I think it is pretty simple. If Trump is elected, the terrorists have won.

[cherdano]

Hillary will be a fine president, but I'm glad Bernie pulled her to the left on a few issues and I hope she will stick to them.

Ok that works for me. To add another thing that we probably agree on, DWS getting pushed out is fine by me - although I would have preferred if it had happened without Russian hackers leaking emails and Wikileaks's mission creep (wasn't it originally about government transparency?).

[billw55]

No, I don't think those voters will change their minds, but I do look for a substantial amount of voter turnout from those who normally don't vote or who would normally vote Republican being spurred to turn out and vote for Clinton in order to prevent a Trump presidency.

The crazier Trump projects himself, the greater the likelihood of spurring these folks to action against him, IMO.

I wonder. Clinton holds a special hate among Rs. An R who dislikes Trump enough might have voted for O'Malley or Warren or even Sanders (barely), but almost never Clinton. Consider a simple voter spectrum in three bins:

 

vote R --- don't vote --- vote D

 

I suspect that more than ever before, voters will change bins - but only by one step. Any of the four possible steps, but never two steps across from voting one way to voting the other.

[Winstonm]

I wonder. Clinton holds a special hate among Rs. An R who dislikes Trump enough might have voted for O'Malley or Warren or even Sanders (barely), but almost never Clinton. Consider a simple voter spectrum in three bins:

 

vote R --- don't vote --- vote D

 

I suspect that more than ever before, voters will change bins - but only by one step. Any of the four possible steps, but never two steps across from voting one way to voting the other.

 

I agree with this. I've never grasped the rights wing's vitriol for HC other than her not being one of them. It may be that simple. To me they have created a straw (wo)man and then hanged her in effigy; to them, it may be she represents the enemy - change.

 

None of this explains Trump, though. This cannot be about right and left, Republicans and Democrats, as Trump shows no consistent path. His claim is simply that of a strongman - we're in danger and I am the one who can save you.

 

Despite Kenbergs reservations, I believe this time the social scientists explain this phenomenon better than anyone else - almost too well for our own good because there can be no room for reasoning when a visceral reaction is transpiring.

[Winstonm]

Accidental double post.

[kenberg]

It is a funny thing but I have learned over time that almost noone likes to announce themselves, or even think of themselves, as rich. Instead you get phrases such as comfortable. This is to a large extent a matter of perspective. As I was growing up, I lived with my divorced mother who was a part-time cleaner. So my perspective on who is poor is perhaps different from the majority of bridge players. Certainly your first family sounds thoroughly middle class to me. They are only working class if you go by the old measure of "working with his hands", which does not hold up in the current economy. The other examples are all people who cannot actually lose their jobs, so again not really high up on the Trump target list. The food stampSNAP families, if they are seeking work and losing out to immigrants, well their private opinions of Trump would be interesting. It would not surprise me if at least one ended up voted for him, even if they were not advertising it to you publicly. What is missing from your list is someone whose job is directly threatened by globilisation or who has security fears and decides a "Daddy" president is required in the current climate. These are prime candidates for the Republicans and there are enough of them in the key states if things run badly for HC.

 

I have thought some about this as well. Here is one divide. If we look back on our childhood with, for the most part, pleasure then we think of this as normal. This is the case with me. A friend grew up living in one place after another, often moving just ahead of the rent collector. This seems awful. My life seems normal. I think that the key difference is anxiety. I never had any doubt about having a home to live in.

 

Some of what I was hearing in the convention speeches seemed to be trying to get at this, at least a little. There is something basic in life that people need, and really we all know they need it if we just think about it. Again I think Biden had a useful start. I don't recall the exact words but he was suggesting we think of what we learned as children. A good idea, I think. We understand these fundamentals if we just think bout them

[kenberg]

I just brought home some wine. Becky greeted this with the observation that we are now prepared for convention watching. Maybe I should have bought vodka. Forward! Always forward!

[Zelandakh]

I just brought home some wine. Becky greeted this with the observation that we are now prepared for convention watching. Maybe I should have bought vodka. Forward! Always forward!

Wine for convention watching, beer for the footy, vodka for hacking into government email systems. B-)

[mike777]

I think many posters here forget that 80-90% of voters who miss a couple of paychecks would be in deep trouble. That causes fear and anxiety. If you miss a couple of paychecks and you lose your home or apt, or car that causes fear. If you miss a couple of paychecks you worry about taking care of your young kids. That is 80%+ of America.

 

My guess is and only a guess that for many posters, the people they are friends with, their loved ones perhaps dont live with this fear and anxiety so they dont fully crasp it. If you and the people you know best can miss a couple paychecks and it is not big deal that is another world for most. They are used to their friends and loved ones owning homes or a car or a cell phone but many dont have these things.

 

As a result these things such as people clinging to their guns and God seem easier to make fun of or look down upon as lower class.

 

 

It is nice to have the luxury to worry about if the Dems want to control our lives and are closet fascists or if the Republicans are racist/bigots and closet fascists.

[PassedOut]

I think many posters here forget that 80-90% of voters who miss a couple of paychecks would be in deep trouble. That causes fear and anxiety. If you miss a couple of paychecks and you lose your home or apt, or car that causes fear. If you miss a couple of paychecks you worry about taking care of your young kids. That is 80%+ of America.

I don't see any evidence that posters here forget that some folks are in that position. But could you supply a link to support your assertion that 80-90% of Americans are in such dire straits? I'd like to see where you came up with those numbers.

[Winstonm]

I think many posters here forget that 80-90% of voters who miss a couple of paychecks would be in deep trouble. That causes fear and anxiety. If you miss a couple of paychecks and you lose your home or apt, or car that causes fear. If you miss a couple of paychecks you worry about taking care of your young kids. That is 80%+ of America.

 

My guess is and only a guess that for many posters, the people they are friends with, their loved ones perhaps dont live with this fear and anxiety so they dont fully crasp it. If you and the people you know best can miss a couple paychecks and it is not big deal that is another world for most. They are used to their friends and loved ones owning homes or a car or a cell phone but many dont have these things.

 

As a result these things such as people clinging to their guns and God seem easier to make fun of or look down upon as lower class.

 

 

It is nice to have the luxury to worry about if the Dems want to control our lives and are closet fascists or if the Republicans are racist/bigots and closet fascists.

 

I think you are right that anxiety and fear is the driving force behind these folks - but I doubt economic fear is the basis for their response. They are looking for safety, just what Trump is promising to deliver.