Hillary 2.0

[dantana]

That’s an interesting perspective. I’m not sure many Trumpers can be swayed. To me at least it seems they have more loyalty to Trump than to the Republican Party or even the conservative movement. To them, voting for a Democrat would be as unpalatable as voting for Satan himself.

In the classes of - red neck, blue collar and so-called country boys, not all of them are idiots. There will be plenty of these, coupled with the undecideds who will vote for the guy who isn't a clownstick. As long as it's a white male.

[drumdude]

That’s an interesting perspective. I’m not sure many Trumpers can be swayed. To me at least it seems they have more loyalty to Trump than to the Republican Party or even the conservative movement. To them, voting for a Democrat would be as unpalatable as voting for Satan himself.

In the classes of - red neck, blue collar and so-called country boys, not all of them are idiots. There will be plenty of these, coupled with the undecideds who will vote for the guy who isn't a clownstick. As long as it's a white male.

I agree, voting for a woman of color is a big problem for a lot of these guys unfortunately.

[honorentheos]

Sorry, I misread. The “ideal” Democratic candidate is a unicorn. When a party has a broad and diverse base, the best candidate is most likely to be a compromise that fires no one’s vision of “ideal.” I can almost guarantee that my ideal candidate would win few, if any, EVs.

I'm not with you on this one Res. I think the Democrats could run PeeWee effing Herman in his coffin and not lose a single Democrat vote. It's the Twump base that need to be appealed to. The ones that can be swung over by posting up the perfect hybrid. A big, brash, good-looking white guy. A cross between Fetterman, Shapiro and Newsome.

He must be out there somewhere. Go find him as... we're probably gonna need him in about 4.

Moral Foundation Theory suggests those who identify as conservative place high importance on loyalty while progressives don't.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_f ... ons_theory

The Democrats historically have a harder time lining up behind the party candidate than Republicans. In fact the general unity of the party behind Jeffries is one of the bigger surprises of the current Congress.

[honorentheos]

That’s an interesting perspective. I’m not sure many Trumpers can be swayed. To me at least it seems they have more loyalty to Trump than to the Republican Party or even the conservative movement. To them, voting for a Democrat would be as unpalatable as voting for Satan himself.

In the classes of - red neck, blue collar and so-called country boys, not all of them are idiots. There will be plenty of these, coupled with the undecideds who will vote for the guy who isn't a clownstick. As long as it's a white male.

[ceeboo]

Moral Foundation Theory suggests those who identify as conservative place high importance on loyalty while progressives don't.

honor's Moral Foundation Theory?

Lol.

[Res Ipsa]

Sorry, I misread. The “ideal” Democratic candidate is a unicorn. When a party has a broad and diverse base, the best candidate is most likely to be a compromise that fires no one’s vision of “ideal.” I can almost guarantee that my ideal candidate would win few, if any, EVs.

I'm not with you on this one Res. I think the Democrats could run PeeWee effing Herman in his coffin and not lose a single Democrat vote. It's the Twump base that need to be appealed to. The ones that can be swung over by posting up the perfect hybrid. A big, brash, good-looking white guy. A cross between Fetterman, Shapiro and Newsome.

He must be out there somewhere. Go find him as... we're probably gonna need him in about 4.

Harris is already losing lots of votes from the Progressive Wing of her party. That’s exactly the problem the Democrats face — when you have a broad based, diverse coalition that makes up your party, you need all the votes. It’s only because Trump presents such a dire threat to our system of government that Harris can reach out to non-Trump Relief Society with having the entire progressive wing head for the exits.

It’s only because Trump is so off the charts horrible for the future of our country that I’ve never bothered to talk about my view of Biden and Harris. In my opinion they’ve badly fumbled on several issues that will be biting the US for, perhaps, the rest of my life. So, if we had an election where the R candidate wasn’t talking a wrecking ball to my country, I’d have happily supported a decent progressive candidate over Biden or Harris. I might have cast a protest vote in the final regardless.

But the Relief Society took that option away by backing the same anti-American, anti-democracy fascist who pissed all over my vote for the guy that won the last election. I have exactly no hesitation in using my vote to make sure the sonofabitch who deliberately sabotaged disaster relief efforts to my fellow Americans who lost everything — who lost homes, friends, and family and were isolated by flooded and destroyed roads and bridges. The guy who took one of circumstances that bring out the very best in Americans — events when we become those best selves that aspires to be — and to a giant crap in middle of it. Because turning things and people to crap is his special talent.

Ever since the inception of the Southern Strategy and the subsequent rise of the political religious right, the Republican Party played Lucy and the football with its Charlie Brown right wing. Except, starting with the Tea Party, Charlie Brown seized the ball and took over the game.

The progressive Ds are still Charlie Brown, with Lucy delivering us a severe scolding when we try to, you know, get something for our support of the mainstream Democrats. The most ridiculous Big Lie out there is that folks like Clinton, Biden and Harris are anything other than middle of the road Ds.

That’s the practical problem that the Democrats have with holding their voting coalition together. And losing progressive wing would be a horrible trade off. Progressives and progressive organizations work their butts off in elections in a that I doubt liberal republicans ever would.

And, look, I don’t have a litmus test in terms of race or sex of a candidate, but if your message is that only white mean can save the Democratic Party, you can kiss the mainstream Democratic base goodbye.

[honorentheos]

Moral Foundation Theory suggests those who identify as conservative place high importance on loyalty while progressives don't.

honor's Moral Foundation Theory?

Lol.

Copying off people is a step up in the quality of your "discourse", I'll give you that.

[ceeboo]

honor's Moral Foundation Theory?

Lol.

Copying off people is a step up in the quality of your "discourse", I'll give you that.

Give me some credit, most people wouldn't dare question and/or laugh at a post that was authored by someone as supremely enlightened as you.

honor's Moral Foundation Theory (with a wiki link to boot) LOL!

[Jersey Girl]

Moral Foundation Theory suggests those who identify as conservative place high importance on loyalty while progressives don't.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_f ... ons_theory

The Democrats historically have a harder time lining up behind the party candidate than Republicans. In fact the general unity of the party behind Jeffries is one of the bigger surprises of the current Congress.

honor just did a quick scan of the page on this. It's a response against all the stage theorists I'm familiar with so a competing theory. Thank you for giving me something new to consider!

I doubt I'll ever give up my support of constructivist theory. That said, it's refreshing to see new food for thought!

You know, thinking. Some folks would do well to take a crack at that.

[honorentheos]

Copying off people is a step up in the quality of your "discourse", I'll give you that.

Give me some credit, most people wouldn't dare question and/or laugh at a post that was authored by someone as supremely enlightened as you.

honor's Moral Foundation Theory (with a wiki link to boot) LOL!

So, how would you distinguish an argument supporting agnostic human rights apply in the case of a same-sex couple or transgender person from an argument that it is about the person being transgender or privileging same-sex marriage?

And, does that distinction matter to you?