Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alex MG who wrote (283601)	11/22/2015 8:27:59 AM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 540755

if Louisiana can elect a Dem Gov then Hillary is a shoe-in for POTUS That isn't true at all. Edwards didn't win, Vitter lost. Vitter alienated too large a number of Republicans to win that race and is probably in trouble next year in his reelection race for Senate. He plausibly will even face a primary and lose there. If Democrats believe what you say above or believe Koan when he says that the Democratic party will definitely win back the Senate and the Presidency in 2016 (or however it is that he has put it) and get in any way complacent, they will lose in 2016 for sure. And lose big. The news cycle is getting worse for Democrats, not better, and that is a huge factor in which party will win in a winner-take-all electoral system such as ours. Here, for example, is an analysis by a right-wing blogger of positions that the parties take and will be branded with over the next year: In recent days, Democrats have blasted Republicans on a number of issues, staking out positions that have one thing in common: they are unpopular with voters. The DNC put out an ad attacking Republicans for talking about “radical Islamic terrorism,” which the Democrats said was “inciting fear.” Just one problem: 60% of voters say we are at war with radical Islamic terrorism. Then there are the Syrian refugees. President Obama says it is un-American to oppose importing thousands of Syrian refugees, above and beyond current limits, and Harry Reid says he will block any effort to “pause” the importation of Syrian refugees. But 63% of voters oppose Obama’s refugee plan. Apparently a large majority of Americans are un-American. Then there are the ridiculous protests that have riled American college and university campuses. President Obama praised the activists who shut down the University of Missouri, and other Democrats have generally been supportive of such protests. But voters hate them; for instance, residents of Missouri disapprove of the demonstrations at their university by more than three to one. More broadly, public disgust with the Black Lives Matter movement and the national anti-police campaign will hurt Democrats at the polls next year, perhaps fatally. It’s a novel strategy, not just taking unpopular positions but doing so aggressively, stridently and contemptuously. Who knows, maybe it will work. But I doubt it. These things can change, but they can change for worse as well as for the better. In a electorate that is primed for fear, who the candidate actually is matters less than how the candidate is branded. Democrats may be proud of being more "nuanced" than Republicans, but everyone only gets one vote that counts the same as everyone else's one vote, whether it is based on nuance or not. Democrats need to figure out better ways of talking about the issues of the refugees and terrorism by people claiming to be Muslims or they may very well lose the election, no matter who the Rs run.