• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

Everybody Hates Donald

Donald Trump Shrug

A new poll from the Associated Press shows that Americans really, really don’t like Donald Trump:

WASHINGTON (AP) — For Americans of nearly every race, gender, political persuasion and location, disdain for Donald Trump runs deep, saddling the Republican front-runner with unprecedented unpopularity as he tries to overcome recent campaign setbacks.

Seven in 10 people, including close to half of Republican voters, have an unfavorable view of Trump, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll. It’s an opinion shared by majorities of men and women; young and old; conservatives, moderates and liberals; and whites, Hispanics and blacks — a devastatingly broad indictment of the billionaire businessman.

Even in the South, a region where Trump has won GOP primaries decisively, close to 70 percent view him unfavorably. And among whites without a college education, one of Trump’s most loyal voting blocs, 55 percent have a negative opinion.

Trump still leads the Republican field in delegates and has built a loyal following with a steady share of the Republican primary electorate. But the breadth of his unpopularity raises significant questions about how he could stitch together enough support in the general election to win the White House.

It also underscores the trouble he may still face in the Republican race, which appears headed to a contested convention where party insiders would have their say about who will represent the GOP in the fall campaign.

“He’s at risk of having the nomination denied to him because grass-roots party activists fear he’s so widely disliked that he can’t possibly win,” said Ari Fleischer, a former adviser to President George W. Bush.

Beyond their generally negative perception of Trump, large majorities also said they would not describe him as civil, compassionate or likable. On nearly all of these measures, Trump fared worse than his remaining Democratic or Republican rivals.

Not that voters have all that much love for those rivals. But their negative perceptions don’t match the depth of the distaste for Trump. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who is seeking to catch Trump in the Republican delegate count, is viewed unfavorably by 59 percent, while 55 percent have negative views of Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

Another problem for Trump is that his public perception seems to be getting worse. The number of Americans who view him unfavorably has risen more than 10 percentage points since mid-February, a two-month stretch that has included some of his biggest primary victories but also an array of stumbles that suggested difficulties with his campaign organization and a lack of policy depth.

With numbers like this, the first instinct of even the amateur political analyst is to assume that Trump is essentially doomed, if not in the fight for the Republican nomination then at least in any General Election battle with the likely Democratic Presidential nominee. Indeed, when you look at the head-to-head polling, Trump loses decisively to both Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders, by a wider margin than Ted Cruz does against either candidate, and in contrast to Ohio Governor John Kasich who leads  Clinton and is far more competitive against Sanders, although that may largely be attributable to the fact that he is relatively unknown. In any case, when a candidate has negatives this high, the logical conclusion is that they aren’t going to go very far and that they are eventually headed toward ignominious defeat.

There’s just one problem, and it lies in the fact that the 2016  campaign has defied logic in almost every respect. Virtually from the time that he has entered the race last June, Donald Trump has had incredibly high negatives among voters in general and Republican voters in particular. Over the course of the pre-primary period that stretched through the end of January, Trump managed to find ways to insult about Mexicans, John McCainMegyn Kelly, Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson, a disabled New York Times reporter, and Muslims, each time leading to speculation that he had, finally, gone “too far” and brought upon himself the point at which voters would start looking at other candidates. Instead of losing support after incidents like this, though, Trump typically ended up gaining support and he’s gone on to win a solid plurality of the delegates at stake so far, gained about a 2,000,000 vote margin in the popular vote, and won 19 of the 32 states in which contests have been held so far. All of this while unfavorable ratings of 60% or higher hung over his head. Given that, the fact that those numbers have ticked up slightly doesn’t strike me as being particularly relevant, because the people who are supporting Trump seem to be supporting him notwithstanding the fact that they may not like him personally.

This isn’t to say that I think that Trump has a realistic chance of winning the General Election in the fall if he becomes the Republican nominee. The Democratic advantage in the Electoral College, combined with the problems that a Republican Party led by Donald Trump is likely to have attracting minority voters, argues strongly that Trump would perform no better in the Electoral College than John McCain did in 2008, and possibly worse in that he could put states such as Missouri and Georgia into play for the first time in years. As far as the remaining battle for the Republican nomination goes, though, I suspect the fact that Trump isn’t very well-liked isn’t necessarily going to hurt him in the manner that conventional wisdom would indicate. Indeed, given the odd ways that Republican Party base, it may actually end up helping him.

Related Posts:

  • None Found

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. SC_Birdflyte says:

    I think popular perceptions of how the economy is doing will play a much more important part in determining how well Trump does (if he’s the nominee). We might recall that the two largest popular-vote percentage winners in my lifetime, LBJ (1964) and Nixon (1972) weren’t all that well liked by the voters. They won nonetheless, in large part because the economy flourished in both years.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. al-Ameda says:

    @SC_Birdflyte:

    We might recall that the two largest popular-vote percentage winners in my lifetime, LBJ (1964) and Nixon (1972) weren’t all that well liked by the voters. They won nonetheless, in large part because the economy flourished in both years.

    I believe they won because their respective opposition candidates were so weak.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @SC_Birdflyte:

    Eh, maybe. I think it’s far more likely that LBJ won due to residual sentiment re: Kennedy, and Nixon won primarily because McGovern was an epic disaster train wreck of a candidate.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. CSK says:

    Trumpkins see his gross defects of character and intellect as signs of his strength and forthrightness, which I suppose is how they rationalize those same gross defects in themselves: “I’m not a racist, misogynist, ignoramus slob–I’m a straight shooter who takes no guff!’

    Trumpkins have merged their identities with that of their savior, much as they did with Palin (it’s by and large the same group.) As one of them said, “If you attack Trump, you attack me.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Joe says:

    Are assholes a poling demographic? I think Trump would have very low unfavorable ratings among assholes. Why does the media always hide this information?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Pch101 says:

    The obvious flaw of these Democratic Candidate vs. Republican Candidate polls is that the US will have 51 presidential elections on the first Tuesday of November, and those polls can’t possibly tell about the distribution of those choices among the 51.

    What is less obvious is that most people aren’t paying that much attention to politics and those who pay the least amount of attention are the most likely to change their minds. It’s just too early and the issue too theoretical — this won’t seem real until sometime after the convention is over.

    I suspect that most committed Republicans will vote for the Republican nominee, regardless of who it is. The question is whether enough of them will defect that it could make any difference. Where this might help is in some swing states such as Florida, Ohio or Colorado, but that won’t be reflected in the national numbers. So we’re back to the US having 51 elections, and with only some of the 51 being real contests.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @Pch101:

    with only some of the 51 being real contests.

    Exactly. I see no states which Obama won in 2012 that are in realistic danger of being flipped by Donald Trump heading the Republican ticket.

    On the other hand, I see several states which Romney won in 2012 which Trump being the headliner conceivably puts into real danger for the Republicans. Missouri? North Carolina? Potentially Georgia & Arizona (despite being regarded as Republican strongholds, Romney ran less than 54% in both states). 152,432 votes would have flipped Georgia. 46,003 votes would have flipped NC.

    It’s not difficult to see why the GOP establishment is so anti-Trump. They see the writing on the proverbial wall, even if a decent sized chunk of their base is urging Captain Smith to increase the speed.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Tony W says:

    Trump has been ‘winning’ races that are extremely non-representative of the general population.

    Convincing 30% of an irrational and fact-free population to vote for you is an entire different prospect from convincing a plurality of Americans to vote for you.

    Yet, I still hope Cruz wins the nomination. He is even crazier than Trump, but we can shut down this ridiculous meme of insufficiently conservative candidates running.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. gVOR08 says:

    @Tony W: Also – Trump’s appeal is pretty focused on angry white people. Everybody talks about this being the year of the angry voter, but I see polls saying no, the electorate overall is no more angry than usual and Dems and independents aren’t particularly angry. It’s hard to see how he can change his shtick to appeal to voters outside the GOP base.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. CSK says:

    @gVOR08:

    He can’t change it. In the first place, he’s probably not capable of so doing, and in the second, he’d lose what support he has if he did change.

    Interesting side note: I saw a comment from a Trump fan this morning that explains a lot of his appeal to those to whom he appeals. The person (a self-identified angry white male) said that the country was beyond saving, but that Trump would bring “judgment” down on those in Washington who had destroyed it. He got a lot of cheers and agreement for saying that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. gVOR08 says:

    @CSK: This is the thing I find so amazing. I look around me I see the safest, richest, most powerful country that has ever existed, with impressive personal and political freedom and a President who’s reasonable and moderate almost to a fault. Even making allowances for living in a declining suburb or small town in the rustbelt or rural south, where is this apocalypse these people see?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Tony W: You don’t think that conservatives will throw Cruz under the bus as a RINO if he loses in November? Or is the “we” in your statement the people who already have dispensed with the insufficiently conservative meme?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. CSK says:

    @gVOR08:

    I went back and looked at the comment I cited. According to this guy, “our freedoms, our money, our values, our culture, and our constitution” have stolen by Democrats and Republicans.

    That’s what a Trump supporter sees.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Just Another Ex-Republican says:

    @CSK

    I went back and looked at the comment I cited. According to this guy, “our freedoms, our money, our values, our culture, and our constitution” have stolen by Democrats and Republicans.

    That’s what thirty years of deliberately lying to cynically get votes ends up doing. No one has treated the Republican base with more contempt than the Republican establishment, who apparently are shocked–shocked(!), I tell you, that their supporters were listening to them screeching about how horrible government in general and Democrats in particular are all this time, and are now frustrated and infuriated that nothing is being done about those (mostly fictional) problems. Meanwhile the Republican establishment did get most of what they actually do care about (free trade and low tax rates) the last 30 years, and deluded themselves into thinking their base cared about the same things (even as they fed them a steady diet of culture war/govt is evil BS).

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. J-Dub says:

    It’s hard to decide what I would rather see, The Donald get denied at the Republican convention or get destroyed in the general election.

    If Trump gets denied at the convention in favor of Cruz then we might get the best of both worlds. A riot at the convention followed be a huge loss by Cruz in the general. How does the party survive both?

    The Trumpster Fire burns on…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. J-Dub says:

    @Just Another Ex-Republican: My favorite is the Republican elite convincing their base that unions are evil. Now that same base is wondering why their pay has been stagnent for 30+ years, if they still have a job at all.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. Pch101 says:

    @J-Dub:

    While I would be pleased for the GOP to suffer the kind of defeat that would force them to reinvent themselves, I doubt that such an opportunity exists. The various factions will simply make excuses and continue to blame everyone but themselves for their failings.

    Republicans love to talk about accountability, but it applies only to other people.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Slugger says:

    Let’s not be so fast to dismiss Trump’s supporters as crazies. If you work in agriculture, mechanization and foreign workers have made you redundant. If you work as a blue collar industrial worker, jobs are down, and all regular politicians are for the TPP which seems likely to decrease US production. If you are a white collar worker, there is a good chance that suddenly you are not working for ACME corp anymore but for Outside Consultant Services, and your job security is gone along with benefits like vacation, sick pay, etc, since you are now a “consultant.” If you work in retail, good luck getting by on what Walmart pays. “Conservative ” professors tell you that this is the working of the sacred invisible hand of economics, and “liberal” professors say that you are racist redneck long overdue for your comeuppance.
    I think that Trump has no answers for these problems, but he does serve as a lightning rod. I would love to hear real answers to real problems from the other aspirants.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. gVOR08 says:

    @J-Dub:

    It’s hard to decide what I would rather see, The Donald get denied at the Republican convention or get destroyed in the general election.

    I vote general election. A) In case of mischance, Trump scares me a lot less than Cruz does. B) If he’s destroyed in the general, it will be by women voters, which would be delicious irony. Whichever happens, POLITICO should be forced to run ten stories a day on his fall, like they did on his rise.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Neil Hudelson says:

    @HarvardLaw92:

    Add Indiana into that mix as well:
    -Obama won it in 08.
    -Donnelly won the Senate seat in the 2010 Republican Wave year.
    -Pence’s major missteps (Marriage Ban, RFRA, Syrian Refugees, and now the Abortion Bill) has created an incredibly forceful “Pence Must Go” movement.

    If either Trump or Cruz are the nominees, Pence is automatically tied to them policy wise, and vice versa. Which helps neither.

    Even if the Hoosier state doesn’t flip, its going to be competitive, which means the GOP will have to dump money into what should be a cakewalk.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. Pete S says:

    @Pch101: I have always found that organizations which talk about “accountability” a lot usually mean what used to be called “scapegoating”. The only modern difference is that the scapegoat is supposed to smile and agree that it really is their fault.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. gVOR08 says:

    @J-Dub: That. They see that teachers get paid better because teachers have a union. And instead of saying, “I need a union”, they say, “We gotta take the union away from those uppity teachers.” Gobsmacking. Some people don’t deserve to be helped.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. Jenos Idanian says:

    My, my, my. Funny how “everyone hates Donald,” but a lot of people like voting for Donald. A hell of a lot more people than those who like voting for the far more “likable” John Kasich.

    What’s my source? The only poll that actually means a damned thing — the one at the ballot boxes and caucus sites.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. Pch101 says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    When you have an insightful comment to make, you be sure to provide plenty of advanced notice so that I can brace myself for the shock.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. Pch101 says:

    @Pete S:

    Those who spend the most time talking about accountability are never to blame for anything.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Pch101: When you have an insightful comment to make, you be sure to provide plenty of advanced notice so that I can brace myself for the shock.

    Better put on your big girl panties, then, ‘cuz I’ll explain why so many people are pissed off about public sector unions. Let me give you a few examples.

    1) Sridhar Boini is a claims judge for the Social Security Administrator. He repeatedly showed up for work drunk and repeatedly sexually harassed and sexually assaulted his co-workers. He fought his dismissal on the grounds of A) plenty of other workers showed up for work drunk and weren’t dismissed, and B) his drinking and sexual assaults qualified as a “disability” and he should be accommodated by being allowed to telecommute. His union backed him up.

    2) At Veterans Administration hospitals across the nation, veterans were denied care for months on end or even longer, leading to several deaths. The workers not only let that happen, but worked out systems to cover up their malfeasance and committed outright fraud to hide the intolerable waits vulnerable veterans suffered. Not a single official was fired. Several were actually promoted in the wake of their wrongdoings. And their unions backed them up.

    3) ATF officials set up a gun-running “sting” operation that not only allowed, but encouraged illegal guns sales to shills for Mexican gun cartels. I put the scare quotes on “sting” because the plan had absolutely no provision for recovering the guns. It had no plans for tracking the guns once they crossed the border. It didn’t even bother to tell the Mexican government that we were aiding the drug cartels to get weapons across the border. Not a single official was ever disciplined for that operation.

    4) At the Gold King Mine in Colorado, engineers working in the mine accidentally dumped over 3 million gallons of highly toxic waste water into a tributary of the Animas River. They didn’t bother to tell state officials in Colorado and New Mexico (downstream of the toxic spill) about the accident until the day after. The EPA was immediately on top of this disaster because it was the EPA and their employees that caused the spill. Astonishingly, not a single official has been disciplined for poisoning those waters.

    In each of these cases, the persons who royally screwed up are still on the job. In fact, several were actually promoted afterwards. They are still on the taxpayers’ payroll, and their unions have worked like hell to keep them on the job and safe from consequences of their actions. And those are just four recent examples off the top of my head.

    For some reason, voters seem to think that they, as taxpayers, ought to have some say in how these things are handled. They have this strange belief that “public servants” should be in some way accountable to the “public.”

    This shouldn’t be particularly “insightful.” It should be simple common sense. But considered your deliberately blinkered perceptions, it probably qualifies.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. Jenos Idanian says:

    One more thing, back on topic: it’s amusing to hear all this talk about what a problem Trump is. That betrays such a colossal level of ignorance, it must be deliberate.

    Trump isn’t the problem. Trump is the symptom. Treating him as the problem is incredibly stupid and pointless (but tremendously amusing).

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. Pch101 says:

    Dunning and Kruger would love to meet you.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Pch101: I’d love to meet them. They plagiarized my idea. There’s a certain matter of royalties…

    And I see you found your big-girl panties, but put them on your head. I guess that’s a start…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Pch101: But if you can pry your head out of your snide, why don’t you explain why it’s so wonderful that no one was ever held accountable for those incidents. Please feel free to argue that they weren’t so bad, or were really for the best, or how blaming people for their screwups is racist, or we just haven’t found the right Republicans to blame…

    There, I’ve done half your work for you.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. HarvardLaw92 says:

    Oh look, Jenos is drinking again

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. wr says:

    @Jenos Idanian: And useful idiot Jenos shows how the Republicans do it:

    “Look, ladies and gentlemen — four anecdotes which, if backed up by facts, would show at least four instances of poor behavior by unions. Now you see why you must give up the only force working to keep your wages high and your working conditions decent — because of those four anecdotes.

    Oh, and someone with dark skin got welfare!”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. Jenos Idanian says:

    @HarvardLaw92: I figure if I toss down half a dozen Sam Adams before I start commenting, that makes it about fair.

    Although I feel a bit profligate. You really aren’t worth the good stuff. I should break out the Natural Ice…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. wr says:

    @Jenos Idanian: “But if you can pry your head out of your snide, why don’t you explain why it’s so wonderful that no one was ever held accountable for those incidents.”

    Well it turns out that all the hooha about the VA was a pack of lies spread by agents of the various Koch industries in an attempt to privatize veteran’s care. Washington Monthly published a huge expose — and by the way, none of it has been disproved.

    Of course the press that was busy screaming scandal can’t be bothered to follow up… and dopes like Jenos will wave the bloody flag no matter how many times they’re proved wrong.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. Jenos Idanian says:

    @wr: Look, there’s only room for one drunkard on this thread, and HeyLookAtMeIWentToHarvard handed me the bottles, so knock it off.

    …what? You’re not drunk? You’re just that naturally stupid?

    Maybe I ought to send you some of the Sam Adams. It certainly couldn’t hurt, as you couldn’t get any dumber…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  36. An Interested Party says:

    My, my, my. Funny how “everyone hates Donald,” but a lot of people like voting for Donald.

    Indeed…we’d love to put that to the test in the general election…how about you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  37. Jenos Idanian says:

    @wr: And lay off the Koch. It’ll kill you. Learn from John Belushi, Chris Farley, Whitney Houston, River Phoenix, Scott Weiland…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  38. Jenos Idanian says:

    @An Interested Party: I would find it interesting. The question is, who would he be facing — the champion of an ideology that killed over 100 million people in the 20th century, or the woman in a photo finish with an indictment?

    BTW, I had a chance to vote for Trump. I passed. I found him entertaining and interesting, but thought more of another candidate. But he certainly is the center of gravity in this election…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  39. Pch101 says:

    Jenos, I only read about five words from each the comments from you that I do read (and frankly, that’s about six too many.) So do try to make them count.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  40. Jenos Idanian says:

    @wr: Oh, look, the Koch brothers apparently bought USA Today.

    BTW, the VA where my father died is on the list of facilities that has some of those problems that you say are all faked and cooked up by your obsessions. (For the record, I have no reason to believe his care was in any way substandard, and it was last century, but I was curious.)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  41. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Pch101: Your mental limitations aren’t my problem.

    (Sorry, that was six words. I didn’t care enough to try to pare it down more.)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  42. Davebo says:

    Good God people why do you feed the JenoTroll?

    He’s already said he didn’t vote Trump (but won’t say who he did vote for, ala Doug). I’m guessing a Palin write in protest vote.

    But seriously, after all this time how much self control does it take to ignore him?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  43. Andre Kenji says:

    Trump is the right-wing demagogue that we, in Latin America, know pretty well. Even the supporters are similar.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  44. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Davebo: But seriously, after all this time how much self control does it take to ignore him?

    They’re using all their self control to ignore all the Hillary messes, the nightmare that the alternative is Sanders, and the huge messes Obama’s blessed us with. They don’t have any to spare for little ol’ me.

    But back to the topic at hand… just how do you reconcile “everybody hates Donald” with him racking up over 7.5 million votes (as of March 19, the most recent citation I could find with minimal effort)?

    Like I said, everybody might hate Trump, but a hell of a lot of people like voting for him. By that same source, 1.4 million more than liked voting for Bernie Sanders.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  45. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Andre Kenji: Trump is the right-wing demagogue that we, in Latin America, know pretty well. Even the supporters are similar.

    Using your expertise, how would you compare Sanders to the socialists who’ve sent so many Latin American countries down the toilet? The Castros, the Sandanistas, Hugo Chavez and his successors?

    How about their supporters?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  46. Andre Kenji says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    Using your expertise, how would you compare Sanders to the socialists who’ve sent so many Latin American countries down the toilet?

    The main base of support of Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, the Sandinistas were always low income people. Chavez main social welfare project was named after the Catholic Missions. You´d always see mostly White people protesting against him, and a wave of brown skinned people in his rallies. Anyone that speaks Spanish you´ll note that his speeches were always very simple, very down to Earth.

    Sanders base of support is composed mostly of Middle Class White people. His proposals are aimed at basically at these Middle Class White people. “Free College” does not say a lot for low income people, for instance.

    He is more similar to the far-left candidate that only runs to lose in the first round of voting(That´s very common in countries with runoff elections) than to Hugo Chavez, that used to win elections.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  47. Anjin-san says:

    Shorter Jenos – “Nope, I’m still not any smarter than last time…”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  48. An Interested Party says:

    …the champion of an ideology that killed over 100 million people…

    That’s funny considering he’d be facing someone who is taking his cues out of the playbook of another ideology that also killed millions of people…

    …or the woman in a photo finish with an indictment?

    Oh please, talk about mental limitations…delusions are curable, you know…

    By that same source, 1.4 million more than liked voting for Bernie Sanders.

    Indeed, but 1.1 million less than liked voting for Hillary…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  49. T says:

    @wr:

    show at least four instances of poor behavior by unions

    While happily ignoring environmental catastrophes that could have been prevented if proper regulations and union worker protections had been in place…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  50. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @Davebo:

    The fun thing is that he copy pasted this exact same multipart rant about unions the other day on a different thread and it went nowhere. I guess he’s trying for round two in his never ending effort to provoke a response.

    “Pay attention to me!” is old hat shtick. It’s been done before. He needs some new material.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  51. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @J-Dub: The guy I share an apartment with is staunchly anti-union–in spite of the fact that the only good jobs he ever held were union jobs. Ya just can’t fix that kind of dumb.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  52. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @gVOR08: I remember seeing Lars Larsen (for those who don’t know him, he wishes he was Limbaugh or Hannity) on a CNN panel about the bailouts. When confronted with the possibility that the auto industry was so fragile that there were no buyers for the companies his response was “well, at least we’d be able to get rid of all those high pay jobs.”

    Gobsmacked doesn’t do it justice. What’s beyond gobsmacked?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  53. Grewgills says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    Using your expertise, how would you compare Sanders to the socialists who’ve sent so many Latin American countries down the toilet?

    His policies are more or less main line European style social democratic policies. Last I counted those policies haven’t led any country down the toilet. The excesses of Greece go well beyond Sanders policy proposals which are more in line with France or Germany.

    the champion of an ideology that killed over 100 million people in the 20th century

    Please cite how the social democratic policies of Western Europe have killed over 100 million people over the last century.
    Jesus, are you really that mind bogglingly ignorant or were you just too lazy to put more effort into your trolling today?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  54. anjin-san says:

    @Grewgills:

    Come on, everyone knows universal health care has killed countless millions. And that business with everyone being able to go to college? Maximum body count…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  55. Jenos Idanian says:

    @HeyLookAtMeIWentToHarvard: “cut-pasted?” I went back to the original article and re-summarized. I never went back to my prior comment.

    @Andre Kenji: Do you realize you only quoted the part where I asked you to compare Sanders, then answered the part where I asked you to compare supporters?

    @T: So, what’s the tradeoff? How many theoretical disasters must the government prevent in order to excuse directly causing one?

    @Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker: I have specifically addressed public sector unions here, not unions in general. While I happen to think similarly about private sector unions and public sector unions, I find the public sector ones far more objectionable.

    @Grewgills: Socialism requires the abrogation of certain fundamental human rights. That is part of its definition. “Democratic Socialism” simply explains how it is implemented, it does not change the results. Saying that “Democratic Socialism” is fine is like (to steal a simile) arguing that gang rape is not really rape, because a majority of the participants were willing participants.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  56. Jenos Idanian says:

    @HeyLookAtMeIWentToHarvard: “cut-pasted?” I went back to the original article and re-summarized. I never went back to my prior comment.

    @Andre Kenji: Do you realize you only quoted the part where I asked you to compare Sanders, then answered the part where I asked you to compare supporters?

    @T: So, what’s the tradeoff? How many theoretical disasters must the government prevent in order to excuse directly causing one?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  57. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker: I have specifically addressed public sector unions here, not unions in general. While I happen to think similarly about private sector unions and public sector unions, I find the public sector ones far more objectionable.

    @Grewgills: Socialism requires the abrogation of certain fundamental human rights. That is part of its definition. “Democratic Socialism” simply explains how it is implemented, it does not change the results. Saying that “Democratic Socialism” is fine is like (to steal a simile) arguing that gang rape is not really rape, because a majority of the participants were willing participants.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  58. Jenos Idanian says:

    @anjin-san: You’re too smart to actually confuse “universal health care coverage” with “universal health care that people can actually afford to use,” so I’ll just ignore your latest attempt to troll me off topic.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  59. Andre Kenji says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    Do you realize you only quoted the part where I asked you to compare Sanders, then answered the part where I asked you to compare supporters?

    But in Politics leaders and their base of support are going to be basically the same thing, because leaders are going to try to do what their base of support wants them to do. Sanders has pretty bad ideas on Trade, a general absence of specifics, and his idea of tuition-free college is incredibly regressive(Probably more than most of what Hugo Chavez did), he can and should be attacked on fhat, not with comparisons with World Leaders that are very different from him.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  60. Tillman says:

    @J-Dub: I’m a tad worried about the convention itself, what with that petition to make it an open-carry venue.

    @Neil Hudelson: NC’s taking some inspiration from “Periods for Pence” with “Piss for Pat.” The Dem gubernatorial candidate is also the currently-serving attorney general who’s refused so far to uphold our noxious bathroom ban, and has more name recognition than Walter Dalton ever had. Plus the economic damage to the state, and hope for a competitve NC is not misplaced.

    @Davebo: I’ve found skipping those posts and any post with certain names in it makes longer threads less a waste of time. But it depends wholly on what substances I’m on, so it’s not the greatest rule of thumb.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  61. Tillman says:

    @Grewgills:

    Please cite how the social democratic policies of Western Europe have killed over 100 million people over the last century.

    I think what bothers me is he’s using the same premise Chait did in his opinion pieces on Sanders. It’s obviously wrong — I know Marxists, Marxists think Sanders is a sell-out — but conflating democratic socialism and Stalinism is surprisingly common.

    Try saying “Marxists think Sanders is a sell-out” ten times fast.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  62. wr says:

    @Jenos Idanian: Shorter Jenos: I got nothing except stupid insults. No wonder I love me some Trump.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  63. Barry says:

    @Pch101: “While I would be pleased for the GOP to suffer the kind of defeat that would force them to reinvent themselves, I doubt that such an opportunity exists. The various factions will simply make excuses and continue to blame everyone but themselves for their failings.

    Republicans love to talk about accountability, but it applies only to other people.”

    No matter how bad the defeat, there will be factions who will never admit defeat or failure.

    The important thing is to shrink their numbers and their power.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  64. Barry says:

    @gVOR08: “That. They see that teachers get paid better because teachers have a union. And instead of saying, “I need a union”, they say, “We gotta take the union away from those uppity teachers.” Gobsmacking. Some people don’t deserve to be helped.”

    The overarching theme is that the right doesn’t want to build; it wants to destroy.

    Somebody made the comment that the theme of the GOP leadership used to be ‘we will make your life better’, but now it’s ‘we won’t make your life better, but we will hurt people, and you will get to watch’.

    Which is also Trump’s policy – his tax plan is ‘enrich the rich, and f*ck everybody else’.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  65. Barry says:

    @Jenos Idanian: “My, my, my. Funny how “everyone hates Donald,” but a lot of people like voting for Donald. ”

    Fewer than have voted for Clinton.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  66. Barry says:

    @Jenos Idanian: “In each of these cases, the persons who royally screwed up are still on the job. In fact, several were actually promoted afterwards. They are still on the taxpayers’ payroll, and their unions have worked like hell to keep them on the job and safe from consequences of their actions. And those are just four recent examples off the top of my head.”

    Sounds like CEO’s, except that these people were not given lavish bonuses.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  67. Barry says:

    @Jenos Idanian: “Trump isn’t the problem. Trump is the symptom. Treating him as the problem is incredibly stupid and pointless (but tremendously amusing).”

    I agree with you, for once. Trump is a symptom; people like you are the problem.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  68. gVOR08 says:

    @Barry:

    The important thing is to shrink their numbers and their power.

    Yes. They cannot be persuaded, they can only be marginalized.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  69. gVOR08 says:

    @Slugger: They have real grievances. But their anger is completely misdirected and counterproductive. There are “other aspirants” offering “real answers”, Hillary and Bernie. Unfortunately very partial answers, but answers nonetheless, and way better than anything Trump or any GOP will come up with. The Trumpites should be supporting Dems. As long as they won’t, how do you help them if they won’t help themselves?

    I’d like to see discussion of trade deals become more realistic. This simple trade deals bad/trade deals good doesn’t touch the real issues.
    One – Free trade is good. Pretty much every economist for a hundred years or more agrees.
    Two -These “free trade” deals have little to do with free trade. A free trade bill would be one page saying that until further notice the tariff on goods from the following list of countries is zero.
    Three – despite two, economists generally agree that on balance these deals are good for the country as a whole. Which is not to say they couldn’t be a lot better.
    Four – These deals are really, really good for some Americans and bad for a lot of Americans.
    Five – In a just world the people hurt would receive compensation from the people helped.
    So six – The discussion should be about how to tax the people who are helped and how to effectively help the people who are hurt.

    You should not be able to spend millions of your corporations money lobbying a trade deal, then turn around and say my company’s profits are just the natural workings of the free enterprise system and my enormous compensation is because I’m so special.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  70. Pch101 says:

    @gVOR08:

    The reality is that the US uses imports as a way to export inflation. The US has a consumer-driven economy, and these policies allow consumers to be prosperous by giving them cheap goods to consume.

    The lesson of the 1970s inflation was that the traditional Keynesian economics had not adequately the risk of inflation. Ever since, we have had monetarist policies that are intended to contain inflation.

    But the primary component of inflation is usually wage growth, which creates conundrum: How do we allow people to be prosperous (own a lot of stuff) without creating inflation (paying them more money)? We have arrived at the answer: Load up the consumer with debt and give them cheaper goods, so that they can own the stuff without wage-driven inflation.

    I doubt that most of the populists would prefer the alternative if they had to live with it. For one, the computers that are used to complain about this would cost a lot more than they do. The US’ enormous trade deficit is effectively a lifestyle subsidy.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  71. gVOR08 says:

    @Pch101:

    The lesson of the 1970s inflation was that the traditional Keynesian economics had not adequately the risk of inflation.

    That was the conventional wisdom in the 70s and carries over to now. I don’t claim the expertise to get into the middle of an econ argument, but I see expert commentary saying that is convenient for VSPs who want tight money, but isn’t really true.

    I’m not sure whether you’re arguing that free trade is good or that reduced consumer prices make the benefits more or less uniformly distributed. I would agree with the former, but regard it as irrelevant to the political issue. Much of the electorate do not believe the latter, and I’m inclined to agree with them.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  72. Pch101 says:

    @gVOR08:

    In essence, I am commenting on the Phillips curve, which shows the relationship between unemployment and inflation. Most inflation is caused by wage growth, and wage growth corresponds to excess levels of employment (workers become scarce, so employers bid up wages, which then gives workers too much money to spend, which leads to excess demand, which produces inflation).

    In other words, you can’t just start paying everyone more money across the board without either changing the nature of the workforce (the workers themselves need to become more valuable so that they are worth the extra cash) or else by creating inflation.

    The Keynesians were unprepared for the stagflation that was produced by the OPEC crisis (which was compounded by the collapse of Bretton Woods dollar standard and the failed guns-and-butter policy during the Vietnam war), which led to the shift in central bank policy both in the US and abroad. It’s no coincidence that the trade deficit began to soar in the late 70s and accelerated during the 80s, in spite of (failed) efforts during the Reagan administration to control it via the exchange rate.

    Populists have always been agitated by free trade, but they also wouldn’t particularly like the alternative if they got to experience it. Imagine a system in which ordinary products cost a lot more than they do and the feds had to impose a double-digit federal sales tax in an effort to manage demand. Yes, wages would be rising but the additional cost of those trips to Costco would siphon off a lot of those gains.

    In other words, both alternatives have their advantages and drawbacks. But Americans love to consume, which forces us to pursue these inflation-exporting policies because of all of the stuff that the public wants. I doubt most of these people would want a European-style alternative, which typically involves some combination of higher unemployment, lower wages, higher income and consumption taxes and less of a goods-driven lifestyle as trade-offs for lower trade deficits.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  73. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Barry: Sounds like CEO’s, except that these people were not given lavish bonuses.

    I can see why you’d be more upset about CEOs of private companies enriching themselves at stockholders’ expense than public employees enriching themselves at the public’s expense. Why, that’s so much more outrageous.

    All the CEOs have to do is get their company nationalized, themselves put on the taxpayers’ payroll, and all their problems will just go away!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  74. Grewgills says:

    So, in Jenos world, to illustrate your simile:

    Saying that “Democratic Socialism” is fine is like (to steal a simile) arguing that gang rape is not really rape, because a majority of the participants were willing participants.

    Stalinist USSR is to Merkel’s Germany as
    Rape is to Gang Rape
    This is probably the stupidest thing you have ever typed and perhaps the stupidest thing I have ever read. You have outdone yourself. Congratulations.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  75. anjin-san says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    universal health care that people can actually afford to use

    I will stand by for details about universal health care systems where patients are unable to access care due to the cost.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  76. al-Ameda says:

    @Tillman:

    It’s obviously wrong — I know Marxists, Marxists think Sanders is a sell-out — but conflating democratic socialism and Stalinism is surprisingly common.
    Try saying “Marxists think Sanders is a sell-out” ten times fast.

    You’re dead on.
    This reminds me of conversations I have with my very conservative family members, wherein I bring up universal healthcare systems in the democratic socialist countries of Western Europe (e.g. Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Germany, etc) and a few minutes in I’m being accused of supporting failed Marxist policies.

    Basically, for working class conservative people FoxNews is one-stop shopping for talking points.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  77. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @Tillman:

    but conflating democratic socialism and Stalinism is surprisingly common.

    It’s more than surprisingly common. It’s widespread among the bulk of the electorate, which is why the attacks will resonate. Ask the average voter in Grovers Corners, West Idaho what he thinks about democratic socialism, and his response will likely be “I don’t want no damn communism”.

    The differences between Stalinism, Marxism, Marx-Leninism, socialism, democratic socialism, etc. are all very legitimate. They’re also somewhat esoteric, and our guy in West Idaho is going to lump them all under the roof that he’s familiar with – communism. Worse, if you try to explain the difference, odds are that you’re only going to annoy him.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  78. humanoid.panda says:

    @HarvardLaw92: Right, and worse: if you try to make things simple, and explain by democratic socialism, you just mean Western Europe, he has 20 years’ worth systematic demonization of Europe lodged in his skull..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  79. jukeboxgrad says:

    It’s more than surprisingly common. It’s widespread among the bulk of the electorate.

    Citation needed.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  80. Andre Kenji says:

    Marxism is not a system of government. It´s a school of economic, a school of Philosophy and a Theory of History. An academic can use Marx Theory to analyse History and not support Political Socialism in any sense.

    And to me the “socialist” label is the lesser vulnerability of Bernie Sanders. His main problem is that he is promising TONS of spending.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  81. Matt says:

    @Andre Kenji: And cuts

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  82. Kylopod says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    What’s my source? The only poll that actually means a damned thing — the one at the ballot boxes and caucus sites.

    “The only poll that actually means a damned thing” is just a version of the phrase “the only poll that counts” (and its close variant “the only poll that matters”), which is apparently such a well-worn cliche in politics that there is even a Wikipedia article on it and an extended discussion of the phrase in a book by the political scientist Herb Asher. Looking on Google, I see the phrase has been used:

    — by supporters of Mitt Romney in 2012
    — by a spokesman for former Maryland governor Bob Ehrlich when challenging Martin O’Malley for reelection in 2010. (O’Malley went on to win reelection by 56.2-41.8%.)
    — by Meg Whitman when running for CA governor against Jerry Brown. (Brown went on to win 53.8-40.9%.)
    — by Senator Mary Landrieu in her doomed bid for reelection in 2014.
    — according to Wikipedia, President Ford frequently used the phrase in 1976, as did President Carter four years later.

    Notice any pattern here?

    The phrase, in fact, is based on a fundamental fallacy. Like many slogans, it hides behind vague terminology to cover up sloppy thinking. It is true that the ballot box is “the only poll that counts” in the sense that it’s the only poll that directly determines who wins that election. But the phrase is being used to imply something different: that it is the only poll that gives any useful information about the electorate worth paying attention to. That’s why the phrase became so popular among losing candidates and their supporters: it provided them with an excuse to ignore any empirical data from public opinion surveys and to place their faith entirely in what had yet to happen on Election Day.

    But your argument is even worse than that, because it fails even by this dumb, delusional standard. It should be obvious that winning primaries within one’s own party is no sign of popularity with the broader electorate. (Ask President George McGovern.) But Trump hasn’t even broken 50% in a single state he has won so far. In other words, in all the states that have held primaries and caucuses so far, a majority of Republicans have voted for someone other than Trump. If this trend continues (he has a chance of breaking 50% in his home state of New York), he will become officially the least popular nominee within his own party (not to speak of the broader electorate) since the beginning of the primary/caucus era in the 1970s.

    You are free to plug your ears to the implications of this, just as you plug your ears to the results of scientific surveys of the general populace, and to treat “winning” like it’s some magical concept that can be considered on its own terms without taking into account any of the details or context of the “win.” But don’t ask us to be sympathetic when reality comes back to bite you in November.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  83. An Interested Party says:

    His main problem is that he is promising TONS of spending.

    No, his problem is that he is promising TONS of tax increases…Americans LOVE spending as long as it is spent on them and people like them and as long as they don’t have to pay too much for it…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  84. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @humanoid.panda:

    And that would lead to?

    Republicans rolling out ads explaining what a person in Europe (they’d almost certainly use Denmark as their example) pays in taxes under democratic socialism. Indeed Sanders own tax proposals result in a single person with no kids who earns minimum wage paying $1,630 more in taxes than they already do. People would be fleeing for the exits.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  85. HarvardLaw92 says:

    Citation needed.

    Head to any average town in Middle America and ask people on the street what they think about democratic socialism.

    Just be sure to wear your shoulder pads and a cup when you do …

    Even if you successfully explain the difference, you’re still left with higher taxes. That’s certainly a plan for victory & convincing people to vote for you :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  86. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @An Interested Party:

    Americans love spending that somebody else pays for. They get testy about having to pay for it themselves.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  87. jukeboxgrad says:

    Head to any average town in Middle America and ask people on the street

    I’m sorry you’re so confused. Finding evidence to support claims made by you is your responsibility, not mine. You should ask Harvard for a refund, because this is something basic they forgot to teach you.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  88. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Jenos Idanian: At the risk of starting a flame war, please note that my comment was not directed at anything you said–or was even said by anyone else after you entered the conversation. I don’t care what you think about anything. Please do not enter comment threads that are not about you at all as if they were. BTW, you said the same thing two comments ago–repeating yourself doesn’t help your point.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  89. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Tillman: The open-carry venue thing was the only part of the plans for the GOP convention so far that had held any promise, but the Secret Service put the kibosh on that from what I heard. I’m shocked the Republicans would tolerate such an abridgement of their constitutional rights and hope that they will come strapped anyway as a protest against tyranny.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  90. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @HarvardLaw92: Your analogy will work better if you start talking about “North Idaho” instead of “West Idaho.” There isn’t any “West Idaho” because of the panhandle. The western part below “North Idaho” is “Southwestern Idaho.”

    Also, because Southwestern Idaho has universities, the conversation you describe is less likely to happen there. Boise–meh, not so much. Metaline–now you’re talkin’!”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  91. HarvardLaw92 says:

    I’m sorry you’re so confused. Finding evidence to support claims made by you is your responsibility, not mine. You should ask Harvard for a refund, because this is something basic they forgot to teach you.

    Sorry, not taking the bait. Seek joy elsewhere, flame warrior :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  92. jukeboxgrad says:

    Sorry, not taking the bait.

    Supporting your claims with evidence is not “taking the bait.” It’s demonstrating that you have something to present other than pure wind.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  93. HarvardLaw92 says:

    See previous comment. You forget, I know your shtick. Seek joy elsewhere, flame warrior

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  94. jukeboxgrad says:

    I know your shtick.

    My “shtick” is to support my claims with evidence, and to notice when someone else refuses to do the same. That’s you.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  95. HarvardLaw92 says:

    While you’re at it, maybe you should support this claim:

    Cars built in the US embody the cost of health care for the employees who built the car. This makes those cars uncompetitive in the export market.

    Since BMW and Mercedes-Benz clearly prove you wrong. Where is your evidence that cars built is the US can’t be profitable in the export market?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  96. jukeboxgrad says:

    Try posting in the correct thread.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  97. HarvardLaw92 says:

    Nah, I’d much rather point out that you’re full of shit on multiple threads.

    And where’s your evidence?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  98. Mikey says:

    @HarvardLaw92: I’m wondering if whoever posted that understands how universal coverage is funded in Germany. There, half the cost of health insurance is borne by employers.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  99. jukeboxgrad says:

    where’s your evidence?

    In the correct thread.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  100. Pch101 says:

    The American auto industry developed during a time when high import tariffs were the norm, plus the US has always had relatively low fuel taxes, which encouraged Americans to have differing taste in cars.

    The US auto industry was oriented toward domestic production for those reasons. When Ford and GM entered Germany in the 1920s, it wasn’t because of healthcare costs. Their decision to not export F-150s to Europe is certainly not because of healthcare costs. If anything, the Germans are attracted to the US by its relatively low labor costs, combined with the proximity to a market that leads the way in SUVs.

    (My apologies for bringing factual points into the thread.)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  101. HarvardLaw92 says:

    @Mikey:

    Facts mean nothing to the Flame Warrior, Mikey. He’s just here to try to demonstrate how superior he [thinks] he is.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  102. HarvardLaw92 says:

    He seems to have fled for the moment. No doubt he’ll be returning at some arcane hour to drop a few comments in at end in order to try to get the last word.

    That’s another tactic he’s well known for …

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  103. Andre Kenji says:

    In major markets, cars are generally built locally, because there are lots of political pressure, tariffs and tax incentives to do so. Healthcare might be a problem for many employers in the US, but cars are generally a bad example of anything in manufacturing precisely because of the political pressure involved.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  104. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Andre Kenji: That comment was intended out of amusement., not malice. I ask you two questions, you quote one but answer the other. I found it mildly entertaining.

    @Kylopod: It’s an established principle that one concrete example trumps (no pun intended) a thousand theories. The title of this post is “Everybody hates Donald,” which is empirically wrong. Even as hyperbole, it’s a stretch.

    As for my extended absence, as my part in the wonderful Obama Recovery, I have two jobs and work about 50 hours a week. I am lucky if I get one day off, and it’s never on a weekend.

    However, I see one development above that I am deeply sorry I missed out on earlier, and wish I’d seen it sooner. But had I commented on it, that might have ended the fun…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  105. Andre Kenji says:

    @Jenos Idanian: But these two things are linked. Bernie Sanders proposals and ideas are related to a very urban and white middle class, while Chavez proposals and ideas are related to a lower income electorate.

    Chavez has more to do with Jesse Jackson in the 80´s than with Sanders.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  106. Kylopod says:

    @Jenos Idanian: You’re not seriously suggesting you took the title of this post literally.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  107. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Kylopod: You’re not seriously suggesting you took the title of this post literally.

    Even as hyperbole, it’s a stretch.

    Oh, wait, I said that already, didn’t I?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  108. Pch101 says:

    Er, I’m reasonably sure that the post title is a gag that is making a pop culture reference to the title of a sitcom (that I have never seen) called Everybody Loves Raymond.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  109. Kylopod says:

    @Jenos Idanian: Pch101 beat me to the punch. If you missed the pop-culture reference in the title of Doug’s post, that’s okay. What is not okay is that you assumed the headline was equivalent to a thesis statement, especially when there was an entire article to help you grok Doug’s message.

    To anyone with even minimal reading-comprehension skills, the point of the article was that Trump is wildly unpopular with the general American public, and Doug backed up this point with a mass of polling data. Your only response was, “If he’s so unpopular, how come he keeps winning at the ballot box?” I pointed out the flaws in this rejoinder in my previous comment (which you ignored), and now your only response to Trump’s massive unpopularity is, “Well, not everyone hates him.”

    With arguments like that, I’m not sure even Trump would want you on his team.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  110. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Kylopod: I took it as more of a “Everybody Hates Chris” reference, and saw it as a bit of clannish insiderism. To me, it sounded like the apocryphal Pauline Kael quote about how she didn’t understand how Nixon won, as no one she knew voted for him. (She didn’t actually say it, but much like the Willie Sutton “I robbed banks because that’s where the money was” fictional quote, it’s too good to let a little thing like truth to ruin them.)

    Trump’s so unpopular that he’s taken out every single Republican opponent except Cruz (and Kasich, who hasn’t realized he’s lost). That includes the “inevitable” Jeb Bush — remember all the talk about how awful the Bush-Clinton election would be? — and golden boy Marco Rubio and a bunch of others.

    Trump has a lot of people who don’t like him. But he has a hell of a lot of people who do.

    I’ve lost count of how many times Trump’s been pronounced politically dead, yet each time he’s come out stronger. It’s only very recently that he’s shown any signs of faltering.

    And in the process, he’s done something I’ve always found hard to dislike: he’s really, really, really pissed off all the right people. Quite a few of those people are often found here.

    On another site, I recently addressed the question of how to perceive a Trump-Clinton election.

    “Rally around Trump to stop Hillary? What exactly are we stopping Hillary from doing that we can be sure Trump won’t do as well?”

    My answer: “It’s playing the odds.

    We KNOW what Hillary will do, or try to do.

    With Trump, we don’t know what he will do, or try to do.

    On the other hand, a vote for Hillary is at least a vote for predictability…

    “Here are two cups. One will make you deathly sick, maybe even kill you. The other might kill you, or it might be 20-year-old single-malt whiskey. Which do you want?”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  111. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Kylopod: I have more confidence–Trump wants anyone who will vote for him, or in the alternative, pay $10 million for a condo in Manhattan.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  112. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Jenos Idanian: While I hadn’t noticed your extended absence, I am glad to hear that you have found a second person who is willing to employ you. I hope it works (no pun intended) well for you.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  113. Just 'nutha ig'rant cracker says:

    @Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker: And yes, that was mean spirited. I wish I could say that I am sorry I said it, but I’m not. I guess something around here has poisoned my attitude toward you. I wish I knew what it was.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  114. Andre Kenji says:

    Doug is right. Trump has a core of strong supporters, but he also has high levels of rejection among the general electorate. He can win the GOP Primaries(And he could go to a runoff if there was a runoff in the United States), but he can´t win the General Election.

    That´s very different from not knowing Trump supporters.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  115. Kylopod says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    To me, it sounded like the apocryphal Pauline Kael quote about how she didn’t understand how Nixon won, as no one she knew voted for him.

    And that’s comparable to citing extensive polling data of the populace, how? Sure the two arguments sound the same, sort of like the way a rottweiler sounds kind of like a donkey.

    Trump’s so unpopular that he’s taken out every single Republican opponent…. That includes the “inevitable” Jeb Bush

    Yeah, I remember you making that argument back in January, how he had slain the mighty Jeb Bush.

    But you know the funny thing about that? That was before a single vote had been cast in a primary or caucus. You based your entire argument about Trump’s strength and Jeb’s impending electoral death on public opinion surveys–the same data source you’re now dismissing as irrelevant and comparing with an apocryphal Pauline Kael quote judging the entire electorate based on her own private social circle. I guess it only counts as evidence when it supports your views, right?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  116. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Kylopod: I’d forgotten saying that, but now I recall it. And I don’t think I was too off on it. And you have a flawed assumption in your summary — I didn’t base that comment about Bush on polling, but on my own perceptions of how Bush was responding to events. He was making stupid mistakes, and showed no signs of understanding why he was failing, let alone how to recover.

    I’m starting to think that we aren’t so much disagreeing as talking two entirely different languages. Let me back up a few steps to where I think we diverge.

    The official purpose of polling is to predict future events. The actual use of polling is to shape future events. And the shallowest use of polling is for ego reinforcement — arguing that I must be right, because so many people agree with me.

    I don’t selectively choose to cite the polls that back what I believe, and ignore the ones that disagree with me. I choose to ignore all the polls — except, of course, “the only one that counts.” And that’s because that’s the one poll that doesn’t attempt to predict (or shape) future events, but tells us exactly what is happening at that precise moment.

    When I voted in the primary, I was still largely undecided up until the day before. And I didn’t have a really strong feeling for any candidate, even the one who got my vote. (I had plenty of strong feelings against several, so I knew who was not getting my vote, but that’s not the same.)

    So when I see all these polls about how unlikable Trump is, or how unlikable Hillary is, I just find myself amused more than anything else. Whether or not people like them, they’re voting for them. And in bigger numbers than for the alternatives.

    So I see these discussions about these polls as signs of insecurity in the people doing the discussing. They have their beliefs and prejudices, and are seeking reassurance that no, they’re not alone in these feelings, and just maybe those feelings will be validated in the end at the elections.

    I find that quite amusing. And every now and then, I feel particularly Puckish and don’t resist the temptation to poke a stick through the cage bars.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  117. Kylopod says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    The official purpose of polling is to predict future events.

    Actually, the official purpose of polling is to provide data about the population.

    So when I see all these polls about how unlikable Trump is, or how unlikable Hillary is, I just find myself amused more than anything else. Whether or not people like them, they’re voting for them.

    The idea that people are voting for them regardless of their feelings for them has no basis. The polls of Trump’s favorability cited earlier are polls of the entire populace, whereas the only elections he has won so far have consisted of Republican primaries and caucuses, representing no more than a slice of the overall US population. The same poll that shows 7 in 10 Americans holding an unfavorable view of Trump also shows more than half of Republicans with a favorable view of him. So there is no contradiction between the poll and the results of the primaries and caucuses, nor is there a shred of evidence to support your claim that the people who do not like Trump are voting for him. He hasn’t even captured a majority of the vote within his own party (his current total is 37%–barely more than a third of the GOP electorate–according to Wikipedia), let alone the general public. “The only poll that counts” isn’t showing what you think it’s showing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  118. Pch101 says:

    This wouldn’t be tough for most people to understand. Naturally, Jenos has to write paragraph after paragraph after paragraph just so that he can prove that he’s “special” and unable to understand it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  119. Jenos Idanian says:

    @Kylopod: Now you’re just getting pedantic. Yes, the purpose of polling is to acquire data. That’s inherent in the definition.

    Politicians use polling to shape future events. They use it to find out how people say they feel on a variety of matters so they can better craft their words and actions to achieve their goals.

    You cite Trump’s numbers being less than a majority. Accurate, but not as relevant as his plurality represents his success out of a field that started out as (I think) 17 candidates, and he thoroughly crushed nearly all of them. He’s winnowed it down to 2 (well, more 1.5), and now the game has shifted.

    Trump’s game was designed to do that winnowing, and it was wildly successful. Now that it’s down to just him and Cruz (and Kasich, for some reason), his game has to change, or he fails.

    Will he find a new winning technique? Is there one?

    I dunno. But I know he’s been declared dead more often than Generalissimo Francisco Franco, and he’s still going. So I won’t make any predictions about how Trump will fare next, but I reserve the right to gleefully mock those who do.

    By the way, Bernie’s won the last seven primaries, and 8 of the last nine. I think it might be time to “socialize” the superdelegates and redistribute them a bit in the name of fairness.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  120. DrDaveT says:

    @gVOR08:

    In a just world the people hurt would receive compensation from the people helped.

    Jenos believes that would be a violation of fundamental human rights.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  121. Kylopod says:

    @Jenos Idanian:

    You cite Trump’s numbers being less than a majority. Accurate, but not as relevant

    What is relevant is that it blows apart your argument that Trump’s victories in Republican primaries and caucuses somehow refute the notion that Trump is unpopular with the general public.

    This is not rocket science. The Republican primary electorate is not the general public, and the general public is not the Republican primary electorate. It is possible to be popular with one and unpopular with the other, since they are not identical populations, and one is but a small subset of the other.

    It is your right to ignore the results of public opinion surveys, but it is other people’s right to point out that your arguments for doing so are massively stupid and reflect a failure to grasp distinctions that even the average third grader could understand.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0