DNC: parting thoughts …

Ok, the DNC was over a couple of days ago. And yes, one of my Facebook Friends (and real life friend too) complained about my high number of tweets that appeared on FB. Well, I’ll have to work something out for the debates…maybe have a “goat debate watch party” on FB or something.

But I like using both FB and twitter…we’ll work something out.

Now to the Convention itself: Here is a fair fact-check of Hillary Clinton’s speech. I think that she comes out well. There is a “spin” here, “not the whole story” there, and in one case she used outdated data.

Now while many women preferred Hillary Clinton to Bernie Sanders, not all of them did…particularly the young women. It turns out that the dominating factor was “life experiences”; those who have had kids and those who have been discriminated against (for being female) preferred Hillary Clinton at roughly the same rates, regardless of age.

Sanders supporters at the convention: This was funny. Some really believed that, going into the convention, that Sanders still had a bona-fide chance. Some complained about “microaggressions” (aka “slights”) that hurt their feelings. And, as a group, they were unprepared for the Clinton supporters being prepared.

Some unsolicited advice: expect your opponents to be smart and prepared. That happened to me in 2004 when my “team” (Kerry) was out-campaigned by Bush. The Bush website was much better organized. And the Kerry organization was a disaster; I remember calling up people who had volunteered to find out that I was the first person to call them…IN SEVERAL MONTHS. And you had competing pro-Kerry rallies in close proximity to each other…it was a real mess. On the other hand, the Obama campaign was magnificently organized. If you said you’d do something, you had someone following up to see if you did. If you took a trip, you got a call the night before.

This was a great metaphor: on election day in 2004, I drove back from Iowa ALONE to get the bad news as I drove. In 2008, I drove home with friends and we cheered the good news TOGETHER.

Now about Trump: David Frum (NOT a Trump supporter) wrote this article to describe how Trump supporters feel. And here are some Trump supporters, telling you that they aren’t stupid, evil, blah blah blah.

Man, have things changed. Now the Democrats are the “patriotic” party pushing the “American Dream” and the Trump party (formerly known as the “Republican party”) is the party for those who “feel” marginalized …mistreated…etc.

And yes, I saw the “Hillary leads by 15 points” poll, but it is just one poll so the forecasts have not changed much.

Just Because Based on what I’ve seen …Trump’s disastrous press conference, comparing his “sacrifice” to that of a parent who had a kid killed in combat and making excuses for not debating Clinton (“she will rig it”!!), I think that he is going to get creamed.

He’ll found out that he isn’t in a Republican primary:

First, he’s running a campaign fundamentally based on racism. But Republicans couldn’t call him on that, because more or less veiled appeals to racial resentment have been key to their party’s success for decades. Clinton, on the other hand, won the nomination thanks to overwhelming nonwhite support, and will have no trouble hitting hard on this issue.

Second, Trump is proposing wildly irresponsible policies that benefit the rich. But so were all the other Republicans, so they couldn’t attack him for that. Clinton can.

Third, Trump’s personal record as a businessman is both antisocial and just plain dubious. Republicans, with their cult of the entrepreneur, couldn’t say anything about that. Again, Clinton can. […]

And there’s one last thing, which I suspect may make the biggest difference of all: Clinton’s campaign can go after Trump’s fundamental buffoonery.

I mean, he is a ludicrous figure, and everything we learn just makes him more ludicrous. So why couldn’t Republicans make that stick? I’d argue that it was because there was something fairly ludicrous about all his opponents, too.

Think about Marco Rubio: even before his famous brain glitch, it was just obvious that he was a prefab candidate, a nice-looking guy with no real convictions or experience reciting lines he was told to deliver. The infamous “We must dispel with …” wasn’t just vile and stupid (even the first time, let alone repeated); it was also, transparently, not something Rubio believed or even cared about except that his handlers told him to say it.

Or think about Ted Cruz, whose mean-spiritedness and self-centered nature evidently stand out even in today’s conservative movement, making him a hated figure even among those who should like his message.

Clinton, on the other hand, is not ludicrous. She can think on her feet; she’s tough as nails. Do you really think the person who stared down the Benghazi committee for 11 hours is going to wither under schoolboy taunts?

This isn’t JV; it isn’t “low A” baseball.


I say that Clinton holds all of the Obama 2012 states and adds North Carolina (Obama 2008), Arizona (Latino) and Missouri (close…and she actually leads in a recent poll. No, she isn’t “really” ahead in Missouri and Arizona right now, I predict that she will be by election day.).


July 30, 2016 - Posted by | politics, politics/social | , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: