This you would think is obvious-more votes are better than fewer votes.
America is Already Great and I'm not Donald Trump. This is how some Berners are characterizing her message.
My question is what's wrong with that?
"So HRC will run as the candidate of both parties' establishments, on the message that America's already great & at least she's not Trump."
"She can say as many liberal things as she wants but when she courts Republicans it only tells me she's playing us"
https://twitter.com/kunktation/status/728713018536775680
So the Berners have never heard of moving to the middle during the general? Bernie has said he would compete for independent and Republican votes. Bernie is not going to be the nominee.
But she is already doing this-and doing quite well. You have the Bush family not voting for the Republican Presidential nominee.
In the mind of the Berners this is somehow a bad thing.
I agree with Yglesias:
"At least she's not Trump" should be good for 55 percent of the vote."
America is Already Great and I'm not Donald Trump. This is how some Berners are characterizing her message.
My question is what's wrong with that?
"So HRC will run as the candidate of both parties' establishments, on the message that America's already great & at least she's not Trump."
"She can say as many liberal things as she wants but when she courts Republicans it only tells me she's playing us"
https://twitter.com/kunktation/status/728713018536775680
So the Berners have never heard of moving to the middle during the general? Bernie has said he would compete for independent and Republican votes. Bernie is not going to be the nominee.
But she is already doing this-and doing quite well. You have the Bush family not voting for the Republican Presidential nominee.
In the mind of the Berners this is somehow a bad thing.
I agree with Yglesias:
"At least she's not Trump" should be good for 55 percent of the vote."
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/728719111665135619
Abigail Gardner:
Abigail Gardner:
"Yeah, maybe ppl feeling the Bern think this proves that she's a sellout, but I'm totally comfortable with that message."
https://twitter.com/abigailgardner/status/728719411348148224
I guess Steffen Christensen means this derisively:
"She goes to every debate, says nothing, just points to her shirt, which says, "NOT THIS GUY" and picture of Trump."
https://twitter.com/Wikisteff/status/728722236962680832
But really, why not? Keep it simple, stupid. Against such an accident prone candidate as Trump, why not just sit back and let him punch the GOP out?
Less is more. If you don't need to do more, doing more hits into the law of diminishing returns-and maybe even messes things up.
There is a handwringing Gawker piece that already thinks she's blowing it against Trump. She needs something more aspirational.
http://gawker.com/dont-blow-this-1775111772?rev=1462551339112
Why? Playing the competent pragmatist has gotten her here, so why does she need to change now? If it worked against Bernie Sanders why does it fail against Donald Trump?
https://twitter.com/abigailgardner/status/728719411348148224
I guess Steffen Christensen means this derisively:
"She goes to every debate, says nothing, just points to her shirt, which says, "NOT THIS GUY" and picture of Trump."
https://twitter.com/Wikisteff/status/728722236962680832
But really, why not? Keep it simple, stupid. Against such an accident prone candidate as Trump, why not just sit back and let him punch the GOP out?
Less is more. If you don't need to do more, doing more hits into the law of diminishing returns-and maybe even messes things up.
There is a handwringing Gawker piece that already thinks she's blowing it against Trump. She needs something more aspirational.
http://gawker.com/dont-blow-this-1775111772?rev=1462551339112
Why? Playing the competent pragmatist has gotten her here, so why does she need to change now? If it worked against Bernie Sanders why does it fail against Donald Trump?
The Berners may not like this because they're purists. They claimed that Bernie could win over independents and GOPers. Yet they object to her doing so.
This is because in their mind moving to the Center is the 'wrong way.'
They presume everyone agrees with them and so the only way you lose is if you aren't Hard Left enough.
But I'm sorry to shock the Berners but elections are sometimes won on fear as well as just pure aspiration. The fear of Donald Trump couldn't be more justified.
So keep it simple, and remember we'll take as many independents and GOP votes as possible. When there were Reagan Democrats no one accused him of being a sellout. Why can't there also be Hilary Republicans?
They presume everyone agrees with them and so the only way you lose is if you aren't Hard Left enough.
But I'm sorry to shock the Berners but elections are sometimes won on fear as well as just pure aspiration. The fear of Donald Trump couldn't be more justified.
So keep it simple, and remember we'll take as many independents and GOP votes as possible. When there were Reagan Democrats no one accused him of being a sellout. Why can't there also be Hilary Republicans?
Mike,
ReplyDeleteI'm sure there will be Hillary Republicans. A lot of people saying now "she's just as bad" are saying that publicly, but nobody can see them in the voting booth (except God, and many of them also know intellectually that he's BS too)
I followed a story about Mary Matalin switching to the Libertarian party and I saw an interview with Gary Johnson who's running for the Libertarian party nomination. He suggested people go to this website and take the quiz:
http://www.isidewith.com/
I gave it a shot. They don't have "I don't know" as an option, but I wrote it in in a couple of cases anyway. Most of the questions expand (if you click the 3rd button) into a host of more nuanced answers. Most of the categories expand as well to more questions if you want. Gary came in at 74% for me, but his Libertarian challengers came in higher. One as high as 80%. Bernie & Hillary both came up 87%, and Trump came in at 27%.
I thought it was a pretty good quiz. I could tell I was answering more right wing on some and more left on others... and some I was being a centrist. Once I discovered you could expand answers to more nuanced selections, I did that in every case.
Gary also made a good point: Nobody can make a realistic mathematical challenge to win electors now, except a party like the Libertarian which is already on the ballot in all 50 states. Probably had something to do with Mary's switch and the fact that Erick Erickson had another look at the Libertarians the other day at TheResurgent: his conclusion: they're still not "grown up" enough for him yet... but he sounded frustrated, like he was eyeing them over and thinking "Now why is it I don't like these guys again? I better take another look..."
Here's an example of what I mean: I'm reading this as another back-handed indirect Hillary endorsement:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.redstate.com/kimberly_ross/2016/05/07/dont-underestimate-anger-will-nevertrump-movement/
There was one like that the other day at TheResurgent too, except it was even more indirectly pro-Hillary... "They're both terrible, but at least we know where Hillary stands, plus Trump is actually evil" (I'm paraphrasing, but that's what it said).
"“Never” actually means never. We refuse to connect conservatism to that which is not by casting a vote in support of Trump. We are focused on maintaining purity of principle, regardless of the outcome.
We know where Hillary stands on the issues, but Trump is even more dangerous since we have no idea what he would do once in office."
... that 2nd quote (a real quote) is from the RedState piece today, not TheResurgent one.
Delete