Jamelle Bouie again is the voice of reason with all the handwringing about all the ways Hillary could lose this election.
A lot of people don't like the demographics as destiny theory. They find it crude and reductionist. They also want to argue that the 'white working class' will decide this election.
It's not demographics they argue, but populism. Well how did the Dem primaries go? Did demographics not, uh, Trump populism? Why will the general election be different?
"That the consequences of President Trump are so dire only amplifies the fear that Clinton could stumble and fall over her scattered baggage. It’s too much to say that liberals and Democrats shouldn’t worry. But to repeat a point that can’t be repeated enough, the fact that Trump could win as a matter of mathematical reality doesn’t mean that it’s a likely outcome. We aren’t in some chaos world of infinite possibilities. Presidential elections are still bound by structural forces, and those—not the dark arts of Donald Trump or the David Brentish awkwardness of Hillary Clinton—will weigh heaviest on this election."
"What are those forces?"
"They are demographics. In 2012, President Obama won 39 percent of white voters to Mitt Romney’s 59 percent, with major deficits in key swing states like Virginia and Florida, where he lost white voters 61 percent to 37 percent. And yet, Obama won the national popular vote with room to spare, and he won in those states. The reason is simple: nonwhite voters. By voting as a bloc (or close to it), black, Latino, and Asian Americans tilted the field decisively toward the Democrats. Thus far, there’s no evidence these Americans have dropped out of the presidential electorate, and plenty to suggest they’ll return in greater numbers. How does Trump fare with this rising share of voters?"
"According to the latest survey from YouGov and the Economist, 82 percent of blacks and 78 percent of Latinos have a negative view of the Republican presidential nominee. Among people under 30, 80 percent have a negative view. Among women, 66 percent have a negative view. No one in the presidential field, including Clinton, is as unpopular as Trump is. He’s in a whole realm to himself."
"There are still other forces. Take partisanship. It governs voting among most Americans, including independents, who vote consistently for one party or the other, even if they don’t call themselves Democrats or Republicans. Partisanship is why Republicans have warmed to Trump in the days since he salted away the nomination.He’s one of them now, and that’s all that counts. On the same score, partisanship—helped along by party leaders like Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren—is why most Democrats will eventually unite behind Clinton. Indeed, once we take partisanship seriously as a major force driving our electoral outcomes, the idea that Trump could peel off substantial numbers of Democratic-voting nonwhites or women (or even liberal whites) is ludicrous. It takes massive events—wars and recessions—to shatter long-established voting habits, and even then, the effect is modest. John McCain ran for president in the shadow of a failed Republican president and still won more than 45 percent of the popular vote."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/why_hillary_won_t_blow_it.html?utm_source=web&utm_medium=twitter
As Bouie says, there is no need for hand-wringing; the Dems have the advantage here.
A major part of that is how weak a candidate Donald Trump is. He has massive vulnerabilities to exploit. Start with his tax returns. Then there Trump University. Then you have how he built the Trump Towers on the backs of illegal immigrant labor.
Then there is how he treats women. We haven't even gotten to his dreadful policies.
A lot of people don't like the demographics as destiny theory. They find it crude and reductionist. They also want to argue that the 'white working class' will decide this election.
It's not demographics they argue, but populism. Well how did the Dem primaries go? Did demographics not, uh, Trump populism? Why will the general election be different?
"That the consequences of President Trump are so dire only amplifies the fear that Clinton could stumble and fall over her scattered baggage. It’s too much to say that liberals and Democrats shouldn’t worry. But to repeat a point that can’t be repeated enough, the fact that Trump could win as a matter of mathematical reality doesn’t mean that it’s a likely outcome. We aren’t in some chaos world of infinite possibilities. Presidential elections are still bound by structural forces, and those—not the dark arts of Donald Trump or the David Brentish awkwardness of Hillary Clinton—will weigh heaviest on this election."
"What are those forces?"
"They are demographics. In 2012, President Obama won 39 percent of white voters to Mitt Romney’s 59 percent, with major deficits in key swing states like Virginia and Florida, where he lost white voters 61 percent to 37 percent. And yet, Obama won the national popular vote with room to spare, and he won in those states. The reason is simple: nonwhite voters. By voting as a bloc (or close to it), black, Latino, and Asian Americans tilted the field decisively toward the Democrats. Thus far, there’s no evidence these Americans have dropped out of the presidential electorate, and plenty to suggest they’ll return in greater numbers. How does Trump fare with this rising share of voters?"
"According to the latest survey from YouGov and the Economist, 82 percent of blacks and 78 percent of Latinos have a negative view of the Republican presidential nominee. Among people under 30, 80 percent have a negative view. Among women, 66 percent have a negative view. No one in the presidential field, including Clinton, is as unpopular as Trump is. He’s in a whole realm to himself."
"There are still other forces. Take partisanship. It governs voting among most Americans, including independents, who vote consistently for one party or the other, even if they don’t call themselves Democrats or Republicans. Partisanship is why Republicans have warmed to Trump in the days since he salted away the nomination.He’s one of them now, and that’s all that counts. On the same score, partisanship—helped along by party leaders like Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren—is why most Democrats will eventually unite behind Clinton. Indeed, once we take partisanship seriously as a major force driving our electoral outcomes, the idea that Trump could peel off substantial numbers of Democratic-voting nonwhites or women (or even liberal whites) is ludicrous. It takes massive events—wars and recessions—to shatter long-established voting habits, and even then, the effect is modest. John McCain ran for president in the shadow of a failed Republican president and still won more than 45 percent of the popular vote."
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/why_hillary_won_t_blow_it.html?utm_source=web&utm_medium=twitter
As Bouie says, there is no need for hand-wringing; the Dems have the advantage here.
A major part of that is how weak a candidate Donald Trump is. He has massive vulnerabilities to exploit. Start with his tax returns. Then there Trump University. Then you have how he built the Trump Towers on the backs of illegal immigrant labor.
Then there is how he treats women. We haven't even gotten to his dreadful policies.
This is exactly how I feel,and I guess it's the mass media of constant jibber-jabbering, that is driving me crazy.so much,that I am tuning it all out, and making me fear trump !
ReplyDeleteCertainly we need to not be complacent against Trump-he would be an absolute disaster for the country.
ReplyDeleteBut the antidote to complacency is not panic. Ignore the media attempts to make us panic!