Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
wonder how many of those votes for johnson were party votes or a vote against don and Hillary...
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
wonder how many of those votes for johnson were party votes or a vote against don and Hillary...
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
wonder how many of those votes for johnson were party votes or a vote against don and Hillary...
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
I think we overestimate how much analysis goes into a voter's decision vs. gut. I think people project their beliefs onto a candidate more than they chop up a platform. Relatively speaking, we’ve hardcore ideologues in this thread. There's no way of fully understanding the intent of a mass of voters without dumping a mountain of one's own bias into the analysis.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
I think we overestimate how much analysis goes into a voter's decision vs. gut. I think people project their beliefs onto a candidate more than they chop up a platform. Relatively speaking, we’ve hardcore ideologues in this thread. There's no way of fully understanding the intent of a mass of voters without dumping a mountain of one's own bias into the analysis.
True dat. However, if he was viable, there would be much more research by the marginally engaged voter I think.
I do take issue with your statement that we're all ideologues here. I think we're all engaged, but not all hyper-partisan warriors.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
I think we overestimate how much analysis goes into a voter's decision vs. gut. I think people project their beliefs onto a candidate more than they chop up a platform. Relatively speaking, we’ve hardcore ideologues in this thread. There's no way of fully understanding the intent of a mass of voters without dumping a mountain of one's own bias into the analysis.
True dat. However, if he was viable, there would be much more research by the marginally engaged voter I think.
I do take issue with your statement that we're all ideologues here. I think we're all engaged, but not all hyper-partisan warriors.
That's why I said "relatively speaking." Just making a pithy comment vs. the average voter.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
And how many people really supported the Libertarian positions? Johnson was a republican governor so he only morphed himself into a Libertarian in order to run. Honestly I am not sure if Johnson believed half of the Libertarian party platform....he was just filling in the shoes.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
I think we overestimate how much analysis goes into a voter's decision vs. gut. I think people project their beliefs onto a candidate more than they chop up a platform. Relatively speaking, we’ve hardcore ideologues in this thread. There's no way of fully understanding the intent of a mass of voters without dumping a mountain of one's own bias into the analysis.
That's probably depressingly true. Clinton helped himself by playing the sax. W was "a guy you'd like to have a beer with" while Gore was a boring policy wonk. Obama was young and charismatic while his opponents were reasonable but did not come off as spectacular. Reagan was...I don't really know, but boy did people like him. The only one from Reagan to Obama that wasn't likeable for intangible reasons was the only one-term president, Bush the First.
In theory this would not bode well for Trump. I doubt too many "gut" people really love him. Of course, Bush lost to a charismatic, fresh newcomer. Trump's squaring off the only guy that seems older than him.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
And how many people really supported the Libertarian positions? Johnson was a republican governor so he only morphed himself into a Libertarian in order to run. Honestly I am not sure if Johnson believed half of the Libertarian party platform....he was just filling in the shoes.
I can tell you that whatever he put out there, he believes. Whether that is libertarian enough really depends on which libertarian you're talking too. I thought he was a pretty good candidate, if a little too goofy.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
wonder how many of those votes for johnson were party votes or a vote against don and Hillary...
At least one.
There were two options in that question.
True...but I thought it was obvious that I am not a Libertarian. My vote was based on my desire to see a viable third party and my contempt for the Clinton campaign, and I cast it knowing that Trump had no chance of winning my state. Bill Weld having been on the ticket helped, but he bailed long before election day.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
And how many people really supported the Libertarian positions? Johnson was a republican governor so he only morphed himself into a Libertarian in order to run. Honestly I am not sure if Johnson believed half of the Libertarian party platform....he was just filling in the shoes.
I can tell you that whatever he put out there, he believes. Whether that is libertarian enough really depends on which libertarian you're talking too. I thought he was a pretty good candidate, if a little too goofy.
I always like him until he became a Libertarian. Some of that platform is just ridiculous in my opinion.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
I think we overestimate how much analysis goes into a voter's decision vs. gut. I think people project their beliefs onto a candidate more than they chop up a platform. Relatively speaking, we’ve hardcore ideologues in this thread. There's no way of fully understanding the intent of a mass of voters without dumping a mountain of one's own bias into the analysis.
That's probably depressingly true. Clinton helped himself by playing the sax. W was "a guy you'd like to have a beer with" while Gore was a boring policy wonk. Obama was young and charismatic while his opponents were reasonable but did not come off as spectacular. Reagan was...I don't really know, but boy did people like him. The only one from Reagan to Obama that wasn't likeable for intangible reasons was the only one-term president, Bush the First.
In theory this would not bode well for Trump. I doubt too many "gut" people really love him. Of course, Bush lost to a charismatic, fresh newcomer. Trump's squaring off the only guy that seems older than him.
I think a lot of Trump support is tied up in how much he annoys the "right" people. For too many people (imo), they have allowed their politics to be defined by who or what they hate. And that spans the entire political spectrum. These people aren't enthusiastic about Trump or Biden, per se. They want to inflict pain. And the key is that their rage is justified, while their opponents' rage is selfish. Shit all the way down.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
And how many people really supported the Libertarian positions? Johnson was a republican governor so he only morphed himself into a Libertarian in order to run. Honestly I am not sure if Johnson believed half of the Libertarian party platform....he was just filling in the shoes.
I can tell you that whatever he put out there, he believes. Whether that is libertarian enough really depends on which libertarian you're talking too. I thought he was a pretty good candidate, if a little too goofy.
I always like him until he became a Libertarian. Some of that platform is just ridiculous in my opinion.
Like with any party, I always say vote the candidate not the party. If there was something about Johnson's platform you didn't like, well que sera sera. But there is a wide range with Libertarian candidates just like anything else. For example, I'd vote for Jared Polis in a heartbeat but I despise Michael Bloomberg. Same party, vastly different approaches.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
I think we overestimate how much analysis goes into a voter's decision vs. gut. I think people project their beliefs onto a candidate more than they chop up a platform. Relatively speaking, we’ve hardcore ideologues in this thread. There's no way of fully understanding the intent of a mass of voters without dumping a mountain of one's own bias into the analysis.
That's probably depressingly true. Clinton helped himself by playing the sax. W was "a guy you'd like to have a beer with" while Gore was a boring policy wonk. Obama was young and charismatic while his opponents were reasonable but did not come off as spectacular. Reagan was...I don't really know, but boy did people like him. The only one from Reagan to Obama that wasn't likeable for intangible reasons was the only one-term president, Bush the First.
In theory this would not bode well for Trump. I doubt too many "gut" people really love him. Of course, Bush lost to a charismatic, fresh newcomer. Trump's squaring off the only guy that seems older than him.
I think a lot of Trump support is tied up in how much he annoys the "right" people. For too many people (imo), they have allowed their politics to be defined by who or what they hate. And that spans the entire political spectrum. These people aren't enthusiastic about Trump or Biden, per se. They want to inflict pain. And the key is that their rage is justified, while their opponents' rage is selfish. Shit all the way down.
Although the views are different, the actions of most party supporters are eerily similar. You will be hard pressed to find those who are willing to admit this though.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
🤚Hi that was me. Mostly when it comes to Amash I was thinking more along the lines of throwing support at the viability of a third party. Of course I live in Texas and voting for a third party this election would not be too risky as it is likely to go to Trump overwhelmingly, it would more or less be a protest vote in favor of third parties in general. Yes I realize that most libertarians are ashamed republicans and that many libertarian positions run counter to my values and positions. The universe where supporting a third party that wouldn’t support m4a while supporting m4a myself is one in which politics has become so slow and stagnant that anything would be refreshing at this point. Maybe a third party that had viable support would provoke a party that was more in line with my values to start doing something besides pulling its hair out and screaming Trump or Republicans every time they fail to do something. My views on M4a have evolved to m4a option. if someone chooses to pay an insurance company that is their right, just give the rest of us a safety net that will keep us from going bankrupt without paying a for profit insurance company through the nose for “care”. That’s about as likely as there being a viable third party before the complete collapse of the empire.
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
🤚Hi that was me. Mostly when it comes to Amash I was thinking more along the lines of throwing support at the viability of a third party. Of course I live in Texas and voting for a third party this election would not be too risky as it is likely to go to Trump overwhelmingly, it would more or less be a protest vote in favor of third parties in general. Yes I realize that most libertarians are ashamed republicans and that many libertarian positions run counter to my values and positions. The universe where supporting a third party that wouldn’t support m4a while supporting m4a myself is one in which politics has become so slow and stagnant that anything would be refreshing at this point. Maybe a third party that had viable support would provoke a party that was more in line with my values to start doing something besides pulling its hair out and screaming Trump or Republicans every time they fail to do something. My views on M4a have evolved to m4a option. if someone chooses to pay an insurance company that is their right, just give the rest of us a safety net that will keep us from going bankrupt without paying a for profit insurance company through the nose for “care”. That’s about as likely as there being a viable third party before the complete collapse of the empire.
One of the funny quirks of the EC...
How many people really want to vote 3rd. I've never seen a breakdown of third party proportion in "sure fire" states vs. swing states. But I think it would be interesting to know how many people in states like NY or Texas who go third would still do it if their state was close. I'd bet some would go "lesser of two evils."
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Further cementing my belief that the largest obstacle the Libertarian Party faces is libertarians
how so? is it because that there are like not many of them?
There are a bunch who are fixated on purity and so they get bogged down in minutiae. The type who will ask at a debate whether driver's licenses should be legal. One of the current leading candidates thinks Medicare should be repealed. Shit like that. Bad ideas that will also never play with voters. Winning combination.
I think the primary obstacle is the same for any third party: it’s a huge uphill climb and on the national level voting third is essentially throwing a vote away. Success would take a slow climb starting locally and growing toward the ability to compete on the national stage over a period of decades. This is for any party.
That said, you do make a point about this specific party; it’s tailor-made for purity tests. In theory, things like Medicare and driver’s licenses should not exist...but most people don’t agree. And either way, the smart move is to be pragmatic and get there after some easier hurdles have been cleared. The hard-left has the same problem with impatience and not being able/willing to play the long game.
I go back and forth on your first paragraph. 4.5 million people voted for Johnson in 2016. Obviously nowhere near enough to win, but they got 4.5 million people to go out and affirmatively check the box for a third party. Ultimately I don't think it's either/or. Do all of that work locally and run candidates wherever you can, but taking big swings in a Presidential election can pay dividends, too.
The question is how many of those people were voting for Johnson vs against the other two. How many people really understood his positions. I think that's the challenge of a third party. You're going to ahve some people vote against the D and R, without being engaged with what the third party believes in. There is a poster here who made a comment that he would be interested in Amash, but he's a passionate advocate for M4A. I don't know what universe those two things connect.
🤚Hi that was me. Mostly when it comes to Amash I was thinking more along the lines of throwing support at the viability of a third party. Of course I live in Texas and voting for a third party this election would not be too risky as it is likely to go to Trump overwhelmingly, it would more or less be a protest vote in favor of third parties in general. Yes I realize that most libertarians are ashamed republicans and that many libertarian positions run counter to my values and positions. The universe where supporting a third party that wouldn’t support m4a while supporting m4a myself is one in which politics has become so slow and stagnant that anything would be refreshing at this point. Maybe a third party that had viable support would provoke a party that was more in line with my values to start doing something besides pulling its hair out and screaming Trump or Republicans every time they fail to do something. My views on M4a have evolved to m4a option. if someone chooses to pay an insurance company that is their right, just give the rest of us a safety net that will keep us from going bankrupt without paying a for profit insurance company through the nose for “care”. That’s about as likely as there being a viable third party before the complete collapse of the empire.
One of the funny quirks of the EC...
How many people really want to vote 3rd. I've never seen a breakdown of third party proportion in "sure fire" states vs. swing states. But I think it would be interesting to know how many people in states like NY or Texas who go third would still do it if their state was close. I'd bet some would go "lesser of two evils."
If it was close I would definitely go lesser of two evils.
Trump Republicans are in deep trouble in Arizona. The President continues to be a drag on the national brand and an anchor on the GOP’s prospects of holding the White House, Senate and recapturing the House. Moreover, Republicans tying themselves to Trump are sinking faster than the President. A recently released poll in Arizona shows what’s happening and why it changes the electoral college roadmap.
It’s important to know that two days prior to the poll being conducted, The Lincoln Project, a Republican organization created to defeat Trump, began airing ads targeting McSally. The ads were sharp, hard-hitting and effective.
McSally now trails Democrat Mark Kelly by 13 points, according to the latest tracking poll by OH Predictive Insights. While the April poll of 600 likely voters favored Kelly 51% to McSally’s 42%, in May it’s now 51%-38%.
Her rapid four point drop in support in support in Maricopa County, Arizona’s most Republican and most populous county, shows just how precarious the situation is. The recent influx of suburban Republican voters to this area are more often high skilled technical workers with college degrees than those without.
This demographic is target rich for The Lincoln Project and recent national and state battleground polls show why our strategy is moving numbers.
The Lincoln Project Effect and why the ads are working
College educated voters are the most elusive part of Trumps Republican base. There is a direct correlation between how much education a Republican voter has and their dislike of the President. In 2016, this education ‘gap’ turned into an education ‘chasm’ as college educated voters — specifically women — fled the party. The trend continued in the 2018 midterms as Democrats captured the House of Representatives and at this point in the election cycle the break between college and non-college educated Republicans is growing even wider. Only 36% of college graduates voted for Trump in 2016 — a number he’ll find harder to reach in 2020. These voters do not believe Trump is competent to be running the country and the handling of the pandemic is proving them right.
Older voters are Trump Fatigued
Lots of older voters in Arizona. Older voters have among the highest likelihood of voting and this group gave Trump some of his biggest margins of support in 2016. It has also remained (along with white evangelicals)one of his most resilient bases of support.
Enter COVID-19.
Trumps incompetence and inability to be trusted to handle a situation that is not only serious but life threatening to seniors — not to mention devastating to retirement programs seniors are reliant upon — and you have the perfect alignment of factors to erode senior support.
As the New York Times recently pointed out. “A recent Morning Consult poll found that Mr. Trump’s approval rating on the handling of the coronavirus was lower with seniors than with any other group other than young voters. And Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee, in recent polls held a 10-point advantage over Mr. Trump among voters who are 65 and older.”
In 2016 Trump won this group by 7 points — that’s an astonishing 17 point drop in support.
In January, The Lincoln Project launched its first salvo against Senator Martha McSally in a blistering. one-minute ad. Drawing a clear distinction between iconic Arizona Republicans John McCain and Barry Goldwater, the ad was designed in large part to contrast traditional Republicanism versus Trumpism.
The objective, in part, was to see just how ‘soft’ Trumps Republican base was.
We liked what we saw.
McSally was tanking and we knew we couldpush Republican vote share even lower.
The Lincoln Project began running its second ad targeting base Republican voters two days before the Predictive Insights poll was conducted. Again, the ad specifically contrasted McSally and Trumpism with traditional Republican leadership. Moreover, it asked Republicans already questioning their support for Trump ‘Why?’ Why would they continue to support McSally and Trump?
McSally is now losing 12% of Republican voters in Arizona. She’s getting clobbered with Independents. If this were to play out nationally, the results could be measured in the Richter scale.
McSally’s drop in support demonstrates how soft GOP support is in the time of Trump, but more importantly how powerful a Republican to Republican message is.
The President has been driving a false narrative showing his statistically impossible levels of Republican support. He does this because even a slight crack in his base of support spells doom for his re-election prospects. Even the slightest Republican dissent could derail a re-election effort focused on winning by the slimmest of margins.
The Lincoln Project ad illustrates to Republican voters that the high levels of ‘trust’ and ‘competence’ they’ve spent associating with their traditional Republican leaders doesn’t transfer to Trump. College educated and older Republicans have reached their limit and they are responding.
Trump fatigue is real and it’s getting worse for the President and Republican candidates.
Trump Republicans are in deep trouble in Arizona. The President continues to be a drag on the national brand and an anchor on the GOP’s prospects of holding the White House, Senate and recapturing the House. Moreover, Republicans tying themselves to Trump are sinking faster than the President. A recently released poll in Arizona shows what’s happening and why it changes the electoral college roadmap.
It’s important to know that two days prior to the poll being conducted, The Lincoln Project, a Republican organization created to defeat Trump, began airing ads targeting McSally. The ads were sharp, hard-hitting and effective.
McSally now trails Democrat Mark Kelly by 13 points, according to the latest tracking poll by OH Predictive Insights. While the April poll of 600 likely voters favored Kelly 51% to McSally’s 42%, in May it’s now 51%-38%.
Her rapid four point drop in support in support in Maricopa County, Arizona’s most Republican and most populous county, shows just how precarious the situation is. The recent influx of suburban Republican voters to this area are more often high skilled technical workers with college degrees than those without.
This demographic is target rich for The Lincoln Project and recent national and state battleground polls show why our strategy is moving numbers.
The Lincoln Project Effect and why the ads are working
College educated voters are the most elusive part of Trumps Republican base. There is a direct correlation between how much education a Republican voter has and their dislike of the President. In 2016, this education ‘gap’ turned into an education ‘chasm’ as college educated voters — specifically women — fled the party. The trend continued in the 2018 midterms as Democrats captured the House of Representatives and at this point in the election cycle the break between college and non-college educated Republicans is growing even wider. Only 36% of college graduates voted for Trump in 2016 — a number he’ll find harder to reach in 2020. These voters do not believe Trump is competent to be running the country and the handling of the pandemic is proving them right.
Older voters are Trump Fatigued
Lots of older voters in Arizona. Older voters have among the highest likelihood of voting and this group gave Trump some of his biggest margins of support in 2016. It has also remained (along with white evangelicals)one of his most resilient bases of support.
Enter COVID-19.
Trumps incompetence and inability to be trusted to handle a situation that is not only serious but life threatening to seniors — not to mention devastating to retirement programs seniors are reliant upon — and you have the perfect alignment of factors to erode senior support.
As the New York Times recently pointed out. “A recent Morning Consult poll found that Mr. Trump’s approval rating on the handling of the coronavirus was lower with seniors than with any other group other than young voters. And Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee, in recent polls held a 10-point advantage over Mr. Trump among voters who are 65 and older.”
In 2016 Trump won this group by 7 points — that’s an astonishing 17 point drop in support.
In January, The Lincoln Project launched its first salvo against Senator Martha McSally in a blistering. one-minute ad. Drawing a clear distinction between iconic Arizona Republicans John McCain and Barry Goldwater, the ad was designed in large part to contrast traditional Republicanism versus Trumpism.
The objective, in part, was to see just how ‘soft’ Trumps Republican base was.
We liked what we saw.
McSally was tanking and we knew we couldpush Republican vote share even lower.
The Lincoln Project began running its second ad targeting base Republican voters two days before the Predictive Insights poll was conducted. Again, the ad specifically contrasted McSally and Trumpism with traditional Republican leadership. Moreover, it asked Republicans already questioning their support for Trump ‘Why?’ Why would they continue to support McSally and Trump?
McSally is now losing 12% of Republican voters in Arizona. She’s getting clobbered with Independents. If this were to play out nationally, the results could be measured in the Richter scale.
McSally’s drop in support demonstrates how soft GOP support is in the time of Trump, but more importantly how powerful a Republican to Republican message is.
The President has been driving a false narrative showing his statistically impossible levels of Republican support. He does this because even a slight crack in his base of support spells doom for his re-election prospects. Even the slightest Republican dissent could derail a re-election effort focused on winning by the slimmest of margins.
The Lincoln Project ad illustrates to Republican voters that the high levels of ‘trust’ and ‘competence’ they’ve spent associating with their traditional Republican leaders doesn’t transfer to Trump. College educated and older Republicans have reached their limit and they are responding.
Trump fatigue is real and it’s getting worse for the President and Republican candidates.
I can’t wait for all those white, suburban republicans to be mysteriously dropped from the voter rolls in AZ, FL, WI, PA and TX. Might just be time to bring in the UN poll observers.
Trump Republicans are in deep trouble in Arizona. The President continues to be a drag on the national brand and an anchor on the GOP’s prospects of holding the White House, Senate and recapturing the House. Moreover, Republicans tying themselves to Trump are sinking faster than the President. A recently released poll in Arizona shows what’s happening and why it changes the electoral college roadmap.
It’s important to know that two days prior to the poll being conducted, The Lincoln Project, a Republican organization created to defeat Trump, began airing ads targeting McSally. The ads were sharp, hard-hitting and effective.
McSally now trails Democrat Mark Kelly by 13 points, according to the latest tracking poll by OH Predictive Insights. While the April poll of 600 likely voters favored Kelly 51% to McSally’s 42%, in May it’s now 51%-38%.
Her rapid four point drop in support in support in Maricopa County, Arizona’s most Republican and most populous county, shows just how precarious the situation is. The recent influx of suburban Republican voters to this area are more often high skilled technical workers with college degrees than those without.
This demographic is target rich for The Lincoln Project and recent national and state battleground polls show why our strategy is moving numbers.
The Lincoln Project Effect and why the ads are working
College educated voters are the most elusive part of Trumps Republican base. There is a direct correlation between how much education a Republican voter has and their dislike of the President. In 2016, this education ‘gap’ turned into an education ‘chasm’ as college educated voters — specifically women — fled the party. The trend continued in the 2018 midterms as Democrats captured the House of Representatives and at this point in the election cycle the break between college and non-college educated Republicans is growing even wider. Only 36% of college graduates voted for Trump in 2016 — a number he’ll find harder to reach in 2020. These voters do not believe Trump is competent to be running the country and the handling of the pandemic is proving them right.
Older voters are Trump Fatigued
Lots of older voters in Arizona. Older voters have among the highest likelihood of voting and this group gave Trump some of his biggest margins of support in 2016. It has also remained (along with white evangelicals)one of his most resilient bases of support.
Enter COVID-19.
Trumps incompetence and inability to be trusted to handle a situation that is not only serious but life threatening to seniors — not to mention devastating to retirement programs seniors are reliant upon — and you have the perfect alignment of factors to erode senior support.
As the New York Times recently pointed out. “A recent Morning Consult poll found that Mr. Trump’s approval rating on the handling of the coronavirus was lower with seniors than with any other group other than young voters. And Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee, in recent polls held a 10-point advantage over Mr. Trump among voters who are 65 and older.”
In 2016 Trump won this group by 7 points — that’s an astonishing 17 point drop in support.
In January, The Lincoln Project launched its first salvo against Senator Martha McSally in a blistering. one-minute ad. Drawing a clear distinction between iconic Arizona Republicans John McCain and Barry Goldwater, the ad was designed in large part to contrast traditional Republicanism versus Trumpism.
The objective, in part, was to see just how ‘soft’ Trumps Republican base was.
We liked what we saw.
McSally was tanking and we knew we couldpush Republican vote share even lower.
The Lincoln Project began running its second ad targeting base Republican voters two days before the Predictive Insights poll was conducted. Again, the ad specifically contrasted McSally and Trumpism with traditional Republican leadership. Moreover, it asked Republicans already questioning their support for Trump ‘Why?’ Why would they continue to support McSally and Trump?
McSally is now losing 12% of Republican voters in Arizona. She’s getting clobbered with Independents. If this were to play out nationally, the results could be measured in the Richter scale.
McSally’s drop in support demonstrates how soft GOP support is in the time of Trump, but more importantly how powerful a Republican to Republican message is.
The President has been driving a false narrative showing his statistically impossible levels of Republican support. He does this because even a slight crack in his base of support spells doom for his re-election prospects. Even the slightest Republican dissent could derail a re-election effort focused on winning by the slimmest of margins.
The Lincoln Project ad illustrates to Republican voters that the high levels of ‘trust’ and ‘competence’ they’ve spent associating with their traditional Republican leaders doesn’t transfer to Trump. College educated and older Republicans have reached their limit and they are responding.
Trump fatigue is real and it’s getting worse for the President and Republican candidates.
Lincoln Project is highly effective says member of Lincoln Project
Martha McSally lost to Kyrsten Sinema in 2018 and got appointed to Jon Kyl's vacated seat. Now she's losing to another Democrat. It's not hard to see the through line here.
Battleground states RCP avg: AZ...Biden +4 Fl...Biden +3.3 MI....Biden +5.5 NV....Biden +4 NC.....Trump +1 OH.....not enough polling yet PA....Biden up 6.5 TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!) VA.....Biden up 9.7 WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
Martha McSally lost to Kyrsten Sinema in 2018 and got appointed to Jon Kyl's vacated seat. Now she's losing to another Democrat. It's not hard to see the through line here.
Yeah I think Arizona is definitely shifting. It doesn't hurt that Kelly is a dynamite candidate.
Battleground states RCP avg: AZ...Biden +4 Fl...Biden +3.3 MI....Biden +5.5 NV....Biden +4 NC.....Trump +1 OH.....not enough polling yet PA....Biden up 6.5 TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!) VA.....Biden up 9.7 WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona wins it. I think it's possible that Arizona and no Wisconsin still wins.
Battleground states RCP avg: AZ...Biden +4 Fl...Biden +3.3 MI....Biden +5.5 NV....Biden +4 NC.....Trump +1 OH.....not enough polling yet PA....Biden up 6.5 TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!) VA.....Biden up 9.7 WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
Here's a contrary take. Not saying I buy into all of it, but it's interesting. If I had to place a bet today, I'd still put it on Biden.
Martha McSally lost to Kyrsten Sinema in 2018 and got appointed to Jon Kyl's vacated seat. Now she's losing to another Democrat. It's not hard to see the through line here.
Yeah I think Arizona is definitely shifting. It doesn't hurt that Kelly is a dynamite candidate.
Could be. I don't follow Arizona closely, but it seems odd to appoint/run someone who already lost one Senate race. Quite a legacy to single-handedly flip both seats to another party. Maybe she runs for Governor next?
Battleground states RCP avg: AZ...Biden +4 Fl...Biden +3.3 MI....Biden +5.5 NV....Biden +4 NC.....Trump +1 OH.....not enough polling yet PA....Biden up 6.5 TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!) VA.....Biden up 9.7 WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
I wouldn’t be shocked if Biden won Texas. I think there’s distain down there for him because of his disrespect to the Bush family. Hillary, despite being maybe the most loathed Democrat ever in the eyes of Republicans, garnered like 43% of the vote in Texas in ‘16. Biden definitely appeals to Trump-hating Republicans...and I think Texas might have more of them than any state.
Battleground states RCP avg: AZ...Biden +4 Fl...Biden +3.3 MI....Biden +5.5 NV....Biden +4 NC.....Trump +1 OH.....not enough polling yet PA....Biden up 6.5 TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!) VA.....Biden up 9.7 WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
I wouldn’t be shocked if Biden won Texas. I think there’s distain down there for him because of his disrespect to the Bush family. Hillary, despite being maybe the most loathed Democrat ever in the eyes of Republicans, garnered like 43% of the vote in Texas in ‘16. Biden definitely appeals to Trump-hating Republicans...and I think Texas might have more of them than any state.
Word on the street in Texas is that Sleepy Woke Joe is going to jail. Any. Day. Now.
Battleground states RCP avg: AZ...Biden +4 Fl...Biden +3.3 MI....Biden +5.5 NV....Biden +4 NC.....Trump +1 OH.....not enough polling yet PA....Biden up 6.5 TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!) VA.....Biden up 9.7 WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
Here's a contrary take. Not saying I buy into all of it, but it's interesting. If I had to place a bet today, I'd still put it on Biden.
I don't quite follow the argument. He's basically saying.. yeah Biden is doing well now because he's surging. And he's surging because D's are coming around to him. Okay but D's coming around is not a short term surge, that's a step change. Now maybe he is surging. And maybe for random reasons but also because people have come to the conclusion that the Tara Reade story is BS. So at the end of the day, I'm not sure how this is bad for Biden, as the author wants to believe.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
I do take issue with your statement that we're all ideologues here. I think we're all engaged, but not all hyper-partisan warriors.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
That's probably depressingly true. Clinton helped himself by playing the sax. W was "a guy you'd like to have a beer with" while Gore was a boring policy wonk. Obama was young and charismatic while his opponents were reasonable but did not come off as spectacular. Reagan was...I don't really know, but boy did people like him. The only one from Reagan to Obama that wasn't likeable for intangible reasons was the only one-term president, Bush the First.
In theory this would not bode well for Trump. I doubt too many "gut" people really love him. Of course, Bush lost to a charismatic, fresh newcomer. Trump's squaring off the only guy that seems older than him.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
The Lincoln Project Effect
Trump Republicans are in deep trouble in Arizona. The President continues to be a drag on the national brand and an anchor on the GOP’s prospects of holding the White House, Senate and recapturing the House. Moreover, Republicans tying themselves to Trump are sinking faster than the President. A recently released poll in Arizona shows what’s happening and why it changes the electoral college roadmap.
It’s important to know that two days prior to the poll being conducted, The Lincoln Project, a Republican organization created to defeat Trump, began airing ads targeting McSally. The ads were sharp, hard-hitting and effective.
McSally now trails Democrat Mark Kelly by 13 points, according to the latest tracking poll by OH Predictive Insights. While the April poll of 600 likely voters favored Kelly 51% to McSally’s 42%, in May it’s now 51%-38%.
Her rapid four point drop in support in support in Maricopa County, Arizona’s most Republican and most populous county, shows just how precarious the situation is. The recent influx of suburban Republican voters to this area are more often high skilled technical workers with college degrees than those without.
This demographic is target rich for The Lincoln Project and recent national and state battleground polls show why our strategy is moving numbers.
The Lincoln Project Effect and why the ads are working
College educated voters are the most elusive part of Trumps Republican base. There is a direct correlation between how much education a Republican voter has and their dislike of the President. In 2016, this education ‘gap’ turned into an education ‘chasm’ as college educated voters — specifically women — fled the party. The trend continued in the 2018 midterms as Democrats captured the House of Representatives and at this point in the election cycle the break between college and non-college educated Republicans is growing even wider. Only 36% of college graduates voted for Trump in 2016 — a number he’ll find harder to reach in 2020. These voters do not believe Trump is competent to be running the country and the handling of the pandemic is proving them right.
Older voters are Trump Fatigued
Lots of older voters in Arizona. Older voters have among the highest likelihood of voting and this group gave Trump some of his biggest margins of support in 2016. It has also remained (along with white evangelicals)one of his most resilient bases of support.
Enter COVID-19.
As the New York Times recently pointed out. “A recent Morning Consult poll found that Mr. Trump’s approval rating on the handling of the coronavirus was lower with seniors than with any other group other than young voters. And Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the presumptive Democratic nominee, in recent polls held a 10-point advantage over Mr. Trump among voters who are 65 and older.”
In 2016 Trump won this group by 7 points — that’s an astonishing 17 point drop in support.
In January, The Lincoln Project launched its first salvo against Senator Martha McSally in a blistering. one-minute ad. Drawing a clear distinction between iconic Arizona Republicans John McCain and Barry Goldwater, the ad was designed in large part to contrast traditional Republicanism versus Trumpism.
The objective, in part, was to see just how ‘soft’ Trumps Republican base was.
We liked what we saw.
McSally was tanking and we knew we couldpush Republican vote share even lower.
The Lincoln Project began running its second ad targeting base Republican voters two days before the Predictive Insights poll was conducted. Again, the ad specifically contrasted McSally and Trumpism with traditional Republican leadership. Moreover, it asked Republicans already questioning their support for Trump ‘Why?’ Why would they continue to support McSally and Trump?
McSally is now losing 12% of Republican voters in Arizona. She’s getting clobbered with Independents. If this were to play out nationally, the results could be measured in the Richter scale.
McSally’s drop in support demonstrates how soft GOP support is in the time of Trump, but more importantly how powerful a Republican to Republican message is.
The President has been driving a false narrative showing his statistically impossible levels of Republican support. He does this because even a slight crack in his base of support spells doom for his re-election prospects. Even the slightest Republican dissent could derail a re-election effort focused on winning by the slimmest of margins.
The Lincoln Project ad illustrates to Republican voters that the high levels of ‘trust’ and ‘competence’ they’ve spent associating with their traditional Republican leaders doesn’t transfer to Trump. College educated and older Republicans have reached their limit and they are responding.
Trump fatigue is real and it’s getting worse for the President and Republican candidates.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/2020/
Biden holding steady 5.1% nationally. Still better than any challenger to an incumbent in recent history.
Battleground states RCP avg:
AZ...Biden +4
Fl...Biden +3.3
MI....Biden +5.5
NV....Biden +4
NC.....Trump +1
OH.....not enough polling yet
PA....Biden up 6.5
TX.......Trump up 2.5 (wow!)
VA.....Biden up 9.7
WI....Bide up 2.7
So far so good, especially considering the Tara Reade story/non story and Trump's barrage of negative nonsense. Hasn't really knocked Biden off his lead.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/poll-shows-biden-beating-trump-like-a-drum-heres-whats-really-going-on?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©