Quote:
|
I don't understand who they think is going to be more likely to vote for this version of the party than for, say, Romney or McCain. It all seems pitched to working-class white men, on the assumption that turning them out will overcome the effects with women, blacks, Hispanics, etc. I just don't see how that can work.
|
Evangelicals, who sat out 2012. Hence, Pence.
And the under the radar bigoted vote. "I've nothing against immigration, but let's face it - they muck up the neighborhood, and this Muslim thing in Europe's a shit show. I don't want that here." I hear sentiments like that all the time among poor to quite affluent voters of all races.
It's unwise to think those doing well, who tend to be better educated, will lockstep behind Hillary. The argument I hear over and over goes like this: "You can't vote for him! It'll fuck up the market!" "Perhaps. But only for so long. And we need to shake shit up. And she'll tax the fuck out of us... Obama would have, but he couldn't because of the 2008 mess. She can and will."
The "let's try something -
anything - new" and "fuck all the incumbents" sentiments are also strong, and run across almost all demographics.
ETA: But you'll never see any accurate data on how much these views permeate the numerous demographics because none of the people saying this shit will say it out loud except for the dumb foot soldiers you see at Trump rallies.
Quote:
|
Seems like establishment Republicans are waiting for Trump to lose so that they can try to reassert control, but I think it's that simple.
|
Huge 2. That's the strategic bet among party elites. The question is, will the people running the GOP ground games at the state levels also leave Trump out to dry? I think a lot of the infantry loves the guy.
ETA: I don't see Trump winning, but I also don't see Nate Silver being very accurate this year. There's a potentially 'yuge, eye-opening and ugly surprise lurking beyond the data collection nets. That's what's keeping this otherwise depressing race interesting.
