Home | About | Donate

Memo for Armchair Strategists: Four Key Factors for Election Day


Memo for Armchair Strategists: Four Key Factors for Election Day

David Morris

Two months to elections and counting. Americans will be voting for the entire House, a third of the Senate and the President, as well as all members of state legislative lower houses and usually half of their state senators.


The winner will be Hillary because the political system is indeed rigged.

By the oligarchy.


Make your choice, CIA corporatocracy or idiocracy

(or unwinnable sanity = Jill Stein)


You don't need to drive yourself crazy, digging up charts and trying to read the tea leaves. Decades of research have shown that most voting choices come down to economic issues -- how well families are doing. The Dem voting base had long consisted of the poor and middle class, workers and the jobless, for the common good. The Clinton wing split this base wide apart. The years of this administration confirmed that the split is permanent, and as if they felt a need to emphasize this, Democrats selected the most anti-poor, anti-New Deal Dem available. Meanwhile, liberals have spent the years of this administration brushing aside (at best) our poverty crisis, more deeply alienating the poor (most of whom are white, incidentally) and those who get why unrelieved poverty is strangling the economy. They have particularly alienated white, low-income and poor people, a sizable portion of the voting population. So, how do you think this will all turn out?


I'm guessing that Trump will win, but it's only a guess. We're in a bizarre situation where a significant chunk of the voting bases of each party oppose the chosen candidate. And the two candidates have strikingly similar ideologies.


You'll certainly be a loser. Stein, like Trump, has no actual governing experience. But, like you say, "99% of us will be losers" so kiss the country good-bye, marlborough! the democracy has been sold to the highest billionaire bidder.


Indeed, although the majority of Republicans seem to support Clinton and considering who controls the voting machines...


"actual governing experience" Hitler, Saddam Hussein, lots of others have 'governing experience' are you sure you want that to be a non-start for you?


Do you suppose assange will do that so that trump will pardon him.
Birds of a feather . . ..


For better or worse, while turnout among some groups will be depressed, on the other hand, many others will be motivated either by fear, or admiration of, Donald Trump. The months-long focus of HRC & The Dems to use Trump's own idiocy to scare the electorate will no doubt have some effect. So many of the comments I see in other social media suggest that... people who aren't exactly fans of Hillary are motivated to vote for her anyway. Then there are the politically-uninformed Hillbots....including both kinds of identity voters...i.e both those who'd vote for Maggie Thatcher without blinking and those folk who'd cheer just as loudly for a snake, if it wore a donkey badge.

But will the turnout of the fearful and the identity voters be enough to cancel out the Trump brown-shirts? My guess is yes, because the big money and top Repub's are all backing Clinton. The sheer volume & repetition of anti-Trump ads will likely have their effect on an electorate that has too many vulnerable to such programming.

But if she wins, it will likely be a bitter prize; and I believe that growing public unrest will set the stage for a wild pendulum shift and Democratic Party losses of both WH & Congress in 2020.


That would have been something I'd have enjoyed watching. As it was, I watched baseball instead. Sanders would have greatly augmented his electoral slam-dunk. But the oligarchy would rather take their chances in a crap shoot with one of their defenders.


I don't know where you get that "strikingly similar ideologies" notion. Have you seen the Frontline documentary called "The Choice 2016". It looks like Trump and Clinton did have similar father figures but the rest of their lives have been very, very different. Think of making your choice using triage - the assignment of degrees of urgency in an emergency. In the end, the idea is to make a decision that, to the greatest extent possible, every effort is made to first address the person(s)/issue(s) with the greatest chance of survival. Otherwise, kiss it all good-bye.


She (Stein) polls at around 2% -- otherwise known as a non-starter. If she were a viable 3rd party candidate, she'd be polling much higher than that. Voting for her is like just giving your vote away-- making a decision based on principle, which is good, but useless - a useless vote.


Yep! Sad but true.


I am giving my vote away to Dr. Jill Stein M.D., Ajuma Baraka everyday of the week, and twice on Sunday! There is nothing useless in voting for a better world!


OK, well this is a different subject, but to your point, my 2 cents, no b/c:
1. If she gets to 5%, that helps for the next 4 years
2. If Clinton loses b/c she lost the progressives, then Clinton democrats will be sure next time to get on board with the next Sanders or even Green party.
3. If everyone who has student debt actually registers and votes green + some Sanders supporters, she can acutally win.
4. Are you sure casting a 'non-wasted' vote and having Clinton or Trump on your conscious is ok?
Like the saying goes: "I'll vote for Stein if you will..." :wink:


Trump may have more actual votes but he will not be the President because the majority of the electronic votes will go to Clinton no matter how they are actually cast. It has already been determined by the oligarchy. If primaries didn't provide enough evidence for this premise, the Bush family support for Clinton pretty much says, the deal is sealed.


Well, you make some good points but #3 is definitely speculative "b/c".

The metaphor I've been using to facilitate my decision-making is triage - that is, that I don't have good choices, including Jill Stein, so I need to choose the one with the greatest potential of surviving and doing the least amount of damage. I was a Bernie backer and that didn't work but even he has seen the necessity of "choosing the lesser of two evills" -- although I don't see Hillary as evil just not likable - she rubs me the wrong way. Trump on the other hand, to me, is an evil narcisistic dualist, a winner/loser type of person always thinking of only himself and conducting himself like a carnival barker. Now, he's in the process of getting even with President Obama for publically humiliating him. His is not a pretty story.

Thanks for helping me think it through.


It was inspiring to hear Madame Clinton's searing denunciation of these tactics and her full throated defense of the right to vote during Monday's debate.

Wait a tick ...


Before voting for Hillary please shoot yourself in the foot.
That wound will remind you of the terrible mistake that you made by not voting for Jill Stein and all the pain that Hillary will have caused you and all the rest of us over the next 4 years.