J.C.MacSwell

Independent run for POTUS 2020

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, swansont said:

While these look flatter, the summer before the election the numbers are never below 27%. Also, "lean democrat/republican" is not the same as party affiliation. They are asking a different question. The Huffington poll would include independents. So, like I said, his base is not "collapsing" but his support is significantly smaller than it used to be.  

 

It was 23% in July of 2015 and 2014. Trump was even running in 2014. Over the last few years the numbers has been in the mid 20's. Polls have MOE's associated with them. The differences aren't particularly significant and pre-date Trump. The difference between 25 & 27 doesn't tell us anything. It was 24 in October 2007. What we are see under Trump isn't different than what we saw in the few years before Trump. 

The big shift happened under Bush. Prior to 2008 the numbers of people who identified as Republican swim from the mid 30's to the high 20's. After about 2008 that number consistently stayed in the mid 20's. Of course despite the slip in people indentifying as Republican Romney got more votes than any Republican candidate ever and then Trump topped that number. So there doesn't appear to be a direct correlation anyways. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting perspective from Ezra Klein tonight:

Howard Schultz’s campaign is based on 3 ideas, and they’re all wrong

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/12/18219607/howard-schultz-presidential-campaign-cnn-independent-third-party-2020-starbucks

Quote

In every case, Schultz’s solution is either what the mainstream of the Democratic Party is already proposing to do, or is so vague as to be meaningless.

<...>

On virtually every policy issue, Schultz’s speech reveals himself to be closer to the Democrats than to the Republicans. On immigration, he wants a path to citizenship. On taxes, he says rich guys like him should pay more. On health care, he wants to build on Obamacare’s gains. On gun control, he wants universal background checks. On debt reduction, he wants to balance the budget “while keeping America strong and reinforcing the safety net for the most vulnerable.” 

Schultz’s agenda is basically Barack Obama’s agenda, or Chuck Schumer’s agenda and, in theory at least, he can be expected to take votes from the Democrats.

<...>

What Schultz is doing is showing the way money distorts representative democracy. He is America’s money-in-politics problem in human form, and he evinces no self-consciousness about this even as he claims to be running to improve political representation.

The part at the end about Batman made me laugh.

Your thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, iNow said:

An interesting perspective from Ezra Klein tonight:

Howard Schultz’s campaign is based on 3 ideas, and they’re all wrong

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/12/18219607/howard-schultz-presidential-campaign-cnn-independent-third-party-2020-starbucks

The part at the end about Batman made me laugh.

Your thoughts?

I think the media either hasn't learned it's lesson after Trump or did and doesn't care. 

The overwhelming media exposure Trump was given daily for free bolstered his success Republican primary. News channels would carry his rallies live, news paper would give Trump the front page above the fold daily, and etc. Trump became a major part of everyones daily media diet at a time when his competitors could hardly get billing anywhere.

It got them ratings. It sold newspapers. Fast forward and the very tease of a 3rd run by Schultz is generating endless press. There are 3rd party candidates in every election. Some combination of the Reform Party, Green Party, Constitution Party, and Libertarian Party have people on various ballots around the country every election. I follow politics closely and bath know who Schultz is. All the media he is receiving confuses me. He is not a major political figure. Yet the media is treating him like a major figure. I suppose if the media keeps it up Schultz could potentially become a major political figure. Currently he is generating more articles, news segments, and etc than any of the Democratic Candidates.  

So I say shame of Ezra Klien for contributing to the over exposure of Schultz. Giving Schultz endless press because it is successful click bait is problematic. Aside from few causal dissimals of Democrats like Harris and AOC Schultz hasn't done anything to establish what his positions are or what his campaign platform would like if he chose to run. 

If Schultz runs that is fine. Let him build a platform and launch his campaign. Let's hear what his plans are and how he would make them a reality. Maybe he has great plans. However until that day happens I don't think journalists should be covering him with the fervor they are. They just build hysteria. I have already be told by numerous people who have no idea who Schultz is that Schultz is going to ensure Trump get re-elected by splitting votes with the Democratic nominee. Seriously, people know I follow politics so they've been asking me who Schultz is but also telling me about the harm he'll do Democrats. It's crazy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly, while you find Klein to be in err, you seem to reinforce one of his central claims (as shared through political scientist, Lee Drutman). 

Quote

“Schultz doesn’t have to do the hard work of building a mass movement or representing a genuine constituency to get attention in our politics, because the media uses ability to spend money as a proxy for seriousness of campaign,” says Lee Drutman, a political scientist at the New American Foundation. “And when the media bestows seriousness on a candidate, the public follows along.”

On another note, since when are you into politics?? Would never have guessed that. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, iNow said:

Interestingly, while you find Klein to be in err, you seem to reinforce one of his central claims (as shared through political scientist, Lee Drutman). 

Klien is still providing unwarranted exposure. Point it out doesn't absolve him of it. 

It's really been bizarre. I literally have had people ask me to explain to them who Schultz is and then warn me that he'll split the Democratic votes. Seems silly to me that people would assume someone that they have never heard of would win million of votes in the general election. Clearly they are getting that impression from from somewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Klien is still providing unwarranted exposure.

In fairness, he posted the same night CNN hosted an hourlong town-hall with Schultz. I’d say the exposure was already very bright this evening whether or not Klein published a piece explaining Schultz running is a bad idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now