Inevitable because she's inevitable. Lovely, logical thinking, that. If I'd tried to give my dad circular reasoning like that when I was, say, ten, I've had gotten a stern lecture. What is wrong with people? Can't they think at all?
The media hopes to convince us she is inevitable because they are all part of the establishment and the 1%, same for the Democratic establishment and the "pundits". They don't want their cozy little lives of privilege disrupted and they know Bernie would change things. Hillary has fought her usual lying unethical campaign and I've reached the point where my eyes turn red and I snarl when I see her.
I do wish the author could have been more succinct and to the point. But I also find myself wondering how this fits with, on the one hand, the Tea Party and its emphasis on small government and on the other with Bernie, whose populism is in some ways similar to Trump's and in others very different. I think a comparison of Trump voters with Bernie voters could have been very illuminating.
But I guess this is an example of the media wanting to talk about Trump rather than Bernie.
I wore my Bernie pin to the book discussion today. And after the discussion a woman asked me about Bernie. I think she was leaning Bernie anyway, although she half-bought the myth about Hillary's inevitability. But by the end of the conversation she was a definite Bernie voter. I suspect her husband may be too, although he didn't take an active part in the conversation.
One main difference between T voters and Bernie voters is that T voters are angry and afraid (pessimistic) which causes them to be reactive, mean and self-focused, while Bernie voters are more likely to be angry and courageous (optimistic), which causes them to be pro-active, kind and outwardly-focused.
Over the weekend I was looking at the Google Trends data for Bernie & HRC and comparing them to the recent polling data in the 3/15 primary states. It looks like deja vu--the polls reporting a very large lead for HRC, while the search trends data reflect either a very close race (less then 10% difference) or a clear advantage for Bernie (20%, 30% or more). Very reminiscent of Iowa and Michigan. After both Iowa and Michigan excuses were made for the pollsters (notably by Nate Silver): they weren't able to catch late trends, they made mistaken assumptions about the mix of voters based on data from eight years ago, etc. It will be most interesting to see if the polls are off in left field again. After reading an opinion/prognostication piece in politico.com saying that if DT should win both Florida and Ohio he would be on the glide path to the GOP nomination (but that if he only wone one of the two it would probably be a contentious multi-vote convention) I checked Google Trends. The pollsters are saying DT and Kasich are neck and neck in Ohio, but Google Trends (even discounting for the entertainment factor) indicates Kasich is at a huge disadvantage. If the pollsters don't get it about right this time, they should have little credibility left. I sincerely doubt they can get a representative sample of voters any more (probably the reason Gallup quit presidential race polling). Well, we shall see!
Checking Google Trends, and assuming that a 10% difference equals a dead heat, HRC vs. Bernie looks close but a bit in favor of Bernie in Florida, Illinois, and North Carolina. Bernie seems to be pulling away in Ohio, and remains strong in Missouri (like Kansas and Nebraska).
Between 3/11 and 3/12 DT got a boost in Ohio from something, and part of that has worn off, but he remains way ahead of Kasich.
I expect that by late afternoon or early evening Monday we should see the nearly final Google Trends data. They seem to regularly drop off the evening before an election, and more when people go to bed.
Deaniacs are first!
ReplyDeleteInevitable because she's inevitable. Lovely, logical thinking, that. If I'd tried to give my dad circular reasoning like that when I was, say, ten, I've had gotten a stern lecture. What is wrong with people? Can't they think at all?
The media hopes to convince us she is inevitable because they are all part of the establishment and the 1%, same for the Democratic establishment and the "pundits". They don't want their cozy little lives of privilege disrupted and they know Bernie would change things. Hillary has fought her usual lying unethical campaign and I've reached the point where my eyes turn red and I snarl when I see her.
DeleteI do wish the author could have been more succinct and to the point. But I also find myself wondering how this fits with, on the one hand, the Tea Party and its emphasis on small government and on the other with Bernie, whose populism is in some ways similar to Trump's and in others very different. I think a comparison of Trump voters with Bernie voters could have been very illuminating.
ReplyDeleteBut I guess this is an example of the media wanting to talk about Trump rather than Bernie.
I wore my Bernie pin to the book discussion today. And after the discussion a woman asked me about Bernie. I think she was leaning Bernie anyway, although she half-bought the myth about Hillary's inevitability. But by the end of the conversation she was a definite Bernie voter. I suspect her husband may be too, although he didn't take an active part in the conversation.
ReplyDeleteOne main difference between T voters and Bernie voters is that T voters are angry and afraid (pessimistic) which causes them to be reactive, mean and self-focused, while Bernie voters are more likely to be angry and courageous (optimistic), which causes them to be pro-active, kind and outwardly-focused.
ReplyDeleteOver the weekend I was looking at the Google Trends data for Bernie & HRC and comparing them to the recent polling data in the 3/15 primary states. It looks like deja vu--the polls reporting a very large lead for HRC, while the search trends data reflect either a very close race (less then 10% difference) or a clear advantage for Bernie (20%, 30% or more). Very reminiscent of Iowa and Michigan. After both Iowa and Michigan excuses were made for the pollsters (notably by Nate Silver): they weren't able to catch late trends, they made mistaken assumptions about the mix of voters based on data from eight years ago, etc. It will be most interesting to see if the polls are off in left field again. After reading an opinion/prognostication piece in politico.com saying that if DT should win both Florida and Ohio he would be on the glide path to the GOP nomination (but that if he only wone one of the two it would probably be a contentious multi-vote convention) I checked Google Trends. The pollsters are saying DT and Kasich are neck and neck in Ohio, but Google Trends (even discounting for the entertainment factor) indicates Kasich is at a huge disadvantage. If the pollsters don't get it about right this time, they should have little credibility left. I sincerely doubt they can get a representative sample of voters any more (probably the reason Gallup quit presidential race polling). Well, we shall see!
ReplyDeleteAlan
Checking Google Trends, and assuming that a 10% difference equals a dead heat, HRC vs. Bernie looks close but a bit in favor of Bernie in Florida, Illinois, and North Carolina. Bernie seems to be pulling away in Ohio, and remains strong in Missouri (like Kansas and Nebraska).
ReplyDeleteBetween 3/11 and 3/12 DT got a boost in Ohio from something, and part of that has worn off, but he remains way ahead of Kasich.
I expect that by late afternoon or early evening Monday we should see the nearly final Google Trends data. They seem to regularly drop off the evening before an election, and more when people go to bed.
Alan