President Trump

[Irvinecommuter]

Oh and as to Asians:

The National Exit Poll, funded by the major national media organizations, shows that Clinton won roughly two-thirds (65 percent) of Asian-American votes, while Trump received just over a quarter (27 percent), according to pollsters at Edison Research.

Asian-American support for Clinton was even more pronounced, though, in exit polling by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, or AALDEF, which provided NPR a preview of its latest report.

According to AALDEF's poll, Clinton's support was closer to winning four-in-five Asian-American voters (79 percent) with just 18 percent for Trump.

https://www.npr.org/2017/04/18/5243...ican-vote-than-the-national-exit-polls-showed

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Lastly, I know you will cite California as an example of what could happen, but what it ignores is that starting in the 90's many California Republicans began moving out of state.  It was a grand exodus to Nevada, Arizona, Montana, Idaho, and Texas.  It made California a much more Democratic and extremist state, but what you fail to acknowledge is that many (not all) of these other states became much stronger Republican states as a result.

In a way, it is a zero sum game.  As one state becomes more Democrat, another becomes more Republican.  The key to winning is to bring in people that normally don't vote with a message that will energize voters enough to want to participate in the process.

Nevada has gone Dem in the last three presidential campaigns.

Arizona has gone from solid red to purple (Trump won it by 3%)

Same for Texas...even the GOP is worried about a Dem wave in Texas in 2018.

States like Colorado and Virginia were reliably red are now blue. 

I think the Trump wins in Penn, Wisconsin, and Michigan are pretty much dead cat bounces.

 

[fortune11]

Are people paying attention to what actually is going on in this country with all these special and off year elections ?

What has kept old white dudes in power is they dutifully troddle out every two years and vote for the Fox News approved curmudgeon with an R next to him . While the gen x and y types are busy wasting their time binging on Netflix and instagram

Even if a small percentage of that changes this cycle , the grip on power that old white evangelicals have can be dismantled . We will find out soon enough anyways .

 

[Liar Loan]

This is classic LL...take one portion of a stat and generate a conclusion that is without basis

In 2060, 74.3% of US population will be white, and that will skew heavily towards older age groups, which are the people that tend to vote the most often and skew the most conservative.

74.3 %"White" includes 31% Hispanic and 6% mixed races...with only 43% remaining to be non-Hispanic whites.

Trump won white voters by a margin almost identical to that of Mitt Romney, who lost the popular vote to Barack Obama in 2012. (Trump appears likely to lose the popular vote, which would make him only the fifth elected president to do so and still win office.) White non-Hispanic voters preferred Trump over Clinton by 21 percentage points (58% to 37%), according to the exit poll conducted by Edison Research for the National Election Pool. Romney won whites by 20 percentage points in 2012 (59% to 39%).

However, although Trump fared little better among blacks and Hispanics than Romney did four years ago, Hillary Clinton did not run as strongly among these core Democratic groups as Obama did in 2012. Clinton held an 80-point advantage among blacks (88% to 8%) compared with Obama?s 87-point edge four years ago (93% to 6%). In 2008, Obama had a 91-point advantage among black.

http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-co...5639/FT_16.11.09_exitPolls_race_ethnicity.png

So your argument is that white people are not really white if they are either Hispanic or only have one white parent?  I think you are wrong.

There are many mixed race people with a white parent that identify as white.  There are also many Hispanics that identify as white.  Once they lose their Spanish and are several generations removed from their home country, they are for all intents and purposes, white.

It's not really your place or the census bureau's place to tell people what they will identify as in 42 years.  Studies have shown that people of mixed race tend to blend into the dominant culture more often than not.  It's just the way it is.

For example:

Irish people used to be considered lower than dogs.  Now they are white.

Italians were the Mexicans of 100 years ago.  Now we all eat spaghetti and listen to Frank Sinatra.

Eastern Europeans were treated as outsiders accused of "ruining America".  Now they are more likely to be accused of having white privilege.

The bottom line is that the "white" demographic continues to grow through assimilation.  No other category or group has that advantage.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The party went from receiving 65% of white evangelicals to 80% most recently.  It illustrates how the party has changed in composition over time, but for some reason assumes the party won't continue to change in composition as America itself changes.

No...the GOP literally went back into its hardcore base and pushed turnout.  They didn't appeal to new voters...they just got the old voters more excited to vote.  White evangelicals have been a part of the GOP base for a long time and the basic foundation of GOP platform since the mid 1980s.  They are easy to excite and motivate as they are basically a two-issue demographic:  abortion and Christian religious rights.  They are also the easiest to scare with talk of "evil immigrants" and the secularization of America.

White evangelicals are only one source of votes that can be targeted.  There are other groups that will rise to prominence whose values align with Republican politics in future years.  Non-white evangelicals, conservative Hispanics, financially successful people of all stripes that don't want to give their hard-earned money to the government, as examples.

Non-white evangelicals vote are large AA...guess who they vote for???!!!

Conservative Hispanics are basically older Catholics and Cubans....both are populations that are decreasing.  Meanwhile younger Hispanic lean heavily toward Dems.

The basic flaw in your thinking is that there is a cap on the number of people that will join the party, while assuming the remaining (R) voters will dwindle in number.  The party will adapt to whatever conditions exist at any given moment (sometimes through painful losses) and they will emerge stronger as a result.

Not a cap...GOP is drawing from demographics (non-college educated whites and white Christian evangelicals) that are reducing while Dems appeal to a much greater electorate.  GOP has been much more organized than the Dems in the last 20 years in targeting local and state races, which allows them to gerrymander and voter ID their way out of the demographic issue.  That tide, however, is turning on both of those issues.

With the election of Trump and the rhetoric that he is espousing...do you think that will appeal to more or fewer minorities? 

GOP may have won the battle with Trump but lost the war.    Just like California with Pete Wilson and Prop 187/215.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

So your argument is that white people are not really white if they are either Hispanic or only have one white parent?  I think you are wrong.

There are many mixed race people with a white parent that identify as white.  There are also many Hispanics that identify as white.  Once they lose their Spanish and are several generations removed from their home country, they are for all intents and purposes, white.

It's not really your place or the census bureau's place to tell people what they will identify as in 42 years.  Studies have shown that people of mixed race tend to blend into the dominant culture more often than not.  It's just the way it is.

For example:

Irish people used to be considered lower than dogs.  Now they are white.

Italians were the Mexicans of 100 years ago.  Now we all eat spaghetti and listen to Frank Sinatra.

Eastern Europeans were treated as outsiders accused of "ruining America".  Now they are more likely to be accused of having white privilege.

These are just a few examples.

White privilege has always been there...if you were Irish, you were still better off than the Chinese or Mexicans. 

Being "white" is no longer racial issue per se but rather socioeconomic and geographic issue. 

The simple math:

 

[Liar Loan]

The party went from receiving 65% of white evangelicals to 80% most recently.  It illustrates how the party has changed in composition over time, but for some reason assumes the party won't continue to change in composition as America itself changes.

No...the GOP literally went back into its hardcore base and pushed turnout.  They didn't appeal to new voters...they just got the old voters more excited to vote.  White evangelicals have been a part of the GOP base for a long time and the basic foundation of GOP platform since the mid 1980s.  They are easy to excite and motivate as they are basically a two-issue demographic:  abortion and Christian religious rights.  They are also the easiest to scare with talk of "evil immigrants" and the secularization of America.

White evangelicals are only one source of votes that can be targeted.  There are other groups that will rise to prominence whose values align with Republican politics in future years.  Non-white evangelicals, conservative Hispanics, financially successful people of all stripes that don't want to give their hard-earned money to the government, as examples.

Non-white evangelicals vote are large AA...guess who they vote for???!!!

Conservative Hispanics are basically older Catholics and Cubans....both are populations that are decreasing.  Meanwhile younger Hispanic lean heavily toward Dems.

The basic flaw in your thinking is that there is a cap on the number of people that will join the party, while assuming the remaining (R) voters will dwindle in number.  The party will adapt to whatever conditions exist at any given moment (sometimes through painful losses) and they will emerge stronger as a result.

Not a cap...GOP is drawing from demographics (non-college educated whites and white Christian evangelicals) that are reducing while Dems appeal to a much greater electorate.  GOP has been much more organized than the Dems in the last 20 years in targeting local and state races, which allows them to gerrymander and voter ID their way out of the demographic issue.  That tide, however, is turning on both of those issues.

I think our basic disagreement is that I believe the Republican party will adapt, just as it has many times since Lincoln freed the slaves.  You seem to think they are stuck with the demographics they've had since the 80's and there's nothing to change that.

 

[Liar Loan]

White privilege has always been there...if you were Irish, you were still better off than the Chinese or Mexicans. 

Yep, and in 40 years a lot of Chinese and Mexicans are going to be accused of having privilege.  I'm sure the terminology will be different by then.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The party went from receiving 65% of white evangelicals to 80% most recently.  It illustrates how the party has changed in composition over time, but for some reason assumes the party won't continue to change in composition as America itself changes.

No...the GOP literally went back into its hardcore base and pushed turnout.  They didn't appeal to new voters...they just got the old voters more excited to vote.  White evangelicals have been a part of the GOP base for a long time and the basic foundation of GOP platform since the mid 1980s.  They are easy to excite and motivate as they are basically a two-issue demographic:  abortion and Christian religious rights.  They are also the easiest to scare with talk of "evil immigrants" and the secularization of America.

White evangelicals are only one source of votes that can be targeted.  There are other groups that will rise to prominence whose values align with Republican politics in future years.  Non-white evangelicals, conservative Hispanics, financially successful people of all stripes that don't want to give their hard-earned money to the government, as examples.

Non-white evangelicals vote are large AA...guess who they vote for???!!!

Conservative Hispanics are basically older Catholics and Cubans....both are populations that are decreasing.  Meanwhile younger Hispanic lean heavily toward Dems.

The basic flaw in your thinking is that there is a cap on the number of people that will join the party, while assuming the remaining (R) voters will dwindle in number.  The party will adapt to whatever conditions exist at any given moment (sometimes through painful losses) and they will emerge stronger as a result.

Not a cap...GOP is drawing from demographics (non-college educated whites and white Christian evangelicals) that are reducing while Dems appeal to a much greater electorate.  GOP has been much more organized than the Dems in the last 20 years in targeting local and state races, which allows them to gerrymander and voter ID their way out of the demographic issue.  That tide, however, is turning on both of those issues.

I think our basic disagreement is that I believe the Republican party will adapt, just as it has many times since Lincoln freed the slaves.  You seem to think they are stuck with the demographics they've had since the 80's and there's nothing to change that.

LOL.  The Republican Party that Lincoln created is the polar opposite of what the GOP is now.  GOP may adapt but as it stands...it is adapting to the hard right.  That is how Trump won the GOP primary.  He got more of the core base to come out and vote him based upon 1950s rhetorics.    GOP Congress have basically capitulated to that rhetoric because they are pandering to their rich donors and the idea that tax cuts saves all. 

Baby boomers and Generation X/Y are probably the most selfish generations in quite a while...the trend to away from that.

 

[Liar Loan]

The simple math:

Ok, the least growth in eligible voters, yet 6x the amount of voters of any other category.  And that doesn't even include Hispanics that identify as white and mixed-race whites.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

White privilege has always been there...if you were Irish, you were still better off than the Chinese or Mexicans. 

Yep, and in 40 years a lot of Chinese and Mexicans are going to be accused of having privilege.  I'm sure the terminology will be different by then.

You are forgetting 500-600 years of European domination and racism...that is something that doesn't go away in a few generation.

 

[Liar Loan]

LOL.  The Republican Party that Lincoln created is the polar opposite of what the GOP is now.  GOP may adapt but as it stands...it is adapting to the hard right.  That is how Trump won the GOP primary.  He got more of the core base to come out and vote him based upon 1950s rhetorics.    GOP Congress have basically capitulated to that rhetoric because they are pandering to their rich donors and the idea that tax cuts saves all. 

Baby boomers and Generation X/Y are probably the most selfish generations in quite a while...the trend to away from that.

I disagree.  Steel tariffs are a hard left desire.  Trump is taking positions from both sides that favor the working class.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

The simple math:

Ok, the least growth in eligible voters, yet 6x the amount of voters of any other category.  And that doesn't even include Hispanics that identify as white and mixed-race whites.

What?  Hispanics are not white...they were lumped in by lazy census techniques.  Hispanics by definition are not "white" as categorized by you.  They don't vote like "whites" and certain not like conservative "whites".

You are also forgetting that the trend for "whites" are also skewing to the left. 
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/religion-and-education-explain-the-white-vote/

 

[Irvinecommuter]

LOL.  The Republican Party that Lincoln created is the polar opposite of what the GOP is now.  GOP may adapt but as it stands...it is adapting to the hard right.  That is how Trump won the GOP primary.  He got more of the core base to come out and vote him based upon 1950s rhetorics.    GOP Congress have basically capitulated to that rhetoric because they are pandering to their rich donors and the idea that tax cuts saves all. 

Baby boomers and Generation X/Y are probably the most selfish generations in quite a while...the trend to away from that.

I disagree.  Steel tariffs are a hard left desire.  Trump is taking positions from both sides that favor the working class.

Steel tariffs are aimed at "working class whites" and a crappy bandaid at that.    Things like universal healthcare and a better social safety net will be a lot more important to those who are struggling to keep a job or a paycheck.

 

[Liar Loan]

What?  Hispanics are not white...they were lumped in by lazy census techniques.  Hispanics by definition are not "white" as categorized by you.  They don't vote like "whites" and certain not like conservative "whites".

Many Hispanics are white and many others identify as white.  It's not your place or the census bureau's to tell them differently.

Trump also received about 30% of the Hispanic vote and won more Hispanics than Romney did, so your points about their voting patterns are not correct either.

 

[Kings]

White privilege has always been there...if you were Irish, you were still better off than the Chinese or Mexicans. 

Yep, and in 40 years a lot of Chinese and Mexicans are going to be accused of having privilege.  I'm sure the terminology will be different by then.

Already happening with Asian college applicants.  Affirmative action strikes again!

 

[Irvinecommuter]

What?  Hispanics are not white...they were lumped in by lazy census techniques.  Hispanics by definition are not "white" as categorized by you.  They don't vote like "whites" and certain not like conservative "whites".

Many Hispanics are white and many others identify as white.  It's not your place or the census bureau's to tell them differently.

Trump also received about 30% of the Hispanic vote and won more Hispanics than Romney did, so your points about their voting patterns are not correct either.

People self-identify for census purposes!  People who choose "Hispanics"...are the one who choose to identify themselves that way.  The laziness come what the categories that census decides to put them under.

Trump captured about 28%...Romney got 27%. 

 

[Irvinecommuter]

White privilege has always been there...if you were Irish, you were still better off than the Chinese or Mexicans. 

Yep, and in 40 years a lot of Chinese and Mexicans are going to be accused of having privilege.  I'm sure the terminology will be different by then.

Already happening with Asian college applicants.  Affirmative action strikes again!

That's not what racial privilege means but thanks for trying!

 

[Liar Loan]

People self-identify for census purposes!  People who choose "Hispanics"...are the one who choose to identify themselves that way.  The laziness come what the categories that census decides to put them under.

If people self identify as Hispanic and white, that's what they are.  You don't get to make up new rules because you wish things were different.

That's not what racial privilege means but thanks for trying!

So you clearly have a lot of racial animus towards whites.  It's been demonstrated over and over again on this board.  What exactly did white people do to ruin your life?  Were you beat up as a kid by white punks?

EDIT:  Here's a fresh example posted just minutes ago:

And your point is?  That multi-generational Californians are somehow extra important?

 

[Irvinecommuter]

People self-identify for census purposes!  People who choose "Hispanics"...are the one who choose to identify themselves that way.  The laziness come what the categories that census decides to put them under.

If people self identify as Hispanic and white, that's what they are.  You don't get to make up new rules because you wish things were different.

Seriously...this is not that hard:

Federal officials are considering major changes in how they ask Americans about their race and ethnicity, with the goal of producing more accurate and reliable data in the 2020 census and beyond. Recently released Census Bureau research underscores an important reason why: Many Hispanics, who are the nation?s largest minority group, do not identify with the current racial categories.

Census officials say this is a problem because in order to obtain good data, they need to make sure people can match themselves to the choices they are offered. Census data on race and Hispanic origin are used to redraw congressional district boundaries and enforce voting and other civil rights laws, as well as in a wide variety of research, including Pew Research Center studies.

After years of trying to persuade Hispanics to choose a standard race category, the Census Bureau has been testing a new approach, with what the agency says are promising results. In 2015, the bureau contacted 1.2 million U.S. households for a test census that experimented with two different ways of combining the Hispanic and race questions into one question (and included a proposed new ?Middle Eastern or North African? category as well). Respondents could self-identify in as many categories as they wanted, or only one.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...sus-bureau-may-change-how-it-asks-about-race/

That's not what racial privilege means but thanks for trying!

So you clearly have a lot of racial animus towards whites.  It's been demonstrated over and over again on this board.  What exactly did white people do to ruin your life?  Were you beat up as a kid by white punks?

Failure/refusal to acknowledge the existence of white privilege is a hallmark of white privilege.

EDIT:  Here's a fresh example posted just minutes ago:

And your point is?  That multi-generational Californians are somehow extra important?

I'm sorry...did I say anything about "white" in that comment.  You assumed that "multi-generational Californians" mean "white." 

Furthermore...how is that racial animus? 

I always love how conservatives complain about the race card and yet cites the race card at the first possible moment.