2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhat the Republicans will do, depending on who the Democrats nominate:
They'll do what they always do. They'll run countless negative ads about the nominee. It doesn't matter who the nominee is. They'll use whatever they can to pour negativity on the nominee.
If the nominee is Hillary Clinton, they'll use all the old arguments and bring up all the old debunked scandals they can find about her and former President Bill Clinton. It will look like the 90s all over again. Then, they'll pile on with the "emails" and "Benghazi" and as many negative, misogynistic memes they can generate. They'll trot out every photo that makes Clinton look old and tired and mock her typical clothing. They'll hint at the possibility that Chelsea isn't Bill's daughter and show photos of Hillary and Huma Abedin and hint at other things. They'll revive every old meme they can come up with. That's what Republicans do. They have no limits on the kind of negative campaigning they will resort to. They'll be predictably vicious.
If Bernie Sanders is the nominee, they'll have less history to work with, but enough for them to go on to present him as the worst possible choice as President. Chief among those will be to call him, on a continuous, daily basis, a "SOCIALIST." That's their main tool, a word that has been anathema for Republicans since the end of WWII. They'll use old Soviet poster imagery in ads, and shout the word "SOCIALIST" as often as they can. They'll hint at his Judaism, of course, but they have to be careful about that. They'll bring up the child he fathered out of wedlock as an example of how "He's not like us TRVE CHRISTINAS." They'll hint that he's really an "ATHEIST." They'll dig out every photo of him glaring at the camera and make him look as old as possible.
Most presidential elections in this country end up being pretty close, with only a few percentage points separating the winner from the loser. It's rare when there's a genuine landslide. Like it or not, we live in a society that is pretty evenly split, politically. So, who will win? The Democrat? The Republican, whichever clown car passenger is the nominee? You know what will decide that?
What will decide that is the turnout of Democrats at the polling places next November. That's what will decide the election. It doesn't really matter who the Democratic nominee is. What matters is how many Democrats turn out to vote. The Republicans will attack either candidate equally strongly. They'll use whatever they have and make up what they don't. The election will turn one way or another, depending on turnout. Independent voters will be split, as usual, in about the same proportions as people who declare a party affiliation. They matter, of course, but will make up their own minds, as they always do. They're hard to predict.
Make no mistake. Democratic turnout, especially in the 10 or so swing states that usually decide presidential elections, will be what determines the winner. That's why I'll begin working on GOTV as soon as the Conventions are over. I'll be doing it just as hard as I can. Here on DU, I'll be posting daily to encourage everyone here to work on GOTV, too. That's what will make the difference.
To those who declare that they will not vote for the Democratic nominee, I will have nothing to say. They are no longer in play. Most will no longer be here. They don't matter at all. It is all those people in all those precincts who need to be convinced to vote who matter. That's what will make the difference. Whoever the Democratic nominee turns out to be, GOTV is the answer. It's always the answer. When enough Democratic voters turn out, Democrats win. It's that simple. I'd like for us to win in 2016.
Who knows? It could be my last presidential election. I'm going to give it my best shot.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Print it out and hang it over your computer monitor. Ten states will make the difference. That's where both parties will be focusing their campaign efforts in an attempt to capture voters in those ten states.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)There's only one die needed to cast. That's it.
progree
(10,909 posts)and cast dispersions aspersions on his commander-in-chief credentials. (thanks hedda_foil in #10 for the dispersions -> aspersions correction, much appreciated)
After all, they managed to paint John Kerry as essentially a coward and joke (making fun of his purple hearts) despite having volunteered for, and served in swift boats -- the most dangerous naval service during the Vietnam War, with the possible exception of naval aviators and SEALs.
And despite his opponent G.W. Bush having far far less commander-in-chief qualifications and deliberately choosing an area of military service with very low likelihood of seeing combat (and the AWOL stuff).
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)The Republicans will detail what that really means from their POV. Bernie is on record stating that there needs to be a wealth re-distribution. Doesn't matter how rich or poor the Republican, they won't like that idea and will cast fear into the hearts of all hard working RW'ers. The RW machine will promote and tie Socialism to Communisn and provide stories of political demigogary, neoptism and corruption that will lead to dictatorship.
hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)dis·per·sion
diˈspərZHən,diˈspərSHən/
noun
the action or process of distributing things or people over a wide area.
"some seeds rely on birds for dispersion"
the state of being dispersed over a wide area.
"the general dispersion of Hellenistic culture"
ECOLOGY
the pattern of distribution of individuals within a habitat.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)Freddie
(9,267 posts)There will be *plenty* of dirt on whoever their nominee is. Whoever ours is, I hope he/she does not take the "high road". Not gonna work. Personal issues and a realistic warning of what they will do to this country having control of the entire government. Not pretty.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Democrats tend to run more positive campaigns than Republicans.
Freddie
(9,267 posts)I've wanted to scream hearing mealy-mouthed so-called attack ads by our side.
Xyzse
(8,217 posts)I've been exceedingly self-occupied this year due to so much loss, and my attempts to regain equilibrium.
Hopefully I can help out a bit more in the coming year.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)Obama beat McCain by 7.2%, and Clinton defeated Dole by 8.5% in a three-way race.
But Democrats had some big natural advantages in those.
In 2008, they were the non-incumbent party after a two-term presidency, and it's generally hard to three-peat in presidential elections. Also, the economy completely collapsed in September. The polls had been close until then, and then Obama pulled ahead.
In 1996, the economy was roaring, people felt like the country was on the right track, and Clinton was the incumbent president. As John Kerry found out, it's hard to unseat a sitting president, even one as obviously deficient as Bush Jr.
But you're right. Most presidential elections are close.
This year, I think the Democrats have a few disadvantages, the biggest of which is that they're trying to hold on to the presidency for a third term. They'll be helped by the fact that the Republicans control Congress, since Americans generally like divided government. For the moment, they're helped by the fact that the Republican primary is a mess. I do think if the Republicans nominate Trump or Carson, the road gets a lot easier. But some of the more establishment types could be a real threat.
MeNMyVolt
(1,095 posts)BTW, agree with your post. As usual.