Originally Posted By Dabob2 "I have a myriad of professionals in this field who have talked to hundreds of people over many months. And yes, they see this pattern." <You don't have a "myriad", You barely have aa handful. Of reporters looking for a narrative to get eyeballs. What you don't have is any actual data.> I posted about half a dozen. I could easily have posted more. And talk about no data - you're attributing motive to these reporters with no proof of your own. "Trump supporters somewhat overlap Sanders" is not exactly a clickbait-type headline, especially as those same reporters would have access to far more clickbait-type headlines every day from Trump alone. What we have is quite a few reporters, on the trail constantly and with better insight than you or I, saying the same thing. I've heard it innumerable times from TV reporters/pundits as well. And most of the TV reporters are not looking to get eyeballs - they're just commentators stuck in the middle of shows hosted by others who are offering what they're seen and heard on the campaign trail. I get what you're saying. Normally, I'm a "show me the data" guy myself. But some things either can't be measured that way, or could be but simply haven't been. Hey, there's no "data" that Trump saying incendiary things seemingly condoning violence has led to violence at Trump rallies either. And yet you have countless people on print and broadcast saying they see the connection. And saying they've heard ugly things shouted at Trump rallies. If it was just one or two people saying "hey I heard this happened..." that would be anecdotal. But at a certain point it becomes a pattern and gains weight, even if it's not "data" per se. "Which is a whole lot more than you have, which is basically 'it doesn't seem logical to me, therefore it can't be true'" <Well, kind of. It's more that it doesn't seem logical to anyone.> By definition it seems logical to all the people in print and broadcast who are reporting it. And I'm not the only one on LP who has said they see it as well. Don't confuse "it doesn't seem logical to me" with "it doesn't seem logical to anyone." But you want data? I hesitated to post this before because it's a). Drudge, ugh. and b). online polls are not scientific. But because it is Drudge, it will be mostly Republicans, and it was clearly mostly Republicans who voted here because a). Trump won, and b). Clinton received less than 1% of the vote. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://drudgereport.com/nosp.htm">http://drudgereport.com/nosp.htm</a> Note that Trump won, with Sanders a strong second. Sanders beat every Republican but Trump in a poll with hundreds of thousands of votes that almost certainly was heavily skewed to conservative voters. Still think there's no overlap?
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "I posted about half a dozen" OK, less than a handful. "I hesitated to post this before because it's a). Drudge, ugh. and b). online polls are not scientific." Right. Give me real data.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <"I posted about half a dozen" OK, less than a handful. > And, as I said (and you left out), there are plenty more where that came from, but why post them? They're just redundant, and you seemingly won't accept them no matter how many there are. Or you'll just move the goalpost again. <Right. Give me real data.> It is data. Not the best data, but data, and actually hundreds of thousands of people. I don't believe Gallup or the other pollsters have polled this particular question, so you're asking for what you know can't be produced, which is an easy game. I've produced a hell of a lot more than you have here, which still amounts to "I don't see it, so it can't be so and it couldn't possibly make sense to anyone." There IS some overlap between Trump and Sanders voters. I said ages ago I didn't want to overstate it, but you don't seem to want to believe there could possibly be any, despite their partially overlapping messages, at least on trade agreements, appeal to those who feel most disaffected, and their shared "outside cred" (which I happen to think neither one really deserves for different reasons, but that's the image each cultivates). Of course, in most ways they couldn't be more different; especially in that Trump is a flim-flam man who couldn't give a crap about the people he's asking to vote for him, while Sanders is legit and does. But there IS some overlap in the people they attract, and I only mention it because a). it's interesting, and b). it may offer some insights in how to defeat Trump, whether he faces Clinton or Sanders. You have to understand your opponent, and his appeal, if you want to beat him.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>By the way... just recently I strongly disagreed with mrkthompson's statement<< You did. In retrospect, I had specific examples in mind and it's not fair to expect you or Mr. X to have responded specifically to those. So I unreservedly apologize. I do think you overreacted to Skinner, who I think gets treated pretty shabbily around here when, if people disagree with her, can simply ignore her. But I did not intend to imply you supported racist comments, though I can see how it came across that way.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Thank you ecdc. << I do think you overreacted to Skinner, who I think gets treated pretty shabbily around here when, if people disagree with her, can simply ignore her.>> I will try to ease up on her, but it is hard to do so when she blames all the problems in this country on me because I am a straight white Christian male. She would probably advance her goals better by trying to make allies rather than enemies.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***I hate to see bad blood here, and clearly there is that between skinnerbox and RT, two people whose posts I have both enjoyed over the years (and sometimes criticized - gently I hope - as well).*** Love you too, Dabob!
Originally Posted By Mr X ***But my memory is that in the last year or two we've had regular posters come to these boards and call Black Lives Matter protestors cop killers, we've had them lecture "the black community," call them too afraid to speak out for their community, call black men terrible fathers, and we've had posters call Muslims horrible and terrorists. I certainly do not recall a response from you, RT, or most anyone else anywhere near the same level of response you've had to Skinner.*** I can almost certainly recall railing against some if not all of that nonsense over the years, but there's another factor in play. As most probably know, RT *is* a white guy. So am I, for that matter. And so when someone spouts off like Skinner does in a foolish way against *US*, in particular, I think it's only logical that we say "hey! wait a minute, that's not fair!". In the same way, I'd expect a muslim on these boards (if we'd ever had one, I'm honestly not sure) to speak up if someone said something unfair about Muslims, not *just* because it's uncool, but because it's also an unjustified personal attack. If I said something misogynistic and Skinner too umbrage, I doubt many would rush to back me up. And I would hope not. In fact, I'd appreciate hearing what I might have said that I should perhaps re-think in the future. Look, we all have our prejudices. I understand that (and I have no idea what Skinner has seen, heard, or been through that has brought her to this angry space). As someone who considered myself *extremely liberal*, I struggled with judgemental leanings when a dear childhood friend came out as transsexual. Hell, I still struggle with it even though she and I speak frequently and she's been very up front about everything (and even typing this I felt slightly funny with using her preferred choice of pronoun). But I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying REAL hard. Skinner should too.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***She would probably advance her goals better by trying to make allies rather than enemies.*** That's kinda where I'm at. ***I do think you overreacted to Skinner, who I think gets treated pretty shabbily around here when, if people disagree with her, can simply ignore her.*** I honestly don't think I did. I was harsh, but I didn't get personal. And remember, her retort was pretty much "Screw you, I'm entitled to my opinion. You don' like it? Don't talk to me!", which doesn't leave much room for dialogue. I've also backed her up many a time on these boards, but by and large I haven't felt any sense of reciprocity in that regard, and I find her to be inflexible and unyielding. One reason I *still* try to drum up chats over here on LP is because the place is still populated by "liberal but compassionate" folks (not the trolls, of course). Skinner reminds me more of the rigid, eternally pissed-off hordes of left-winger purists, where I feel like a goddammed teabagger in comparison.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Hell, I still struggle with it even though she and I speak frequently and she's been very up front about everything (and even typing this I felt slightly funny with using her preferred choice of pronoun).>> Ironic. One of my good FB friends and a friend in real life is a M to F transsexual who came out about two years ago. I originally knew this person as a male and it was something of a shock. Remember the "Branson Boards"? He was one of the most rabidly offensive posters there. I first met him (at the time) when I went to see a Blues Band he was in. Strangely enough we got along well. There was always something that made me feel there was a story behind the crusty exterior and something that made this person a good person to know. Of course now I realize that she had created a tough-guy persona in response to 60 years spent having to live a lie. She first self-identified with being female as a young child. Back to the issue of confronting bigots, I constantly sparred with Beau and complained to Admin about so many of his posts that I think Admin was sick of hearing from me.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Of course now I realize that she had created a tough-guy persona in response to 60 years spent having to live a lie. She first self-identified with being female as a young child.*** Dayum. And I thought my friend had guts to come out in liberal Boston!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Dayum. And I thought my friend had guts to come out in liberal Boston!>> Yes, it was pretty sad. The Blues Band he put together deserted him. They had been a very successful local band. The "star" of the group was the lead singer and harmonica player. He said that my friend was totally perverted and he couldn't even stand riding in the same car. My friend quit the band and even let them keep the name he had created. He just didn't want the hassle.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Crap. SHE didn't want the hassle. Damned pronouns get you every time. :-(
Originally Posted By Mr X Yep...that's an issue for sure (in my friends' case, I heard her stepfather "accidentally" refer to her by her former name at her grandmothers' funeral...maybe it *was* an accident, but it was jarring nonetheless).
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "It is data. Not the best data, but data, and actually hundreds of thousands of people." An online Drudge poll. Seriously? Give me something significant. "There IS some overlap between Trump and Sanders voters" What is some? 1%? 5%? I'll buy 1%. Maybe 5%. Clearly you can find "some" overlap between all candidate's supporters. That's so obvious that it's not worth mentioning. At what point does it become interesting or significant?
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "He said that my friend was totally perverted and he couldn't even stand riding in the same car. My friend quit the band and even let them keep the name he had created. He just didn't want the hassle." Jesus Christ. That is horrible. What is wrong with people?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "It is data. Not the best data, but data, and actually hundreds of thousands of people." <An online Drudge poll. Seriously? Give me something significant.> And how do you define "significant" other than specific Gallup-style polling on this question that you know well hasn't been done? And if it existed, you'd probably just move the goalposts again. ("One poll? Could be an outlier.") "There IS some overlap between Trump and Sanders voters" <What is some? 1%? 5%? I'll buy 1%. Maybe 5%. Clearly you can find "some" overlap between all candidate's supporters. That's so obvious that it's not worth mentioning. At what point does it become interesting or significant?> At that point where plenty of professional political reporters in both print and broadcast are reporting on it. Oh wait, that's already happened. Look - you don't believe it. Fine. I looked askance at it myself the first several times I heard it brought up, until it was brought up enough times by enough different people with various political leanings that I had to admit to myself that my first inklings might not have been correct.
Originally Posted By hopemax Article about the other way. Sanders supporters who also prefer Trump to Clinton. Not a poll but a request for people to call and explain why. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/13/bernie-sanders-supporters-consider-donald-trump-no-hillary-clinton">http://www.theguardian.com/us-...-clinton</a>
