Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic Episode 446: The Empire Strikes Back

(+) Yeah! (+)

Like, you ask people if they want to go back to early 2021 over late 2024 many would say yes (shocking how forgotten covid has been), but very few would want to go back to early 2021 over early 2017.

LightningStrikes posted...

Like, you ask people if they want to go back to early 2021 over late 2024 many would say yes (shocking how forgotten covid has been), but very few would want to go back to early 2021 over early 2017.

My cousin was still alive in 2017

LightningStrikes posted...

https://www.newsweek.com/barack-obama-popularity-poll-results-president-1961845

Obama would win comfortably.

And we saw how right polls were! Then again I have never been a huge fan of Obama personally (dont really follow politics beyond a historical context admittedly), and the only reason Id rank him a better POTUS than Biden or Clinton is because he has fewer controversies.

That being said, what was the last notably good POTUS? LBJ? Kennedy? EISENHOWER? Im convinced this country would have been irrelevant ages ago if other countries could get their stuff together.

LinkMarioSamus posted...

And we saw how right polls were!

As has been discussed many times the polls were basically right. Wild how this has become the narrative already lol.

Polls werent wrong, conventional wisdom was wrong.

Obama represents the casual revolution of 2007 perfectly. The people yearn for that simpler time.

LightningStrikes posted...

Wild how this has become the narrative already lol.

You must have missed everyone shitting on Nate and such for the last few months. Their heads were already in the sand.

Political historians almost always have Obama top 10. Not sure how that doesn't make him a good president.

Obama's approval ratings in the 2nd half of his 2nd term were underwater until the 2016 campaign got going and it became clear that it was going to be Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump. I think people then started saying their viewed Obama favorably because he was better than these two. But since then, Trump has had a term in office in which he achieved the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years in early 2020.

The operative question is whether people would go back to January 2020 (right before Covid hit) or late 2016. People wouldn't choose early 2021 because of the pandemic, but they would absolutely choose early 2020. In 2016, if you'll recall, Democrats were campaigning for a $15/hr minimum wage and Republicans were saying that was so unrealistic as to be out of touch. By 2020, market wages for fast food jobs in high income areas had risen above $15/hr and the $15 minimum wage had become increasingly irrelevant. At the beginning of 2020, unemployment was the lowest it had been since 1969. There were oil and gas jobs in North Dakota where you could walk up to a job site and be hired on the spot.

Don't underestimate how strong the economy was immediately before Covid.

People like Obama the person but I'm not sure they like Obama the presidency (anymore). Remember that Hillary Clinton offered 4 more years of that and was soundly beaten by Trump in 2016.

Hillary lost because her promises didn't come off as authentic so no one cared what she was promising

Kenri posted...

People like Obama the person but I'm not sure they like Obama the presidency (anymore). Remember that Hillary Clinton offered 4 more years of that and was soundly beaten by Trump in 2016.

I'm not sure I'd call it soundly beaten.

10704 more votes in Michigan
44292 more votes in Pennsylvania
22748 more votes in Wisconsin (where she didn't even campaign)

And she wins.

Kamala lost by:
80k in Michigan
145k in Pennsylvania
30k in Wisconsin

She kept it pretty close, and the 'candidate of change' often has an advantage unless they're the incumbent themselves when the economy is good.

Throw in James Comey and the fact most people thought it'd be a walk in the park, and she loses.

why are we relitigating 2016 when we haven't finished beginning to litigate 2024

red_sox_777 posted...

Don't underestimate how strong the economy was immediately before Covid.

It was powerfully, unprecedentedly weak. Hence the collosal crash afterwards. It was a positive economy, never mistake that for strength under keynesianism. Fear the boom not the bust. That's what all rich people know.

v_charon posted...

Political historians almost always have Obama top 10. Not sure how that doesn't make him a good president.

They also usually rank Reagan somewhere around 15ish and y'all say he was the worst thing ever so

foolm0r0n posted...

It was powerfully, unprecedentedly weak. Hence the collosal crash afterwards. It was a positive economy, never mistake that for strength under keynesianism. Fear the boom not the bust. That's what all rich people know.

Even if you're right about that, it really doesn't matter politically. People were doing well. They didn't know it was being held together by smoke and mirrors.

Not much really matters politically, we all agree on that

Underleveled posted...

They also usually rank Reagan somewhere around 15ish and y'all say he was the worst thing ever so

His popularity in those rankings has been faltering from where it was a decade ago to be fair; he used to be much higher than that ranking. I feel eventually he'll wind up where he deserves.

Well, hopefully.

Obama would've beaten Trump pretty bad. He wasn't part of this administration and people have fond memories of Obama's terms as President. Harris was at a real disadvantage in that she wasn't President during a prosperous time (or at all.) People will often pick the devil they know over the one they don't. Obama is very popular, and charismatic. He and Michelle are about the only ones who would've won this time.

Possibly? The last decade has seen some drastic shifts. Jackson was pretty universally considered top 10 for a long time until people finally woke up to the fact that the repercussions of his horrid treatment of Native Americans are still felt today. On the other side, Grant's rankings have risen significantly, his poor reputation having largely been southerners and confederate sympathizers negatively skewing the narrative of his presidency.

The truth is, It takes decades before a presidency can truly be assessed. We need time to see exactly how the long-term ramifications of their administration play out. Like, right now we're at the point where we can start to properly judge the Clinton and early Bush years.

I don't think Michelle Obama had a chance

Some white old guy who was younger than Trump may have

Dancedreamer posted...

Obama would've beaten Trump pretty bad. He wasn't part of this administration and people have fond memories of Obama's terms as President. Harris was at a real disadvantage in that she wasn't President during a prosperous time (or at all.) People will often pick the devil they know over the one they don't. Obama is very popular, and charismatic. He and Michelle are about the only ones who would've won this time.

I'll go a step further and say that I firmly believe that, running today with a clean slate, Obama would soundly beat any former president or major party candidate except maybe Kennedy on charisma alone.

Underleveled posted...

I'll go a step further and say that I firmly believe that, running today with a clean slate, Obama would soundly beat any former president or major party candidate except maybe Kennedy on charisma alone.

Even the presidents that don't have any audio/video footage to compare? How do you measure that?

Xeybozn posted...

Even the presidents that don't have any audio/video footage to compare? How do you measure that?

how much rizz could this dude possible have come on man
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/b/b0855a4a.jpg

90% of the counties in America leaned more towards Trump than before.

Jesus Christ himself would have lost against the right wing nutjobs that have infiltrated the electorate.

Well yeah Jesus wouldve been a brown socialist none of them wouldve voted for even if he could prove he was real

Xeybozn posted...

Even the presidents that don't have any audio/video footage to compare? How do you measure that?

At the very least, since the radio era.

DoctorPiranha3 posted...

90% of the counties in America leaned more towards Trump than before.

Trump went from losing by more than 4% nationally to winning outright. Considering that, it's surprising there are that many counties that shifted away from him.

foolm0r0n posted...

You must have missed everyone shitting on Nate and such for the last few months. Their heads were already in the sand.

Indeed.

People on Monday November the 4th, 2024: Ignore the polls, Harris will win comfortably.

Those same people on Wednesday November the 6th 2024: Cant believe Harris lost, the polls must have been wrong!.

Why would 18-20 year-olds who don't remember Obama's presidency and had their teenage years during Trump's first one vote for Obama over Trump?

LightningStrikes posted...

People on Monday November the 4th, 2024: Ignore the polls, Harris will win comfortably.

I feel like it was more "hot damn look at these polling numbers, Harris will win comfortably" on Nov 4.

LinkMarioSamus posted...

Why would 18-20 year-olds who don't remember Obama's presidency and had their teenage years during Trump's first one vote for Obama over Trump?

Why do 18-20 year olds who dont remember before the brexit referendum and spent their teenage years during the exit process say they would overwhelmingly vote to rejoin the EU?

I know you know the answer to this.

Kenri posted...

I feel like it was more "hot damn look at these polling numbers, Harris will win comfortably" on Nov 4.

Well, one specific polling number. The reality is nearly every poll was within the margin of error, as were the aggregators. I feel bad for Ann Selzer though.

v_charon posted...

His popularity in those rankings has been faltering from where it was a decade ago to be fair; he used to be much higher than that ranking. I feel eventually he'll wind up where he deserves.

Well, hopefully.

I didn't exist in the 1980s but historically speaking how could Reagan be the worst thing as opposed to William Henry Harrison, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Warren G. Harding, Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, George W. Bush, and even Trump himself? Heck, what about most of the 19th century Presidents, William Howard Taft, Woodrow Wilson, Calvin Coolidge, and George H. W. Bush?

Admittedly I say this having seen CNN-produced documentaries about the 1980s and 1990s recently and both Reagan and the older Bush seemed fairly likeable. I genuinely don't think there has been such a charismatic President since Reagan in terms of being able to demand attention just by his sheer presence without necessarily even drawing attention to myself, though I could just be taken back by his movie star swagger because he reminds me of my two favorite actors Harrison Ford and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Based on Wikipedia though Reagan wasn't seen in particularly high regard until the 2000s (even though he was very popular during his Presidency, the first Bush's stained him for a time). I honestly believe the current Republican Party has basically appropriated Trump as the next Reagan even though Trump is frankly an insult to Reagan. Speaking of appropriation, here's how I read the political events of the past decade regarding the two parties:

-Trump wins first term due to infighting among Democrats between Clinton and Sanders factions.
-Obama becomes the de facto leader of the Democratic Party after leaving office, uniting the party back.
-Trump screwing up in his first term causes Obama's VP to beat him in the next election.
-Trump then himself becomes the de facto leader of the Republican Party after leaving office.

LightningStrikes posted...

Indeed.

People on Monday November the 4th, 2024: Ignore the polls, Harris will win comfortably.

Those same people on Wednesday November the 6th 2024: Cant believe Harris lost, the polls must have been wrong!.

When everyone was salivating over that one Selzer poll I was like "that can't possibly be right". I go to Iowa for work all the time and that state is a cesspool. So I went to check other polls and literally that same day there was a Trump +9 from another polling group that I remembered being good in the past. So I asked in this topic and people were like "oh yeah that dude is a fraud everyone has been laughing at them all election".

That was the hardest day for me to not be a downer in here because I was like people are just straight up ignoring polls for no reason. "Oh Nate Silver is a fraud oh this other aggregator is a fraud oh the polling looks really good if you ignore like two thirds of the polls and only focus on these three specific pollsters".

People were setting themselves up to be willfully ignorant out of hope and I get that but then don't act confused and go "jeez how come the polls were wrong???"

Taft, Ford and Bush Sr dont belong anywhere near the bottom of the list. Coolidge was meh but did nothing too terrible. Nixon had some good policies, corrupt as he was.

Underleveled posted...

Taft, Ford and Bush Sr dont belong anywhere near the bottom of the list. Coolidge was meh but did nothing too terrible. Nixon had some good policies, corrupt as he was.

If Nixon gets props for seeking detente with the USSR then Reagan has MR. GORBACHEV, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL!

Heck Bush, Sr. being better than Reagan is a thing. Based on election victories and approval rating Reagan was the most successful POTUS since Eisenhower. I disdain his influence on subsequent politics though.

In that sense, Trump would get credit for project Warp Speed, which is a moon landing level achievement of government. Most of a presidency is judged by its circumstance rather than the president's actual actions.

I'd say it's not as apparent but the discussion is frankly academic in this case.

foolm0r0n posted...

Obama represents the casual revolution of 2007 perfectly. The people yearn for that simpler time.

the 07 to 15 era was way more optimistic than the echo revolution, but the seeds were being sewn. Social media addiction is the number 1 cause of all of this.

Suprak_the_Stud posted...

When everyone was salivating over that one Selzer poll I was like "that can't possibly be right". I go to Iowa for work all the time and that state is a cesspool. So I went to check other polls and literally that same day there was a Trump +9 from another polling group that I remembered being good in the past. So I asked in this topic and people were like "oh yeah that dude is a fraud everyone has been laughing at them all election".

That was the hardest day for me to not be a downer in here because I was like people are just straight up ignoring polls for no reason. "Oh Nate Silver is a fraud oh this other aggregator is a fraud oh the polling looks really good if you ignore like two thirds of the polls and only focus on these three specific pollsters".

People were setting themselves up to be willfully ignorant out of hope and I get that but then don't act confused and go "jeez how come the polls were wrong???"

Yeah I hate to say it but Nate Silver was right, other high rated Iowa pollsters showing differently was definitely a blow to the Selzer poll. Now, there are times where pollsters diverge and show wildly different results and the less expected one can be right. I got excited by the Selzer poll too. But there was always a chance it was just a large polling error which is what it was.

There can be use in just talking to people on the ground though. You can definitely get a sense of things that way. Eg my sister was working in Florida in 2020 and was pretty sure that it was going to go more to Trump which is what happened.

LightningStrikes posted...

Indeed.

People on Monday November the 4th, 2024: Ignore the polls, Harris will win comfortably.

Those same people on Wednesday November the 6th 2024: Cant believe Harris lost, the polls must have been wrong!.

People in this very topic were saying to ignore this poll, and ignore that poll, and ignore all the national polls, in favor of looking at a few state polls that favored Harris.

People will probably still do this next time, and still blame the polls when they are "wrong."

HeroicCrono posted...

People in this very topic were saying to ignore this poll, and ignore that poll, and ignore all the national polls, in favor of looking at a few state polls that favored Harris.

People will probably still do this next time, and still blame the polls when they are "wrong."

Yeah I pointed out the polls were bad and got told my "doomering was annoying", lol.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Yeah I pointed out the polls were bad and got told my "doomering was annoying", lol.

Dooming was annoying tbf

We have plenty of time to doomer now

UltimaterializerX posted...

you can't do an entire presidential campaign in 3 months

This is really disappointing, because our election cycles are too damn long. I'm glad I don't live in a swing state, because I can't imagine being bombarded by ads for 6 months non-stop.

The people who broke for the election didn't start researching until after they voted. I'm not convinced that a longer ad cycle would have done much for harris.

In Ireland the campaigns are three weeks, and legally cant go over four weeks long.

People googling 'what are tariffs?" after the election is crazy to me. Like you'd think they'd look that shit up at least the day before.

Dancedreamer posted...

People googling 'what are tariffs?" after the election is crazy to me. Like you'd think they'd look that shit up at least the day before.

If their vote was locked in no matter what tariffs are, it makes sense.

The thing is, by the standards of a sitting government in a 2024 election the Democrats did not actually do that badly. They saw a roughly 6% swing against them. By contrast the then-sitting government in the UK election saw a 22% national swing against them (actually bigger if you look at the individual seats). Heres what a 22% swing from 2020 looks like in a US election:

https://www.270towin.com/maps/7V0pg

Absolute disaster, if that happened it could be an extinction level event for the Democrats. I think that was averted, and if Trump doesnt end US Democracy the Democrats can recover, probably quite quickly too. Unlike a lot of those other countries, the Democratic base is still broadly intact, though damaged.

I still believe there will be enough face eating in the next 4 years that Dems can win against a non Trump candidate, just in time for all the consequences of the Trump administration to really hit the country.