I looked through hubski posts submitted from the culturalaffairs.com domain, and there are only a few, one of which was this. I'm rereading the discussion, and it's striking how less confident I am that folx voting for Trump will be scarce in November. The NYTimes mentioned in a blog post introducing a predictive model of the election, and put the odds of Hillary losing at 34%, or about the liklihood that an NBA player will miss a free throw. I agree though, where's the PAC running boorish comment n montage ads of Trump?
In my opinion, it's exactly as it was. I mean, This is June 21: I mean, the Koch Brothers are sitting this one out. That 3%? That's all about money.In the primaries you're appealing to roughly 50% of roughly 97% of the electorate that has made up its mind and will never vote for the other side's candidate. In the general you're trying to grab the 3% that's legitimately up-for-grabs, doesn't hear your dog whistles, and has somehow managed to stay undecided in the most polarized political climate since the Civil War.
Trump raised just over $3 million in May — the month he secured enough delegates to win the Republican nomination — while Clinton raked in more than $26 million, according to the latest filings from the Federal Election Commission.
Is that right? I've heard so much conflicting analysis regarding money in politics that any consensus, if there is one, is that votes follow the more monied candidate but also that money naturally finds the likelier candidate anyway etc. with the cause being difficult to single out. Is money really the only (/largest) influence on that 3%? And why is it 3%, not 5% or 25%? How come it doesn't ever swing to 60% one party and the other 30%? Why is the party breakdown always so nearly even? Also, now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever known someone in that 3%. Who the fuck makes their mind up about something like that based on a 30-second ad spot?That 3%? That's all about money.
You convert an undecided voter to a decided voter by carpetbombing their field of view with propaganda. Propaganda costs money. Current polls seem to put "undecided voters" somewhere between 10% and 20%. Whenever I find someone skeptical about the general stupidity of the human race, I encourage them to read some Youtube comments. If that doesn't work, I advise them to sell something on Craigslist. Elitism only grows easier the more you interface with the proletariat. TRUE STORY: The last time I voted in person in Washington, I crossed the street to the church and walked into the foyer. Someone struck up a conversation with me. We chatted for a minute. Then he said "You seem to be pretty intelligent. Who should I vote for?" I told him that it was an important decision and I'd be happy to help him, but I wouldn't tell him, and he shouldn't let anyone else tell him, either. He gave me a thoughtful look like he'd never heard such a thing in his life.
I find my incredulity from last night somewhat foreign to me now. I literally just sold my car on craigslist and the experience was very much what you describe. My love for the proletariat is very abstract.