dagblog - Comments for "Why These Voters Rejected Hillary Clinton but Are Backing Joe Biden" http://dagblog.com/link/why-these-voters-rejected-hillary-clinton-are-backing-joe-biden-32756 Comments for "Why These Voters Rejected Hillary Clinton but Are Backing Joe Biden" en Seth Abramson retweeted AP http://dagblog.com/comment/291409#comment-291409 <a id="comment-291409"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/291353#comment-291353">Absolutely fabulous 7:16</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Seth Abramson retweeted AP article on suburban women vote:</p> <p> </p><div class="media_embed"> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" height="" width=""> <p dir="ltr" lang="en" xml:lang="en">President Trump has tried to appeal to “the suburban housewives of America,” as he called them. There’s no sign it’s working.<br /><br /> Read more in the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AmericaDisrupted?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AmericaDisrupted</a> series on how suburban women are leading a charge against the president<a href="https://t.co/ClmisDjY4U">https://t.co/ClmisDjY4U</a></p> — The Associated Press (@AP) <a href="https://twitter.com/AP/status/1318306693080633344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" height="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" width=""></script></div> </div></div></div> Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:45:49 +0000 artappraiser comment 291409 at http://dagblog.com More experienced focus http://dagblog.com/comment/291406#comment-291406 <a id="comment-291406"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/why-these-voters-rejected-hillary-clinton-are-backing-joe-biden-32756">Why These Voters Rejected Hillary Clinton but Are Backing Joe Biden</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>More experienced focus grouper tells:</p> <p> </p><div class="media_embed"> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" height="" width=""> <p dir="ltr" lang="en" xml:lang="en">"The majority of 2016 Trump voters—despite a mismanaged pandemic, widespread economic fallout, a racial crisis exacerbated by divisive rhetoric, and a debate meltdown—plan to back Trump a second time."<br /><br /> Read <a href="https://twitter.com/SarahLongwell25?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SarahLongwell25</a> to understand why:<a href="https://t.co/lllCUsBc05">https://t.co/lllCUsBc05</a></p> — Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) <a href="https://twitter.com/JeffreyGoldberg/status/1318160671339630592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 19, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" height="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" width=""></script></div> </div></div></div> Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:46:45 +0000 artappraiser comment 291406 at http://dagblog.com No, I understand that. My http://dagblog.com/comment/291382#comment-291382 <a id="comment-291382"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/291381#comment-291381">you must have missed the part</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>No, I understand that. My point is that, as a group, they were willing to vote for a known racist. They are changing their minds because they see the consequences. I don't think that outreach pointing out Trump's racism would have changed minds. Trump's behavior changed minds.</p> </div></div></div> Sun, 18 Oct 2020 23:02:15 +0000 rmrd0000 comment 291382 at http://dagblog.com you must have missed the part http://dagblog.com/comment/291381#comment-291381 <a id="comment-291381"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/291379#comment-291379">It appears that outreach did</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>you must have missed the part that what turned them off is having a president that poured fuel on the fire rather than one who was attempting to calm down people that were "overreaching".</p> </div></div></div> Sun, 18 Oct 2020 22:59:19 +0000 artappraiser comment 291381 at http://dagblog.com It appears that outreach did http://dagblog.com/comment/291379#comment-291379 <a id="comment-291379"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/291353#comment-291353">Absolutely fabulous 7:16</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>It appears that outreach did not change opinions. Observing the murder of a black man by police, while a crowd of black people pleaded with the officer to stop altered their view of being pro-life. </p> </div></div></div> Sun, 18 Oct 2020 22:46:23 +0000 rmrd0000 comment 291379 at http://dagblog.com "I don’t know how to explain http://dagblog.com/comment/291376#comment-291376 <a id="comment-291376"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/why-these-voters-rejected-hillary-clinton-are-backing-joe-biden-32756">Why These Voters Rejected Hillary Clinton but Are Backing Joe Biden</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>"I don’t know how to explain it.” - that largely just explained it</p> </div></div></div> Sun, 18 Oct 2020 21:51:58 +0000 PeraclesPlease comment 291376 at http://dagblog.com Absolutely fabulous 7:16 http://dagblog.com/comment/291353#comment-291353 <a id="comment-291353"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/why-these-voters-rejected-hillary-clinton-are-backing-joe-biden-32756">Why These Voters Rejected Hillary Clinton but Are Backing Joe Biden</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Absolutely fabulous 7:16 minute video of Don Lemon interviewing an expert on Trump losing female Republican voters all of whom voted for him in 2016 (she has been working with many focus groups of same since that date.) I can't recommend it enough:</p> <p> </p><div class="media_embed"> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" height="" width=""> <p dir="ltr" lang="en" xml:lang="en">“He is failing to speak to the issues that are top of mind for women,” says Sarah Longwell, co-founder of Republican Voters Against Trump. “I’ve done about 50 focus groups over the last say three years. I’ve watched Donald Trump alienate these women in real time.” <a href="https://t.co/Csw1JafRux">pic.twitter.com/Csw1JafRux</a></p> — CNN Tonight (@CNNTonight) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNTonight/status/1317309686908133376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 17, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" height="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" width=""></script></div> <p>Exceptionally interesting thing to me is that she says they were hanging in there with him through 2019. She started to see a turn in March and April and "especially in July".</p> <p>Of course one can instead think that they are all "Karen" racists and one should not try to get their vote. As we have been lectured on dagblog about how all Trump voters are irredeemable.</p> <p>But then you have to deal with what she says about how they reacted to Trump's handling of the George Floyd killing And Don agrees with what she has to say about that "155 thousand percent". She explains how many of these women are pro-life but are beginning to rethink what being pro-life means, and when they saw a grown man on video call out for his mama while being killed by a police officer....</p> <p>To get into nuance, though, that Don and Sarah didn't have time for--what this type of woman now think about Trump, maybe they don't think the same about Amy Coney Barrett....</p> </div></div></div> Sun, 18 Oct 2020 18:46:36 +0000 artappraiser comment 291353 at http://dagblog.com