I know we've talked about this before here but making a new thread today with a poll.
We have folks here knowledgeable about political strategy and process. I'm not one. I'm a regular guy that feels like I understand human nature pretty well. And I understand game play and strategy.
I know it's serious and not a "game" but for this discussion, I'm defining the "game" as winning the Presidential Election.
Understand, that's VERY different than the game being "My Candidate Winning". If your candidate is on the further edge, you're not going to like what I'm saying here. But understand what I'm saying. I'm defining the game as winning the election. Not getting your candidate in.
Side Note: This is separate / in addition to one of the most important and odd rules of the game - the Electoral College. A rule Trump seemed to intuitively understand and use to his advantage last time way more effectively than Clinton. This part is actually fascinating. This is like a guy who doesn't know the NFL players but completely understands game play. You put him in a league where RB receptions are worth 10x their normal fantasy value and he instantly understands Austin Ekeler is a top 2 pick. Where the other guy is relatively clueless how a rule changes the game.
Back to the game. I see it like this.
The Democrats already the folks firmly on their end of the spectrum. Those points/votes are already scored. There is talk of Bernie Bros defecting if they don't get Bernie again, but the reality is most everyone firmly on the Dem side now will vote for whoever is the nominee.
The Republicans already the folks firmly on their end of the spectrum. Those points/votes are already scored. In the same way, most everyone that is firmly on the Republican side will vote Trump. They may talk about the "lesser of two bad choices", but the reality is a vote is a binary decision and the guy who holds his nose and votes Trump counts exactly the same as the MAGA Hat Rally voter.
The "game" then becomes who can win over the points WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN SCORED YET. They live in the middle. They're people who lean mostly Democratic but just aren't quite comfortable with how Bernie will pay for all this. They're people who lean most Republican but they just aren't comfortable with how Trump yells at people. Whatever. Doesn't really matter what they're not comfortable with. What matters is they're not firmly in either camp.
These were the mostly Republican small business owners (like my Dad) who realized Bill Clinton gave them the best opportunity to succeed. These were the mostly Democratic unemployed car factory person, who felt like Donald Trump would bring back jobs. Again, I"m not sure it matters so much WHY a candidate appeals to the person. Just that that they DO appeal to person.
So the game becomes in my opinion very simply: Who can win over the middle? And that begs the next question: What does the middle look like? Or better: How firm are the votes already locked in for the Democratic Candidate and for Trump?
Personally, I see way more opportunity for picking off the "not firm" Trump Support than I do picking off the "not firm" Democratic support. This goes back to my constantly saying my opinion, based on people I know, in the subset of "Trump Voters", the subset of super hardcore locked in Trump folks is relatively small. Sure, the average "Trump Voter" will say he supports / approves Trump when asked in a poll. But again, that's a binary vote. I think the actual opportunity for a moderate Democrat to pull people over to their side is huge.
If I could magically control the DNC and try to win the presidency in 2020, I'd go all in for a candidate that would satisfy my votes that are already locked up, and then go hard after those undecided votes in the middle.
So that's my strategy. And that's how I'd try to win "the game". Thoughts?
We have folks here knowledgeable about political strategy and process. I'm not one. I'm a regular guy that feels like I understand human nature pretty well. And I understand game play and strategy.
I know it's serious and not a "game" but for this discussion, I'm defining the "game" as winning the Presidential Election.
Understand, that's VERY different than the game being "My Candidate Winning". If your candidate is on the further edge, you're not going to like what I'm saying here. But understand what I'm saying. I'm defining the game as winning the election. Not getting your candidate in.
Side Note: This is separate / in addition to one of the most important and odd rules of the game - the Electoral College. A rule Trump seemed to intuitively understand and use to his advantage last time way more effectively than Clinton. This part is actually fascinating. This is like a guy who doesn't know the NFL players but completely understands game play. You put him in a league where RB receptions are worth 10x their normal fantasy value and he instantly understands Austin Ekeler is a top 2 pick. Where the other guy is relatively clueless how a rule changes the game.
Back to the game. I see it like this.
The Democrats already the folks firmly on their end of the spectrum. Those points/votes are already scored. There is talk of Bernie Bros defecting if they don't get Bernie again, but the reality is most everyone firmly on the Dem side now will vote for whoever is the nominee.
The Republicans already the folks firmly on their end of the spectrum. Those points/votes are already scored. In the same way, most everyone that is firmly on the Republican side will vote Trump. They may talk about the "lesser of two bad choices", but the reality is a vote is a binary decision and the guy who holds his nose and votes Trump counts exactly the same as the MAGA Hat Rally voter.
The "game" then becomes who can win over the points WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN SCORED YET. They live in the middle. They're people who lean mostly Democratic but just aren't quite comfortable with how Bernie will pay for all this. They're people who lean most Republican but they just aren't comfortable with how Trump yells at people. Whatever. Doesn't really matter what they're not comfortable with. What matters is they're not firmly in either camp.
These were the mostly Republican small business owners (like my Dad) who realized Bill Clinton gave them the best opportunity to succeed. These were the mostly Democratic unemployed car factory person, who felt like Donald Trump would bring back jobs. Again, I"m not sure it matters so much WHY a candidate appeals to the person. Just that that they DO appeal to person.
So the game becomes in my opinion very simply: Who can win over the middle? And that begs the next question: What does the middle look like? Or better: How firm are the votes already locked in for the Democratic Candidate and for Trump?
Personally, I see way more opportunity for picking off the "not firm" Trump Support than I do picking off the "not firm" Democratic support. This goes back to my constantly saying my opinion, based on people I know, in the subset of "Trump Voters", the subset of super hardcore locked in Trump folks is relatively small. Sure, the average "Trump Voter" will say he supports / approves Trump when asked in a poll. But again, that's a binary vote. I think the actual opportunity for a moderate Democrat to pull people over to their side is huge.
If I could magically control the DNC and try to win the presidency in 2020, I'd go all in for a candidate that would satisfy my votes that are already locked up, and then go hard after those undecided votes in the middle.
So that's my strategy. And that's how I'd try to win "the game". Thoughts?
Last edited by a moderator: