wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago
An interesting story about None of the Above voters from the LA Times. I cut a lot of the article out but I didn’t separate it into a lot of quotes. You’ll have to go to the story  to read all of it.

If prior elections were decided by soccer moms, security moms, NASCAR dads, or even “the economy, stupid,” the 2016 presidential election will be determined by the NAs — the none of the above voters who have so far refused to support either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. For them, the election isn’t about mere dissatisfaction. It’s about rejection.
Comprising about 11% of the electorate in the critical swing states,
But, as a language and communications consultant, I’m listening to them very carefully, because they have become a distinct, determinative force in politics. Anger doesn’t begin to describe their personal outlook. Betrayal does.
They straddle both sides of the ideological spectrum. no trust in their elected officials, and no love, like or even tolerance for either of the presidential candidates thrust upon them.
After 10 years of failures by Washington, Wall Street and the parties they used to (somewhat) trust. For them, life is about survival, nothing more and nothing less.
They’re not the “low information” voters that conservative talk radio scorns. they blame America’s biggest institutions for the American peoples’ troubles, and they trust almost no one. Especially not the parties’ prospective nominees.
Two-thirds of the NA voters are women and more than a quarter are under age 30, compared with 18% of the electorate. These are struggling working class voters, the staple of the Democratic Party.
If elections were strictly about demographics, Clinton should be winning them. But she’s not.
Politically, they look more favorably on the Republicans. Just under half (49%) voted for Romney in 2012, while only 36% supported Obama — and they embrace conservatism over liberalism by better than 2 to 1 (45% to 21%).
If elections were strictly about party loyalty or ideology, Trump should be winning them. But he’s not.
Frank Luntz is an on-air contributor and analyst for CBS News and the Fox News Channel.



It is possible for someone to vote NA or for a 3rd party candidate to show their dissatisfaction. I am kind of leaning toward burning my vote with Gary Johnson. He may not be any better than the Clinton or Drumpf. He will never win but at least it is one way to express my disgust with the choices at hand.
In reality it doesn’t matter what I do. IL will go to Clinton no matter what. She has those 20 Electoral Votes tucked away in the bank. IL has gone for the Democratic candidate in the last 5 elections.
In reality the election is Hillary’s to lose. Even with as much frustration people have expressed, including people who regularly vote for the Dem candidate, it will come down to 5-10 states. AZ, FL, Virginia and Minnesota are weakly leaning her direction. Those along with Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and Pennsylvania will be the ones to decide the election. She doesn’t even need to win all of them.


UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
9 years ago
There are so many democrats I'm hearing who are voting for Trump and many people who lean left now call themselves Progressives are performing an all out assault on Hilary, while putting their support behind Sanders. The landscape is crazy. I'm a libertarian, so I'll be voting for Gary.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
PackFanWithTwins
9 years ago
These stats on who the NA voters are shows exactly why I can't throw my vote away.

Just under half (49%) voted for Romney in 2012, while only 36% supported Obama



Wisconsin had 98K more GOP votes in the Primary than Democrat votes. Wisconsin hasn't voted GOP for a president since 1984. It is to close to flush a vote and help Hillary take the state.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Cheesey
9 years ago
Once again I can't voice my opinion without a certain person calling me stupid.

Isn't that something? How you can depend on some things as certainties?
Again, nothing said to back up how my points were stupid, just the same leftist regurgitations.

Boy, I hope some day I can be even HALF as smart as some people (in their own minds) THINK they are.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
9 years ago

Once again I can't voice my opinion without a certain person calling me stupid.

Isn't that something? How you can depend on some things as certainties?
Again, nothing said to back up how my points were stupid, just the same leftist regurgitations.

Boy, I hope some day I can be even HALF as smart as some people (in their own minds) THINK they are.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey 



You want to say something smart? Do an essay on how trickle down economics has devastated the lower middle class and poor people of America. Or, back up the bull shit you believe with your right wing duping and explain how trickle down economics has helped the lower middle class and poor people of America. You'll find the first choice is correct and you'll be able to find much more research data to support it.

Your candidate should be Bernie Sanders because his agenda financially helps you and keeps food on your table. But, you're a Republican through and through. Please explain why, Einstein.

Back on topic, Hillary is a hypocrite, a chicken hawk, corrupt, and an establishment politician; which is why she will be the next president of the United States. But she does that without my vote.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
9 years ago
I think we all know who falls under this umbrella ...
 13346958_1228218563878292_4253814413172011282_n.jpg You have insufficient rights to see the content.
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
9 years ago
First, knock the shit off in the threads in terms of personal attacks.. pretty simple and straightforward... talk to the topics or even why you disagree with a viewpoint.. but stop short of attacks on each other.

I get it.. religious or political discussions bring emotion and hatred out... but if you cannot control it, stay out of the topics.

Think it clear enough.

On topic... show me a single politician that will not sellout for a donation.... the bigger the donation, the more they will over look. Hell... they will sell their signature on a bill for far less deposited directly into their pocket. We have a golden boy currently in Wisconsin with plenty of insurance money in his pockets at the moment.

While some might see NA as throwing their vote away, which technically it is, but I think the statement itself makes a bigger impact than what my mind can accept as voting for the least evil option. That is the sad state of our leadership today... there are few leaders worthy of my actual vote on merit.. not be the least toxic option.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago
Whoever wins and their party will not care at all about the NA "vote" even if it is 50-60%.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
9 years ago

Whoever wins and their party will not care at all about the NA "vote" even if it is 50-60%.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Perhaps not. But:
1. It might be a lot harder for them to get legislation passed AND
2. It would encourage more civil disobedience

BECAUSE:

If the NA vote were 50 percent, the most the "winners" would likely have would be about 10% of those eligible to vote (since a lot of people won't vote at all) AND
Those elected with 10% of the electorate are going to have a much harder time convincing anyone they have small-d democratic legitimacy.

A 50% NA vote means those elected have the legitimacy of, oh, your average "banana republic."

IMO, even a 15% NA vote would make the major parties quiver a lot. At least any who study history.

A 50% NA vote would mean we were on the knife edge of storming the Bastille.






And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
9 years ago

Perhaps not. But:
1. It might be a lot harder for them to get legislation passed AND
2. It would encourage more civil disobedience

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Oh and Congress is doing so well passing legislation now? That is best news I have heard. The less they legislate the better the odds they won't screw us over.


If the NA vote were 50 percent, the most the "winners" would likely have would be about 10% of those eligible to vote (since a lot of people won't vote at all) AND
Those elected with 10% of the electorate are going to have a much harder time convincing anyone they have small-d democratic legitimacy.



I hope you realize I am exaggerating by saying 50%. However if you include the typical non voters that are there in every Presidential election maybe it is going to pretty close to 50% this year.


IMO, even a 15% NA vote would make the major parties quiver a lot. At least any who study history.


I don't give them credit for being smart enough. They are like hogs at a trough. As long as they are stuffing their faces they won't care or realize they might soon be starving.


A 50% NA vote would mean we were on the knife edge of storming the Bastille.
yes I know.







UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Mucky Tundra (3h) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
    Mucky Tundra (3h) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
    Mucky Tundra (3h) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
    Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
    Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
    dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
    dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
    wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
    Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
    Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
    Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
    Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
    Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
    Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
    beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
    Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
    Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
    Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
    Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
    Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
    dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup
    dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw
    dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.
    Zero2Cool (11-Jun) : He's been sporting a ring for a while now. It's probably Madonna.
    Martha Careful (10-Jun) : We only do the tea before whoopee, it relaxes me.
    wpr (10-Jun) : That's awesome Martha.
    Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : How's the ayahuasca tea he makes, Martha?
    Martha Careful (10-Jun) : Turns out he like older women
    Martha Careful (10-Jun) : I wasn't supposed to say anything, but yes the word is out and we are happy 😂😂😂
    Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : I might be late on this but Aaron Rodgers is now married
    Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : Well he can always ask his brother for pointers
    Zero2Cool (10-Jun) : Bo Melton taking some reps at CB as well as WR
    Zero2Cool (10-Jun) : key transactions coming today at 3pm that will consume more cap in 2025
    Zero2Cool (9-Jun) : Jaire played in just 34 of a possible 68 games since the start of the 2021 season
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2025 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
    COMMANDERS
    Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
    Browns
    Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
    Cowboys
    Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
    BENGALS
    Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
    Cardinals
    Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
    PANTHERS
    Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
    EAGLES
    Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
    Bears
    Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
    RAVENS
    Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
    Vikings
    Recent Topics
    4h / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

    16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    29-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

    23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    18-Jun / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    16-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    15-Jun / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    14-Jun / Around The NFL / beast

    14-Jun / Community Welcome! / dfosterf

    13-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.