



EDIT 2: I just read a piece in politico that really ties everything into perspective with the few sources I trust in political forecasting.



Read these and you'll get a better idea of how I've come to see this election cycle.



*www.politico.com/magazine/stor…



* www.theatlantic.com/politics/a…



* geopoliticalfutures.com/in-def…



So here's my new rough timeline for a pretty conservative take on the general election:



2016 was an election year that highlighted a generational shift in American politics. The culture wars had largely been put to rest, and economic interests finally returned to the forefront of domestic political concerns, while the moral questions shifted to American foreign policy and immigration.



On one side were those who saw nationalism/protectionism as immoral, akin to racism or even fascism in the extreme. These people embraced Neo-Liberal ideals about a globalized world, defined by free trade as an intrinsic economic, perhaps even moral good; and saw the individual more as a citizen of a global humanity, and borders/nation-states as arcane institutions that only serve to hurt this global citizenry and that the questions of race/gender/orientation were far more important than where you were born. Generally speaking these voters were more urban, wealthier, younger, more educated, and more ethnically diverse. They felt that the state should help the poor and new immigrants on means tested programs, but were generally more resistant to universal social welfare programs like social security and medicare. Internationally they saw the military as a necessary evil at best, believing that interventionism should be limited to humanitarian crises, while seeking relations and trade with all nations.



On the other side were the more nationalistic members of the society, who sought a form of protectionism and ethnic nationalism for whites in the extreme. These people embraced Conservative notions about the nation-state, and looked at free trade as source of economic malaise and unemployment in the middle class, or worse, a scheme by the wealthy or some not clearly defined establishment. Borders were seen as too porous, and the foreign was seen as a danger, either as an economic competitor or carrier of militancy. The idea of Americanness was far more important than the notion of race/gender/orientation, which were not viewed with any kind of hostility, just obliviousness when it came to their own privilege. These voters tended to be older, poorer, less educated, whiter, and more rural. They felt that the rich had betrayed the middle class, and that the government should both get out of the way of small businesses, but also raise taxes on the wealthy and provide universal social welfare programs for the aging and the unemployed. In a sense they were national-socialists without the overt racism. For them foreign entanglements were met with suspicion, and yet there was a pervasive militancy among this block of voters when it came to perceived threats.



While these shifts in voting blocks had already begun at the start of the 2016 election cycle, the shift in political machinery was still very much steeped in older notions about American political culture and thus after a chaotic primary season, both parties saw sizable defections to the other sides and third party candidates. The so called, NeverTrump and NeverHillary voters were in realty Republican Neo-Lberals and Democratic National-Socialists. For the Democrats, these defectors typically sought out the Trump campaign, while a minority endorsed Green Party perennial Jill Stein. On the Republican side, a minority sought out Clinton, while a larger faction endorsed Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. These libertarian voters would eventually join the Democratic party as it embraced a more consistent Neo-Liberal message, but much as was the case in the election of 1912, the initial defection hurt the Republicans far more than the Democrats they would eventually join.



EDIT 1: Well, I gotta say, I'm surprised as all of you that Trump's not, basically the nominee, but I fully expect the convention to still be a real circus.EDIT 2: I just read a piece in politico that really ties everything into perspective with the few sources I trust in political forecasting.Read these and you'll get a better idea of how I've come to see this election cycle.So here's my new rough timeline for a pretty conservative take on the general election:2016 was an election year that highlighted a generational shift in American politics. The culture wars had largely been put to rest, and economic interests finally returned to the forefront of domestic political concerns, while the moral questions shifted to American foreign policy and immigration.On one side were those who saw nationalism/protectionism as immoral, akin to racism or even fascism in the extreme. These people embraced Neo-Liberal ideals about a globalized world, defined by free trade as an intrinsic economic, perhaps even moral good; and saw the individual more as a citizen of a global humanity, and borders/nation-states as arcane institutions that only serve to hurt this global citizenry and that the questions of race/gender/orientation were far more important than where you were born. Generally speaking these voters were more urban, wealthier, younger, more educated, and more ethnically diverse. They felt that the state should help the poor and new immigrants on means tested programs, but were generally more resistant to universal social welfare programs like social security and medicare. Internationally they saw the military as a necessary evil at best, believing that interventionism should be limited to humanitarian crises, while seeking relations and trade with all nations.On the other side were the more nationalistic members of the society, who sought a form of protectionism and ethnic nationalism for whites in the extreme. These people embraced Conservative notions about the nation-state, and looked at free trade as source of economic malaise and unemployment in the middle class, or worse, a scheme by the wealthy or some not clearly defined establishment. Borders were seen as too porous, and the foreign was seen as a danger, either as an economic competitor or carrier of militancy. The idea of Americanness was far more important than the notion of race/gender/orientation, which were not viewed with any kind of hostility, just obliviousness when it came to their own privilege. These voters tended to be older, poorer, less educated, whiter, and more rural. They felt that the rich had betrayed the middle class, and that the government should both get out of the way of small businesses, but also raise taxes on the wealthy and provide universal social welfare programs for the aging and the unemployed. In a sense they were national-socialists without the overt racism. For them foreign entanglements were met with suspicion, and yet there was a pervasive militancy among this block of voters when it came to perceived threats.While these shifts in voting blocks had already begun at the start of the 2016 election cycle, the shift in political machinery was still very much steeped in older notions about American political culture and thus after a chaotic primary season, both parties saw sizable defections to the other sides and third party candidates. The so called, NeverTrump and NeverHillary voters were in realty Republican Neo-Lberals and Democratic National-Socialists. For the Democrats, these defectors typically sought out the Trump campaign, while a minority endorsed Green Party perennial Jill Stein. On the Republican side, a minority sought out Clinton, while a larger faction endorsed Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. These libertarian voters would eventually join the Democratic party as it embraced a more consistent Neo-Liberal message, but much as was the case in the election of 1912, the initial defection hurt the Republicans far more than the Democrats they would eventually join.



"I could be wrong, I'm probably wrong, but in this crazy election its anyone's guess who will win." - Me from 12 months ago.

Well I've made predictions a few years out about where this election would go, and I'm still trying to dislodge the foot from my mouth... So here's another scenario!The primaries for both parties and their respective conventions were an embarrassment for American politics. From Donald Trump's bizarre acceptance speech, to Ted Cruz's attempt to force a floor vote, to the protests against the DNC by Bernie Sanders' supporters, the entire primary season left a bad taste in the mouths of many voters and political operatives alike. The aftermath of the convention while less chaotic, was no less impactful. Many moderate Republicans (and historic Republican donors) were quick to endorse Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson after Donald Trump's acceptance speech, the most profound endorsement coming from 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Bernie Sanders endorsement of Hillary Clinton rallied the bulk of his supporters to the Clinton camp for the general, but Clinton's acceptance speech (which lauded his supporters for their enthusiasm, but made it clear that she intended to run to the center and appeal to minorities to try and secure moderate and disaffected Republicans) caused 20% of Sanders voters to defect to Trump and to a lesser extent Jill Stein. Ted Cruz's attempt to userp Trump's delegates before the first ballot only served to deepen the schism in the party and leds to Cruz being shouted down from the Senate floor shortly after returning from the convention, blamed by some as the spoiler that caused the Republican primary to drag on like it did after months of work to unite the party. A great deal of buzz was generated over the running mates, Clinton choosing Labor Secretary Perez (Obama cabinet, Hispanic, Progressive but suburban enough to not scare Republicans who would otherwise stay at home to run to the polls for Trump), and Newt Gingrich on the Republican side, in an attempt by Trump to reign in some Republican establishment donors. Most of these donors and voters were more willing to support Johnson than Clinton, but there was some crossover, and Clinton did reach out to them as political allies after taking office.