Often times voting Democratic is associated with being on the 'left' socially, being an outright socialist, racial minorities, welfare, etc. A sizeable portion of the Democratic party is actually based on mistrust of corporations that outsource manufacturing by labor union voters - but there seems to be a realization that Democrats have now supported and (are prepared to sign) yet another trade bill that will likely open up US laborers to competition with globally lower wage workers.
This begs the question, will Hillary Clinton herself be the primary reason for a potential Democrat loss, especially in the Rust Belt, or will a trend of betrayal of laborers, along with perhaps an annoyance of the political correctness obsession, lead to large scale abandonment of the party? Trump is easy to defect to if you dislike both parties, because both parties strongly dislike and dissociate themselves from him.
Pic related: posted a mock map based on some current Quinnipac polls (within margin of error); I've left NV, CO, and VA blue due to migration but FL, OH, and oddly PA all indicate to be competitive now.
>>73659777
I don't see Trump winning the general election because he doesn't have the minority vote like Clinton does.
As of things go now the election will be similar to 2012.
>>73660257
Lets allow only white men to vote then.
>>73660349
>tfw if that was the case my state would still go blue
fucking massachusetts
>>73660349
A lot of states would still be blue.
>>73660257
Will black turnout match 2012 for Obama? Or even 2008? Some (don't have a number) young blacks, or young people in general, are unlikely to support Hillary, even if faced with Trump.
Even if he can generate a higher Hispanic turnout for Democrats, I can't see white turnout being less than 2008 levels of demographic representation.
>>73660799
>Will black turnout match 2012 for Obama? Or even 2008?
No but that doesn't matter when Hispanics make up the largest minority demographic and Trump does the worse with Hispanics than any other Republican candidate in the history of the US. So far he's doing worse with Hispanics than Romney. You cannot win the election without the hispanic vote.
>>73660257
>Pennsylvania
>Ohio
>Florida
>going red
>>73660257
He's doing way better than Romney was, and Romney lost by less than 5%.
>>73661406
Better in what demographic? White voters? You can't win with only white people. 2012 showed us that.
>>73659777
>will likely open up US laborers to competition with globally lower wage workers.
How are they not already?
>>73661604
All production faces cost of long-distance shipping (Asia) with tariffs tacked on, or extremely low quality, even by cheap-shit standards, from Mexico or Central America with free trade. Open up America to virtual unrestricted trade with the Pacific Rim: America products win with quality, probably can be priced to win on cost, but many, many more jobs are now ripe to leave than before. That is a market share that the US has never had unrestricted access to.
>>73661319
Based off a recent Quinnipac, all within margin of error, but my intention is to show a potential electoral map that would handle the election to GOP.
Also, what is with the "Florida - red?" meme. Bush won it twice, I believe Romney was within .2%?
