Blue Tsunami approaching?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Special Elections have a tendency to be warped due to the relative ease that shifts in turnout can have with relatively low turnout in special elections. So the special election for Missouri House Seat in District 97 needs to be taken with a bit of salt.

When Doug Jones won in Alabama, it was a 30% of the electorate that voted which was black that gave Jones the victory... whites were for Moore, but not by much, and minorities were the push over the top. But, in the Missouri race in a District Trump won by 28 pts, the demographics are much different. Different to the point that about 93% of the population is white, and a labor friendly area.

Trump won in '16 in large part due to the labor vote. In Ohio, he sliced away a good deal of the labor vote. If this result(s) in Missouri tells us something, it is that Trump mania from Unions could be quelling.

Yes, Republicans won 3 special races in Missouri as well. The thing is, the swing from '16 averaged 33.5 pts per race!

This is likely the reason Wisconsin apparently isn't running anymore special elections for the vacant Wisconsin Senate seats.

Like I said above, mid-terms have much higher turnout than Special Elections, so maybe we return to the status quo, but what seems clear from 2010 and these recent elections is that turnout is likely the most important thing when determining who wins a race. The Democrats are so unbelievably energized, making the W years look like nothing.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Special Elections have a tendency to be warped due to the relative ease that shifts in turnout can have with relatively low turnout in special elections. So the special election for Missouri House Seat in District 97 needs to be taken with a bit of salt.

When Doug Jones won in Alabama, it was a 30% of the electorate that voted which was black that gave Jones the victory... whites were for Moore, but not by much, and minorities were the push over the top. But, in the Missouri race in a District Trump won by 28 pts, the demographics are much different. Different to the point that about 93% of the population is white, and a labor friendly area.

Trump won in '16 in large part due to the labor vote. In Ohio, he sliced away a good deal of the labor vote. If this result(s) in Missouri tells us something, it is that Trump mania from Unions could be quelling.

Yes, Republicans won 3 special races in Missouri as well. The thing is, the swing from '16 averaged 33.5 pts per race!

This is likely the reason Wisconsin apparently isn't running anymore special elections for the vacant Wisconsin Senate seats.

Like I said above, mid-terms have much higher turnout than Special Elections, so maybe we return to the status quo, but what seems clear from 2010 and these recent elections is that turnout is likely the most important thing when determining who wins a race. The Democrats are so unbelievably energized, making the W years look like nothing.

I hope that it's coming. But not sure who the Russians support this time. They reportedly hacked 24 states the other day. They will be crucial swing components in 2018!

 

[Elixir]

...not sure who the Russians support this time. They reportedly hacked 24 states the other day. They will be crucial swing components in 2018!

That will be the case if the status quo remains otherwise unchanged. The only thing that can possibly overwhelm their effect when backed by a Rethuglican Congress is massive - unprecedented - turnout. I don't care who anyone votes for, as long a we can get sufficient numbers to the polls to actually represent the preferences of the total electorate.

 

[bilby]

...not sure who the Russians support this time. They reportedly hacked 24 states the other day. They will be crucial swing components in 2018!

That will be the case if the status quo remains otherwise unchanged. The only thing that can possibly overwhelm their effect when backed by a Rethuglican Congress is massive - unprecedented - turnout. I don't care who anyone votes for, as long a we can get sufficient numbers to the polls to actually represent the preferences of the total electorate.

http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/Compulsory_Voting.htm

I want the government to reflect the will of the people, not just of the ones who are not too lazy to go and vote. Lazy people have rights too, and should not be disenfranchised - I speak as a life-long and proud lazy person.

Generally people don't much care for any candidates in any election, and they pick the one that is on the team they usually support, or the one they dislike the least. Political parties always seem to fondly imagine that the voters pick the candidates they like the most - But that's simply not true, and the use of attack ads indicates that even the parties themselves know this.

As a result, an incumbent who is hugely and widely unpopular should be expected to do very poorly indeed - and the turnout against such an incumbent is a good indication of just how disliked he is by the public at large.

I would not be surprised if there was a much larger than usual turnout in the midterms, and if there is, we should expect to see very large swings away from the GOP.

 

[Elixir]

...not sure who the Russians support this time. They reportedly hacked 24 states the other day. They will be crucial swing components in 2018!

That will be the case if the status quo remains otherwise unchanged. The only thing that can possibly overwhelm their effect when backed by a Rethuglican Congress is massive - unprecedented - turnout. I don't care who anyone votes for, as long a we can get sufficient numbers to the polls to actually represent the preferences of the total electorate.

http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/Compulsory_Voting.htm

I want the government to reflect the will of the people, not just of the ones who are not too lazy to go and vote. Lazy people have rights too, and should not be disenfranchised - I speak as a life-long and proud lazy person.

Generally people don't much care for any candidates in any election, and they pick the one that is on the team they usually support, or the one they dislike the least. Political parties always seem to fondly imagine that the voters pick the candidates they like the most - But that's simply not true, and the use of attack ads indicates that even the parties themselves know this.

As a result, an incumbent who is hugely and widely unpopular should be expected to do very poorly indeed - and the turnout against such an incumbent is a good indication of just how disliked he is by the public at large.

I would not be surprised if there was a much larger than usual turnout in the midterms, and if there is, we should expect to see very large swings away from the GOP.

Even at that, Uncle Vlad is not to be under-estimated. He does have a way of whipping up his/trump's base. And the social media Companies seem to like his money more than they like representative democracy. So even with massive turnout, I don't think there are any guarantees. We won't see the full extent of Russian interference until October anyhow...

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

We have 8 months to election day. That is a lot of time for great, stupid things to be done to enrage the electorate. So either way, we could have great changes in store. We could end up with an election where everybody is angry. At the Trumpoids, the far right Tea party politicians, the far right idiots. The old, tired Democrats like Pelosi, the blue dog Democrats. Things could take a weird bounce, and it is going to be hard to estimate what the election will be like this far out. Burn it all down!

 

[ZiprHead]

Seen elsewhere:

I hope he gets his parade.

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." - Napolean

 

[Hermit]

There are at least two options to prevent the Democrats from getting anywhere.

One is a major act of Islamic terrorism. This can be facilitated by the Russian or the US government. Even merely turning a blind eye will do.

The other is a dramatic development in regard to North Korea triggered by a Tonkin style Incident.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The election may well not be Blue Wave so much as an Angry Women Wave. If the angry women turn out the vote effort succeeds, it may well change the political landscape well into 2020.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I was actually pondering how fucked the Dems are if the Dream Act gets put into legislation.

 

[Elixir]

I was actually pondering how fucked the Dems are if the Dream Act gets put into legislation.

How so? If it would truly fuck the democrats, the 'pugs would be screaming for it.

 

[LordKiran]

Seen elsewhere:

I hope he gets his parade.

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." - Napolean

Except his mistake reflects poorly on the country. If you believe yourself so powerful then you do not invite comparison between yourself and your 'lessers.'

 

[ZiprHead]

Seen elsewhere:

I hope he gets his parade.

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." - Napolean

Except his mistake reflects poorly on the country. If you believe yourself so powerful then you do not invite comparison between yourself and your 'lessers.'

Could his parade maybe be in Dallas with him leading it in an open convertible?

 

[LordKiran]

Seen elsewhere:

I hope he gets his parade.

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." - Napolean

Except his mistake reflects poorly on the country. If you believe yourself so powerful then you do not invite comparison between yourself and your 'lessers.'

Could his parade maybe be in Dallas with him leading it in an open convertible?

I'd rather it just not take place and the money allocated toward the event is used to house and feed homeless veterans (or really homeless anybody who are we kidding?)

 

[Harry Bosch]

There are at least two options to prevent the Democrats from getting anywhere.

One is a major act of Islamic terrorism. This can be facilitated by the Russian or the US government. Even merely turning a blind eye will do.

The other is a dramatic development in regard to North Korea triggered by a Tonkin style Incident.

The democrats greatest challenge is over confidence. Sure the trend seems to be going our way. But let's not get cocky crazy. The republicans have built in incredible advantages. I was joking above about the Russians. But they are a true factor. They have already hacked 31 states. They will be a factor again. Secondly, due to gerrymandering, the republicans can win elections with fewer votes. Far fewer votes. Thirdly, the republicans have the greatest most influential and dependable voting block in the country: older white women. Then they have the second most powerful voting block: older white men. Wave a flag, play Nascar on TV, threaten Jihadist holocaust, and you got their vote. The democratic voting blocks are smaller in number and more nuanced, requiring more advertising to reach and excite to vote. In fact, many experts predict the republicans to retain at least the senate in 2018; and Trump to win reelection.....

 

[Hermit]

There are at least two options to prevent the Democrats from getting anywhere.

One is a major act of Islamic terrorism. This can be facilitated by the Russian or the US government. Even merely turning a blind eye will do.

The other is a dramatic development in regard to North Korea triggered by a Tonkin style Incident.

The democrats greatest challenge is over confidence. Sure the trend seems to be going our way. But let's not get cocky crazy. The republicans have built in incredible advantages. I was joking above about the Russians. But they are a true factor. They have already hacked 31 states. They will be a factor again. Secondly, due to gerrymandering, the republicans can win elections with fewer votes. Far fewer votes. Thirdly, the republicans have the greatest most influential and dependable voting block in the country: older white women. Then they have the second most powerful voting block: older white men. Wave a flag, play Nascar on TV, threaten Jihadist holocaust, and you got their vote. The democratic voting blocks are smaller in number and more nuanced, requiring more advertising to reach and excite to vote. In fact, many experts predict the republicans to retain at least the senate in 2018; and Trump to win reelection.....

Yes, overconfidence is a real danger. It's not as though the Democrats have been on the side of ordinary folks. They have not been for quite a while, beginning with Bill Clinton's presidency. Yes, unemployment was under control. The economy kept growing at a pleasant rate, but where did all the money go?



It's no wonder some populist con artist captured the imagination of so many. Really, in light of their performance at the last presidential elections the Dems need to have a good, hard look at themselves, what they represent and figure out why they were so much on the nose to so many that they turned to some reprehensible, populist con man, a man they'd rather vote for even if he stood in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shot someone dead just because he felt like it. They have a fuck-load of work to do. A sea change in policy is well and truly overdue.

 

[braces_for_impact]

There are at least two options to prevent the Democrats from getting anywhere.

One is a major act of Islamic terrorism. This can be facilitated by the Russian or the US government. Even merely turning a blind eye will do.

The other is a dramatic development in regard to North Korea triggered by a Tonkin style Incident.

The democrats greatest challenge is over confidence. Sure the trend seems to be going our way. But let's not get cocky crazy. The republicans have built in incredible advantages. I was joking above about the Russians. But they are a true factor. They have already hacked 31 states. They will be a factor again. Secondly, due to gerrymandering, the republicans can win elections with fewer votes. Far fewer votes. Thirdly, the republicans have the greatest most influential and dependable voting block in the country: older white women. Then they have the second most powerful voting block: older white men. Wave a flag, play Nascar on TV, threaten Jihadist holocaust, and you got their vote. The democratic voting blocks are smaller in number and more nuanced, requiring more advertising to reach and excite to vote. In fact, many experts predict the republicans to retain at least the senate in 2018; and Trump to win reelection.....

This. It's also important to not waste any time on the Trump humpers. They are not going to see reason. Spend time convincing concerned people to get to the polls. Trump humpers are just trolls anyway.

 

[humbleman]

I don't think Democrats will have a chance to take the Senate and the House with Mrs. Pelosi as their leader.

Nancy Pelosi starting her speech

one and a half hours later

Three hours later

four and a half hours later



Six hours later



She read the five copies of the same speech in a eight hours record.

 

[braces_for_impact]

I would welcome and honest and open discussion on (lack of) Democratic leadership, not with Trump humpers though, they just like to hate on certain personalities a la Limbaugh style, and it adds nothing to the discussion, there's Breitbart for such "discussion".

 

[Ford]

I would welcome and honest and open discussion on (lack of) Democratic leadership, not with Trump humpers though, they just like to hate on certain personalities a la Limbaugh style, and it adds nothing to the discussion, there's Breitbart for such "discussion".

A couple weeks ago I got to spend some time with one of our rare Democratic Congress critters here from AZ. He was in my studio recording a podcast with "Pod Save America" and the hosts (former Obama administration officials) on the other end.

I was less than impressed. He was certainly passionate, but what was missing is that relentless sound-bite-on-message thing that the GOP has mastered. Back in the days following 9/11, part of my job was to edit interviews with news makers into soundbites that would be easy to fit into a short report. It was a challenge, but when I was handed a piece of audio from our Senator McCain, I rarely had to edit anything.

He spoke in 30-40 second soundbites. It was so eerily precise that I asked a co-worker who had been part of one of his campaigns and she said "oh that's on purpose." It was a skill he'd developed over the years, and it was a big reason why he got on so many media outlets. He made it easy for them to have him as a guest. "30 seconds left Senator, can you tell me about...?" and he'd be able to do that. In music radio we call it "hitting the post." That part where the DJ talks up the instrumental intro of a song and ends their bit when the vocals kick in. McCain could "hit the post" at will.

The Congressman? He took 3 whole minutes to answer one question. I don't know how the podcast edited that, but I was sitting there thinking "wrap it up...wrap it up...wrap it up" the whole time. In a media landscape where you have seconds to grab someone's attention and get your message across, taking 3 minutes to provide a rambling answer to a question is problematic.

Don't get me wrong, I hate the fact that everything has been boiled down to talking points, but that's the game right now, and it seems that Democrats just aren't playing it as well as Republicans. You've got a limited time with which to connect to an audience with a limited attention span. My own Representative is a machine in this area. She's got her shit down, but she's an exception rather than the norm.