The Ds lost their fourth special election. Some say those are Big Wins for Rs and Disaster for Ds. Other optimistic souls say each was a Win for Ds because they were close. While I tend to agree with the last statement, I won't go so far as calling it a win. Instead, I call it a harbinger of wins to come.
I base that on the Cook's PVI report which rates Congressional districts on how strongly they lean left or right. It is where those four special elections rank that gives me hope. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_Part … x#By_state for an explanation of their methodology if you want.
Know that ranks of D+4 (or 5) to R+4 (or 5) indicates "toss-up" districts. Then consider that the lowest of the four ranks was R+8 (GA 6th) where the D lost by only 2.1 points, a difference of 5.9. The Ds worst performance was for the Montana At-Large seat (R+11) where they lost by 5.6 points, a difference of 5.4.
Now understand that their are 23 Republican seats which are in districts ranked Even to R+3; Ds need 24 to take back the House. If you expand that to less than or equal to R+4, then there are 33 R seats up for grabs.
That is why I am still optimistic. What do you think?
What those elections tell us is that we are more divided than ever - they are not a Dem win, or they would have won; and being a 'slight' win is all any party needs.
I don't think it is surprising that places that are usually very red continue to vote for the GOP, despite Trump. They aren't just voting for Trump, ALL conservatives LIKE the basic GOP platform no matter how much Dems hate it. As long as they run on their well-worn & fear-mongering talking points - they will continue to win and even gain supporters; because for most conservatives - its about keeping Dems OUT and their dogmas IN, which again, has absolutely nothing to do with Trump.
The only way fearful conservatives are going to change their votes is if/when they ever get a different perspective on this world in relation to eternal damnation. The soul-based fear that was instilled at the official founding of the Roman State's pagan version of Christianity was a magnificent prison that has lasted through a couple of millenia.
Its happening, but it is taking a really long time for realizations to light up in their brains. We're basically waiting for the old ones to die off - which also means that us 'old moderates & liberals' are dying off with them. We probably won't get to see a world without religions screwing the people; but I'm willing to bet that generations not far behind us, will.
When that happens, our politics will dramatically change for the better - if we can hold out.
I really don't think we are going to get a decent temperature of this country until a much larger election comes along. Patience, and try not to maim or kill anyone in the meantime - LoL!
Elections are so distorted anymore by secret money, Russian hacking and dirty tricks that it's becoming impossible to interpret the results an election with such a rational question.
What matters to too many people is that "my guy won" (pardon the sexism). It doesn't matter if he won legally and ethically or not. Party first, country second.
A loss is still a loss, but there was a swing towards the democrats relative to previous votes.
I think you (and that "some") are living a pipe dream, trying desperately to apply significance to something that we both know has none.
Now if you would look at a dozen or more of these special elections and find that all have swung Democratic from the last time it was held (you didn't mention how those four voted last time - were they strong D and lost ground?)...
There are only 4 special elections since 2017, in each the R won big the previous time..
The Cook rating gives you an idea of the likelihood of an R or a D winning where R+8 means a moderately likelihood. That is why I used the ratings, to address your question.
I'm hoping the party doubles down yet again on the ideas which alienate so many US citizens. We need the Democratic party to die. America deserves a better party to counter the GOP. Political parties have died before, and it's time this one goes into the great goodnight and becomes a disgraced footnote of US history.
When you study your American history, it has been the conservatives who have held back social and economic progress, REGARDLESS of which party they belonged to. Consider:
- Conservatives promoted slavery from the 1650s to 1864,
- Conservatives fought, and succeeded for many years, to defang the 14th and 15th Amendments
- Conservatives were responsible for and sought (still do actually) Jim Crow
- Conservatives fought tooth and nail against giving first blacks, and then women the vote
- Conservative economic philosophy is responsible for roughly 23 major recessions (including 2008) and depressions since 1780. Progressive economic philosophy (mainly Keynesian) is responsible for only 2 or 3 major recessions and depressions and for stopping the economy from going through wild swings since 1940.
My theory is that we until we have an inspiring Democratic "leader" to fill the hole left by Obama, we won't sway many voters. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are reviled by the right and have a lot of baggage. Right now, they are the face of the Democratic party, and it's going to be difficult to get a Republican to vote Democratic with the old guard as the standard bearers of the party.
Who will it be?
You're looking for great charisma and speaking ability? Thinking back to the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Kim Jong-un you may win an election that way but you won't do the country or its people much good. It takes more than great speeches about failed policies to do that.
I didn't say that at all. Once again, you've invented an imaginary position to argue against.
"My theory is that we until we have an inspiring Democratic "leader" to fill the hole left by Obama, we won't sway many voters."
Sorry - I took that "inspiring Democratic leader" to be a charismatic speaker that could sway the masses. Apparently you didn't mean that; as virtually ALL politicians have that "baggage" you spoke of I haven't a clue what you mean and retract the statement entirely.
Agree and who knows, but a change is needed.
Why not run Bernie Sanders again ? I hear its only his first time being investigated by the FBI , the IRS and the state Attorney General of Vermont for financially ruining two colleges , tax issues , and devastating two family run colleges by naked nepotism and gross mismanagement .
What is it with liberals and candidate corruption ?
I'm not going to be surprised if they do run Bernie Sanders in 2020. The Democratic party is so into losing these days that I won't be surprised if they run Hillary Clinton again in 2020 either. I do hope they run one of those two. I so can't stand what 'liberalism' has become.
Get your facts right, ahourseback, that was his wife.
First, thoughts come to mind about how the amount of money spent in this Georgia election is still being discussed but I've seen nothing on how Republicans have no problem with making money, spending money, and raising money verses how Democrats blast those who do so even as they are quite busy at it themselves. Also, it does seem that the more anti-Trumpers sound off about the Trump win being illegitimate the more the American people seem to answer them by legitimately voting in more Republicans. Telling the American people (in various ways) that they actually did not want to vote Republicans into office seems to be an ongoing mistake that Democrats can't help themselves avoid, perhaps because of how angry they are about the latest outcomes.
In pondering this question and some of its responses I realized that sometimes people tend to want to undertake for the underdog. They don't think things through from the perspective of learning from history or any other kind of wisdom and instead will listen to popular rhetoric that plays on their emotions. That could be a primary reason we often have swings between Democrat and Republican wins, especially in the presidential elections. Usually, its one or two rounds with the right and the country swings left, then vice versa again. We have to include how new generations of voters (and how they've been educated) are also factors, and we mustn't forget that the performance of a president is a major factor in whether Democrats or Republicans continue in the offices that open up after a presidential election.
My opinion really does not matter, though. Whether we look at the current situation as "the American people have spoken with their vote" or as "the American people have been duped", the heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord and He turns it wither-so-ever He will no matter who is in any office in any nation at any time. He is the Ruler yet and to Him I plead for mercy for this poor world that has a long history of rebellion toward Him. He has given us His Word so we can know His mind on the affairs of the world and it is wise to avoid being counted among those who fly in His face with self-satisfaction and pitiful self-sufficiency.
I may well have to come to the conclusion that much of the drive from the progressive left may be futile. I find that while my neighbors in this 'red county' are nice enough, we, as quiche eaters, have little in common so I am content to leave them with their beer and Nascar.
I can't not be affected by the dismal red that is over the vast proportion of the US Map that denotes political support. There has been no buyers remorse. Trump as a race baiter, misogynist, xenophobe is the secret and real choice of so much of the nation. We were outraged that such a man could be taken seriously on the political scene, shows how much I know. Either they subscribe to the Trump attitude and support it, or are indifferent to its presence, or still, are psychologically bound to stubbornly support THEIR man rather than admit to error.
I don't recognize my neighbor and I have to come to the conclusion that perhaps I never really did. It is becoming more obvious that we have little or nothing in common. It was like a "brother" once quoted, my supporting Donald Trump is as ridiculous as a chicken supporting Col. Sanders. With such large portions of the country under his spell and that of Republicanism, I am forced to see them all as Col. Sanders.
Perhaps if you concentrated on the positives of Trump and on what he is trying to do you could find a connection with your neighbors. Yes, they are ignoring the surface negatives - the only things you see in our President - were you to do the same and attempt to understand the deeper actions you could well find a connection. You don't have to agree with "America First!", just understand that that is what they are looking at.
From where I sit there are no positives except, lightening up on AHCA, attempting to pull back from the extremes of his party. But that is equivalent to micron's level of accomplishment relative to the rest.
I see bigotry and promotion of strife between people rather than how to solve problems together as a short coming of leadership style and, thus, far more than just 'superficial'. If I mull over the deeper motivations of the Trump voter, their actions are seen as entirely negative.
I live with my 'red' neighbors, and we get along fine as long as we avoid speaking of politics. One look at me and they know where I stand, and where I must stand.
Right now "America First" is just a slogan.
You see bigotry...because you expand anything with a tiny taste of it into a 5 course meal. Nothing else he has done smacks of bigotry, not even after exaggerations and spinning of the left.
You don't like his leadership style - OK. It isn't what YOU would do - OK. But that does NOT indicate a shortcoming; no one that runs the business empire he does can lack leadership skills no matter how you spin it. You just don't want to see that, you are happier vilifying everything he does and says and this is just another minor point you can blow up into something it isn't.
You know what those "deeper motivations of the Trump voter" are: to return government to the people, to clean up the Hill and to return to actual governance of the country rather than party politics benefiting primarily the politicians. You just don't like that - that a conservative is ahead of you on a basic need of the country - so turn it into some imagined evil.
Like I said - dump your hatred of anything smacking of conservatism and join the real world. Quit spinning everything you see or hear and listen, look with an open, honest effort to understand.
"You see bigotry...because you expand anything with a tiny taste of it into a 5 course meal. Nothing else he has done smacks of bigotry, not even after exaggerations and spinning of the left."
I am from a different world, your tiny taste is my big bite. The view from your crimson tinted glasses, I bet? How could I expect YOU to see anything else? Your myopic view is the universal one, because you say so?
"You don't like his leadership style - OK. It isn't what YOU would do - OK. But that does NOT indicate a shortcoming; no one that runs the business empire he does can lack leadership skills no matter how you spin it."
You really admire that, don't you? he is just a cowardly dandy that has had everything given to him and wouldn't know the meaning of real courage or sacrifice if it bit him in the butt. But that is good enough for you, is it not so hard for me to see why? Yes, it is not what I would do, and it is never acceptable.
"You just don't want to see that, you are happier vilifying everything he does and says and this is just another minor point you can blow up into something it isn't."
He gets from me what he deserves and I neither expect you to appreciate nor understand that.
"You know what those "deeper motivations of the Trump voter" are: to return government to the people, to clean up the Hill and to return to actual governance of the country rather than party politics benefiting primarily the politicians. You just don't like that - that a conservative is ahead of you on a basic need of the country - so turn it into some imagined evil. "
That's what he tells you and you can choose to believe it if you want. I don't, and his record gives me reason to hold to that view. It is YOUR idea of the basic needs of the country, the need of the rightwinger, stop making it sound as if it is some universal paternalistic need for us all....
"Like I said - dump your hatred of anything smacking of conservatism and join the real world. Quit spinning everything you see or hear and listen, look with an open, honest effort to understand."
Like I'll say, the honest effort is there, it is the arrogance of how you present your hero and your point of view that remains a continued impediment. While you think that you stand still, you are in actuality just 'spinning' in the opposite direction.
You can bet that there are going to be difficult times ahead and it will be far from being resolved easily. I am most sorry about that....
I will address only one of your "points", for it is very indicative of exactly what I'm saying.
"That's what he tells you and you can choose to believe it if you want. I don't, and his record gives me reason to hold to that view. It is YOUR idea of the basic needs of the country, the need of the rightwinger, stop making it sound as if it is some universal paternalistic need for us all...."
First, Trump didn't have to say anything; that our "leadership" and government is broken was readily apparent before he ever came onto the scene. If you don't agree that a government nearly paralyzed with partisanship is a bad thing, if you don't agree that using taxpayer money to buy votes is a bad thing, if you don't agree that behind-the-scenes, illegal actions by politicians is a bad thing...well, I just don't believe that you think they are good for the country. Once more your hatred for anything touched by conservatives shows through, with the twisting that people were happy with it all before Trump and with the idea that because conservatives don't like it means it must be good, does you no credit. Wake up, join reality and accept that conservatives ARE right some of the time.
When you accept that libs are right some of the time, I will acknowledge your statement. Of course, we have dysfunction in Washington. But, why is Trump the man in armor? I recognize the problem, but I have not see any reason why someone like Trump is the solution.....
Keep in mind Wilderness, that most CEOs are dictators, and Trump was no exception. Because you applaud his leadership style, that implies you want him to stay in that mode of leadership.
On the other hand, some CEOs lead by example and moral/ethical clarity while allowing well picked subordinates who aren't YES-men to do the job they were hired to do without micromanagement. Trump is the polar opposite of that. Lincoln tried to be but fell somewhat short. Washington made the grade. The rest of the Presidents fall somewhere in between.
I have read more than a few articles that mentioned Trump's angst at the job. He just can't operate like a CEO as President. He cant simply issue edicts, and his wealth has absolutely no influence on the outcome. The members of congress and his executive branch are not just simply shepherd boys that he can awe. He has to be unhappy and overwhelmed, lets see how long that he can take it.
"Because you applaud his leadership style"
Tsk tsk. Yet another poster making unwarranted assumptions. That YOU do or don't like his style doesn't mean I do (or don't). Even your implication that Trump has a total lack of morals or ethics doesn't have a thing to do with whether I like his style or not. Not even if that implication is a very gross exaggeration...something I've come to expect in these forums from Trump haters in general.
One only has to read the totality of your posts defending Trump dragging America through his personal mud to discern that you admire his leadership skills.
As to hating an idea, in this case conservatism, I don't. I may hate what the consequences of its application are; but in and of itself, I can only agree or disagree with it. And I very much disagree with conservatism because it is a harmful philosophy to the liberty of men and women.
What I do hate is that it is the conservative philosophy naturally leads one class of people to enslave another class
What I do hate is that it is the conservative philosophy naturally justifies the denial of suffrage to all but certain classes of people; first blacks and women, then after a Civil War gave blacks the vote, they did their very best to keep women from voting. 50 years later, conservatives lost that battle as well.
What I do hate is that it is the conservative philosophy naturally led to the defanging the 14th and 15th Amendments within 20 years after the Civil War returning the subjugation of blacks to the status it help prior to that war, less actual slavery.
What I do hate is that it is the fact that conservative philosophy opposes learning from one's mistakes because of a firm belief that tradition is best.
This unwillingness led to roughly 23 major recessions (including 2008) and depressions since 1780. By trying something new, progressive economic philosophy (mainly Keynesian) is responsible for only 2 or 3 major recessions and depressions prior to 1929 and for stopping the economy from going through wild swings since 1940. Today, conservatives are once again striving to return to the failed policies of the 1700s, 1800s, and early 1900s.
While it is true that I have attacked, on a regular basis, the gross exaggerations and tales from the left about Trump, I have seldom defended him. Most (not all) of his decisions and actions, but not the man himself. He is detestable as a person and I wouldn't care to dine with him at the table.
But it's interesting to read your litany of conservative failures. As we watch the liberal philosophy destroy the liberty of men and women, first by stealing vast amounts of money when possible and second by firmly chaining people to the largess of government charity it's hard to think it is conservative thinking doing either.
"Enslave another class"; as in the chaining to a lifetime of charity. Again, not conservatives.
Can't speak as to suffrage; my (adult) lifetime has seen suffrage for every citizen. And I do seem to recall that somewhere along the line liberals and conservatives swapped philosophies; perhaps it was liberals denying suffrage?
You mean like the liberal philosophy of throwing money at all problems, without ever trying to solve them? That kind of failure to learn? Consider that the entitlement philosophy of modern liberalism began somewhere around the 50's or 60's and has grown every year. While every year more money is required and no one is actually helped - only bonded tighter than ever to government charity - yet liberals continue to expand that failed system.
So...the same complaints you make (mostly unfounded IMO) are made of liberal philosophies. Removal of freedom, harmful to freedom, slavery - all are due to both parties, just with different aspects. You find employment distasteful and slavery; I find endless charity and dependency on the nanny state the same. You find the dying discriminatory practices harmful to freedom (so do I but they ARE dying); I find the constant and accelerating attacks on the wealthy and the demand they give up their possessions the same. Freedom and massive taxation do not make good bed partners.
Interesting, to say the least. The same complaints about the opposing philosophy, from opponents in the philosophical and moral fields. (Although truthfully I make a poor conservative, coming closer to libertarianism.)
"As we watch the liberal philosophy destroy the liberty of men and women"... Gosh, you don't watch much Fox News, do you? LoL!
"but not the man himself. He is detestable as a person and I wouldn't care to dine with him at the table"... Frankly, this is plenty good enough reason for people to abide by their higher standards to NOT vote for him as potus. You could have elected a much more respectable person who actually has a good head for politics.
Its what we did when we elected Obama. We didn't go out and find the most offensive lefty we could. 'The right' could have been just as responsible this time around. There is no way that Obama would have gotten away with saying (and doing!) the majority of offensive stuff that Trump has.
And yeah, his disposition is a major part of how Trump creates chaos in this country - so it counts, a lot.
"Frankly, this is plenty good enough reason for people to abide by their higher standards to NOT vote for him as potus"
What "higher standards"? The standard of stealing from those we deem to earn too much? The standard of running down our country to anyone that will listen? The standard of consistently taking last position in the world...as we pay the cost? The standard of giving our country to anyone that can sneak across the border? Those "higher standards" are a reason to vote liberal? I think not.
One can only be offended if they choose to be; that you choose to be offended by "America First", by controlling our borders, by allowing people to decide how their earnings should be spent...well, that's your choice. And if you choose to be offended by man-in-the-street rhetoric but not than the polished lies of more common politicians, that is your choice, too.
To listen to you, you would think America has been a third-rate country since its founding. Fortunately, the facts don't bear you out. Indeed, in the five months since Trump took office, things, other than the stock market, have taken a decided turn for the worse domestically and internationally.
Because of him, I am embarrassed to be an American; we must look like idiots to have elected such an idiot.
As to the stock market, as soon as Trump can't get his promised tax cuts for the wealthy passed, it will also nose dive.
Sometimes, an attempt to sound highbrow just doesn't pan out the way the speaker hoped.
Credence, take heart. even though Trump managed to get enough electoral votes to win, the majority of the people still don't like him and even conservatives are starting to feel the same way as his poll numbers start sagging in that demographic
That's what you and your media said BEFORE the election toooo.!
That was also before the full-extent of Russian meddling was known, the fact that Clinton couldn't/wouldn't learn from her problems with Sanders, the DNC's near collapse after Obama's last election, and Comey's last minute erroneous claim that Clinton was under investigation again.
Trump's electoral win is the result of a perfect storm of events which allowed him to be a one-off.
Bottom line is Trump never had the support of most American's and has even less support today.
Thanks My Esoteric, what was it about your 'authoritarian scale"? These people will cling to this guy till the very end. Satan himself can be a candidate before they would ever acknowledge a Democrat.
In a heavily Red district, Why didn't his opponent win by by a much larger margin; history says she should have ... but yet she didn't (and yes, they both spent about the same obscene amount of money)
I think dems should be proud in coming in second. Second is pretty close. I am just really proud that a Woman won.
Man or woman is beside the point. It is beliefs that count and hers suck.
For liberals , it's all old ,angry , hand -bag carrying dyed -hair ,curmudgeons for years now , The only refreshing change from the norm was Obama , a rising star , likable , presentable , stylish , intelligent , and as Joe Biden said , " He's articulate , -clean -and bright " or some such dumb a$$ed thing . Too Bad the most potentially historic , black , young liberal President couldn't have been more patriotic though , He was a one world orderer , Hated the U.S. constitution , the country itself , Christianity and America's mainstream voting populace , of both parties.
In the end , I think he was in over his head and new it .
Until democrats create leadership out of the elitist moonshots they call leaders , No,,,,,,,,,,actually until they immigrate someone with a sense of political reality , they will continue to listen to Hollywood cocktail drinkers and Marxist professors too long on hallucinogens .
Perhaps we on the right can loan or lease democrats a leader for a term or two as a humanitarian gesture .
To listen to most liberals here , one would think they are neither ideologically allowed nor entirely capable of thinking totally for themselves , deciding individually and certainly all addicted to 'Group Thought ', I am amazed that the one track mind of this ideology sounds often so helplessly child like .
My advice to the liberal ;
- Seek reasonable levels of wisdom
- If you continually state leaving America , please do
- Embarrassed to be American ? read above line.
- Photos and cartoonish drivel only shows you in a worse light
- Give individual thought a try
Not thinking for themselves is Provably a distinguishing characteristic of High Scoring Right-wing Authoritarian followers, the majority of Trump supporters. That isn't to say there aren't some on the Left who qualify, but there aren't that many.
In fact, from the responses to my hub on the issue, 23% of self-identified Right-leaners score high to very high on the RWA survey while 7% of those that identify as independents do, and 3% of Left-leaners score the same. THAT is not an accident. (Sample size is 264, which is plenty big for the kind of survey I put together)
These results follow those by Professor Altemyer who has spent his career studying this trait. His study grew from others who asked the question of why so many seemingly normal German citizens so easily followed Hitler into Hell. (which is what I seeing Trump supporters doing)
by Scott Belford 8 weeks ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...
by Readmikenow 21 months ago
It is an example of the hypocrisy of the left. They believe they protect black people, except for black conservatives. I know black conservatives who have been lectured by white, female, liberals about being black. If a white liberal says anything racist about a black...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 22 months ago
The Democratic Party have institutionalized socioeconomic policies which are the detriment to America such as welfare & a governmental health program known as Obamacare. Because of the Democratic Party, we have generational welfare which the onus of tax is on the middle...
by Scott Belford 3 years ago
Trump's hand-picked attorney general summarized the Mueller Report by saying two things.1) Trump or his campaign did not legally conspire with Russia to fix the 2016 election2) Trump is NOT exonerated from the charge of Obstruction of Justice.IF Barr properly reported Mueller's...
by Credence2 12 months ago
I find this topic most disturbing as it is a reflection of the goals and aspirations of the American Right wing movement. There is no such thing as it being "fringe" as Trump, Carlson and many Republican Senators avoided direct answers or said that the Orbanz authoritarian regime in...
by Mike Russo 5 months ago
It's payback time for Trump. He is endorsing primary candidates who are loyal to his "stop the steal" movement and they are winning in his battleground states. He is like the pied piper with his following of "Trumpets." This is serious business. He is putting...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|