Replies

I knew this would crumble into a bash-GeorgeWill-fest. I suggest we look at his conclusion:

Any candidacy premised on conceding those 18 states involves a risky thread-the-needle path to not much more than 270 electoral votes. Writing in Politico, Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik notes that in the six elections since 1992, a majority of states have not been "remotely competitive."

Thirty-one plus the District of Columbia (they currently have 344 electoral votes) have voted for the same party in those elections. Another eight (71 electoral votes) have voted for the same party in five of the six. This is why, Sosnik says, "almost two-thirds of the $896 million spent on television" by the two candidates in 2012 was spent in five states that have been competitive since 1992 — Ohio, Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Virginia.

The Republican nominee must crack the ice that has frozen the electoral map. Cruz cannot do that by getting more votes from traditional Republican constituencies.

I have given Cruz money twice this week, so I hardly am defending Will in general, but his electoral construct needs to be pondered. We still have much time.

The Republican nominee must crack the ice that has frozen the electoral map. Cruz cannot do that by getting more votes from traditional Republican constituencies.

Well, he certainly can't do it by getting LESS votes from traditional Republican constituencies! If Will's euphamism for conservatives is "traditional Republican constituencies", that's a red flag that he's full of crap, pardon my French.

George Will deserves to be bashed as the effete uniparty flack that he is. That said, he has a small point with regards to electoral math. But that point relies on everything staying static, which it rarely does in politics.

What’s changed? First off an intensely unpopular incumbent. After that an intensely uninspiring candidate almost certain to pick up the nomination of the rat faction of the uniparty. Not to mention she bears the last name of a prior president when the idea of dynastic rule is being increasingly opposed. So against this fertile landscape, what does George Will propose? Another intensely uninspiring candidate that bears the same last name as 2 previous presidents.

So I guess we should all feel fortunate to bask in the brilliance of such analytical genius.?

2016 has the potential to be a breakout election similar to 1932 and 1980. We get them about once every 30 to 50 years. The uniparty intensely hates them as they’re rare events that have the potential to challenge their hegemony, if only for a short time.

“I have given Cruz money twice this week, so I hardly am defending Will in general, but his electoral construct needs to be pondered. We still have much time.”

I don’t agree with Will. Rather than looking at it from a top-down perspective: “What must we do to compete again in Pennsylvania”, what we should be doing (hence my tag line and home page here) is looking from the BOTTOM UP. Roughly 70% (or so) of the voters in PA and that entire area are white - what do we need to get them to vote 65% Republican - and hold enough Hispanics (maybe 40%) so they don’t factor in too much (blacks, of course, or still hopeless politically, so don’t even bother fighting for them).

White have now been isolated by this president (and policies that preceded him as well) and made second-class citizens. For the first time, they can start voting as a BLOCK...they no longer have any identification with Democrats. This is happening in Texas and throughout the South. Whites voted 75% to 89% Republican in 2014 - Texas whites voted 75/25 Republican, Texas Hispanics voted 55/45 Democrat (i.e., nearly split right down the middle). Is it any wonder that Texans voted in the most conservative slate of statewide candidates ever here, and did so by 20 points - they gave us (and nearly half of the legal Hispanics) something to vote for.

Spread this “Texas Miracle” north and it’s LIGHTS OUT for the Dems in state after state - it can be a ROUT...and Cruz appears to be the only one who might do this (maybe by accident...but who cares).

[needless to say, when I use the term “white” I’m not referring to San Francisco whites or Berkly radicals. I’m referring to the other 90% of the white electorate - the quiet ones just trying to raise kids or enjoy retirement]