Posted on 06/30/2017 12:19:48 PM PDT by Kaslin
The Democrats are lusting for the House takeover. In some weird way, they see their 0-4 record in special elections as an indicator that they’ll retake the lower chamber. Democrats say they’re over performing in these elections. Democrats say this is a good sign. Everyone else says they’re still losers, even CNN.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) from the People’s Republic of Illinois said that she feels confident that Democrats will pick up 25 seats. Well, from the concrete fortress of urban, progressive America, that may be a possibility—just as this cohort thought that Hillary Clinton would win in a landslide. Everyone else, even The New York Times, is not so sure.
MSNBC’s Morning Joe tossed a wet blanket on the notion of a Democratic wave, noting the difficulties with candidate recruitment—no solid standout candidates—and the lack of a farm system to find those candidates. Nate Cohn at The New York Times noted that Democratic turnout for the GA-06 special election was the highest in a decade, but added that a) the Democratic path to the majority runs through red districts and Jon Ossoff’s defeat in Georgia showed the level of difficulty on that front; and b) even with the high Democratic turnout, the electorate could mirror that of 2016 which was favorable to Trump. In all, even with President Trump’s less than stellar approval rating, which usually is a good indicator for how midterm elections turn out for whichever party is occupying the White House, the GOP could retain the majority.
We’re not fighting an unpopular war that was growing increasingly out of control and corruption scandals haven’t hit the GOP leadership. Also, the Democrats were much more exposed heading into 2010 than Republicans. Also, for Democrats to win districts that trend Republican, having Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as the face of the party is a recipe for disaster. The House Minority Leader proved to be a contributing factor to Ossoff’s defeat to Republican Karen Handel in the most expensive House race in history. Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), who challenged Pelosi for the leadership position, conceded that she is more toxic than Trump in some parts of the country, and that the Democratic Party brand is just terrible right now. All of this isn’t necessarily the making for headwinds into these red districts. Now, Third Way, a left of center think tank, released a study showing that even if the Democrats sweep the suburbs, they’ll still fall short (via WaPo) [emphasis mine]:
The opposition party needs to win 24 seats to take control of the House in 2018. Understandably, operatives and handicappers have focused on the 23 districts that Republicans hold, which voted for Hillary Clinton last year. But some of the incumbents are very popular, with brands that are distinct from Trump’s, and they are unlikely to lose no matter how bad the headwinds become.
In other words, it’s inconceivable that Democrats run the table in those 23 districts. Even if they did, they’d still be one short. And Democrats must defend 12 seats in districts that Trump carried in 2016.
Third Way did a deep dive to try to understand what the 2018 playing field will look like. The center-left think tank focused on 65 “Majority Makers,” the battlegrounds where a majority would most likely be won.
[…]
They divided the swing districts into four categories: Thriving Suburban Communities, Left Behind Areas, Diverse/Fast-Growing Regions, and Non-Conformist Districts.
[…]
The numbers underscore how different even the 23 GOP-held Clinton districts are demographically. Many are suburban and overwhelmingly white. Others are rural and heavily Latino. Within the broad categories, there are stark differences on income, educational attainment and employment rates. More than half of adults in New Jersey’s 7th District, for example, graduated from college. Only 17 percent in California’s 10th District did.
“The most important takeaway is that there is no one kind of voter or district that can deliver the House for Democrats in 2018,” said Lanae Erickson Hatalsky, the vice president for social policy and politics at Third Way. “There’s been a lot of focus on suburban districts. There’s no doubt that those are important, but there are not enough of them to win the House.”
Hatalsky, who co-authored the report with Ryan Pougiales, emphasized that Democrats still would not win the House even if they could get every single 2016 Clinton voter who backed a Republican House candidate to turn out again in 2018 and cross over.
“You can’t get to a House majority without winning over Trump voters,” she said. “There are some people who definitely want to believe that they can because they still don’t know how to deal with Trump voters and are intimidated by the idea of appealing to them.”
Well, that certainly is a splash of cold water on those Democratic wave hopes. As of now, looks like low tide for the Left.
(D)feated
(D)pressed
(D)lusional..............................
Let’s help them continue on their downward path.
JoMa
we can flip the Minnesota legislature red in 2018, and add rust belt state seats, and take away two more democrat governors.
Is Tom Perez still around?
Seems to be scarce recently.
I think they should run Rodney Stooksbury anywhere and everywhere. His ability to garner votes while spending 0 dollars is uncanny.
I heard he was in charm school, trying to become a rectal orifice.
He knows he's a target again and never stopped fundraising after the last election. With no Trump at the head of the ticket I think he'll take the district again.
We need 60 senate seats. We will pick up house seats.
The Rat party is in psychotic denial, doubling and tripling down on their arrogance, terrible policies, and hateful violent rhetoric. They have a nasty old hag, brain-damaged from Botox, as their most visible leader in Congress.
It’s just outstanding!!!!
We are winnng, will keep winnng! Thank you, President Trump.
May the covfefe be with us!
"Ideas Have Consequences." - Weaver
I must say that I still laugh at that statement. Their BRAND is terrible? No, Ryan, your PRODUCT is terrible, horrendous, disgusting: it is Leftist, nanny-state, know-it-all, paternalistic government rule over all of the people, taxing the non-select heavily, destroying the middle class in the name of so-called "environmental concern" and world government, letting in those that hate our guts in massive numbers to go on welfare, etc., etc., etc.
You could pack that steaming pile of dogcrap up in the world's most beautiful, diamond-encrusted, velvet-lined box, wrapped up in the world's finest gold-leaf, tied up with a silk bow, and with a free gift of special Skittles obtained from the ass-end of virgin flying unicorns...and it would still be a package containing a steaming pile of dogcrap. It ain't branding, it is a product-development problem - the product just DOES NOT WORK, and hasn't for over 100 years.
It is our job to keep reminding our fellow citizens that the Dems are asking you to buy a steaming pile of dogcrap. Remind them every single day - point to Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, etc., etc.
Yep
And again:
Trump voters are not GOP stalwarts. As is so in the article for the other side, you can’t categorize Trump voters as anything the right wing would want them to be.
Trump ran on repeal and replace, build a wall, drain the swamp, BRING THE JOBS BACK.
That’s what the Obama voters in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania voted for with Trump. They don’t give a damn about abortion or hardcore right wing perspectives on the budget.
They care about those four items. The GOP doesn’t have to have a right wing healthcare replacement. It just has to have one that cuts premiums. That and pass both houses. Healthcare doesn’t have to do anything else. It doesn’t have to defund planned parenthood, it doesn’t have to allow buying policies across states, it probably does have to defund illegals because those voters wanted a wall, but they con’t care about the other right wing things. JUST CUT PREMIUMS.
They want a wall. You just have to have one get started. It doesn’t have to be done, but it has to be clearly underway. Those voters will give a nod to that.
Drain the swamp is vague and they’ll give him a pass on that as long as there’s no corruption scandals.
Bring the jobs back is the biggy, and that has to happen in those big three states. Show some progress in that, he gets those votes again.
And so will the Congress seats.
Trump put a floodlight on the path forward for the GOP: solidify the hold on the Rust Belt and deport the illegal aliens and/or prevent them from voting in the Sun Belt. I’m less worried about 2018, because Democrats have a lot more marginal voters who can’t be bothered more than once every four years, but by 2020, the Rust Belt economy needs to be moving, and the illegal aliens need to be gone, if the GOP is to remain in power.
The actual concern is from each and every political/judicial level of RINO Republicans/Anti-Trump Republicans, who create a ton of damage, whenever the Republicans have a political/judicial majority.
>> and/or prevent them from voting in the Sun Belt.
This is they key. A few more high-profile trials/long prison sentences/deportations for voter fraud and me might just be able to keep the 5 million illegals away from the polls in 2018.
“This is they key. A few more high-profile trials/long prison sentences/deportations for voter fraud and me might just be able to keep the 5 million illegals away from the polls in 2018”
(D)funct
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.