Blue Wave 2018

[HI54UNI]

RealClearPolitics now has the Democrats as having a 7.3 percentage point edge in the popular vote. If that holds or it gets higher that means the Democrats had a bigger overall percent vote edge in the 2018 House election than the Republicans have ever achieved during my 1957 - Present lifetime; beating the 7.1 percentage point edge the Republicans achieved in the 1994 "Contract with America" election.

Are you seriously giving credence to total popular vote counts across multiple Congressional elections across 50 states?

You realize how useless that is, right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The whole "popular vote" thing was the Donk talking point going up to the election to try and deligitmize it in case they lost.

[HI54UNI]

It’s not over, Nostradamus.

You just watch - she doesn't have the votes

BUT

What we could be seeing is a preview of 2020... the opposition will put someone so far left up as her replacement that the people who have already said they won't support her will vote "present"

which will fulfill their campaign promises while throwing the gavel to Pelosi

But right now she doesn't have the numbers, but a possible pathway there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wait until some Repubs vote for her to give her the gavel so Trump can make her the boogeyman for the next two years.

[AZGrizFan]

You just watch - she doesn't have the votes

BUT

What we could be seeing is a preview of 2020... the opposition will put someone so far left up as her replacement that the people who have already said they won't support her will vote "present"

which will fulfill their campaign promises while throwing the gavel to Pelosi

But right now she doesn't have the numbers, but a possible pathway there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wait until some Repubs vote for her to give her the gavel so Trump can make her the boogeyman for the next two years.

I would fucking laugh so hard.

[93henfan]

That race is over.

[CID1990]

You just watch - she doesn't have the votes

BUT

What we could be seeing is a preview of 2020... the opposition will put someone so far left up as her replacement that the people who have already said they won't support her will vote "present"

which will fulfill their campaign promises while throwing the gavel to Pelosi

But right now she doesn't have the numbers, but a possible pathway there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wait until some Repubs vote for her to give her the gavel so Trump can make her the boogeyman for the next two years.

Actually, that is her most realistic pathway to the gavel-

[Ivytalk]

Anyone see that the newest Socialist from NY wants her salary 3 months earlier, is upset nobody recognizes her or gives her special treatment?


What an entitled brat


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Eh, I agree that it's disconcerting that she doesn't appear to have a lot of economic know-how and is woefully inexperienced in that regard (that's almost the definition of socialism when you think about it), but I don't mind the brashness and the willingness to voice an opinion and push back against the system. And she's right, she's there for 2 years to do a job and get things done. More politicians should have her focus on getting things done rather than just holding power.

Will you get off the goddam center stripe and take a position? I don’t want ignorant legislators “pushing back” and “getting things done.” Stalin got things done. Shit, Gannon, you call yourself a historian?

[CID1990]

Eh, I agree that it's disconcerting that she doesn't appear to have a lot of economic know-how and is woefully inexperienced in that regard (that's almost the definition of socialism when you think about it), but I don't mind the brashness and the willingness to voice an opinion and push back against the system. And she's right, she's there for 2 years to do a job and get things done. More politicians should have her focus on getting things done rather than just holding power.

Will you get off the goddam center stripe and take a position? I don’t want ignorant legislators “pushing back” and “getting things done.” Stalin got things done. ****, Gannon, you call yourself a historian?

Exactly

I'm pretty happy with a slight Dem majority in the House

We are going to have 2 years of complete legislative standstill and given the denizens who occupy Capitol Hill that's a win


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baldy]

Ding dong the cheating witch is dead.

Abrams ends run for governor against Kemp

Stacey Abrams halted her run for Georgia governor Friday, but the Democrat said she would not concede the contest to Republican Brian Kemp and planned to launch a voting rights group to file “major” litigation challenging election policies.

As state officials prepare to certify the vote, Abrams acknowledged the law “allows no further viable remedy” to extend her quest to be the nation’s first black female governor. But she laced her speech with biting criticism of Kemp, whom she accused of leveraging his role as the state’s top elections official to suppress voters.

“I will not concede,” she added, “because the erosion of our democracy is not right.”

Kemp, who stepped down as secretary of state two days after the election, swiftly thanked Abrams for her “passion, hard work and commitment to public service,” ratcheting down divisive rhetoric he’d long used to describe her.

“The election is over and hardworking Georgians are ready to move forward,” Kemp said. “We can no longer dwell on the divisive politics of the past but must focus on Georgia’s bright and promising future.”

Fuck you, bitch. Now its time to fight your soon to be announced Senate campaign.

[Chizzang]

Will you get off the goddam center stripe and take a position? I don’t want ignorant legislators “pushing back” and “getting things done.” Stalin got things done. ****, Gannon, you call yourself a historian?

Exactly

I'm pretty happy with a slight Dem majority in the House

We are going to have 2 years of complete legislative standstill and given the denizens who occupy Capitol Hill that's a win

As I stated already...
We should have a majority of Republicans in the Senate as more states are Conservative than Liberal
and we should have a majority of Democrats in the House as more "people" are Liberal

and honestly that should work the best...
Force these clowns to work together

[CID1990]

Exactly

I'm pretty happy with a slight Dem majority in the House

We are going to have 2 years of complete legislative standstill and given the denizens who occupy Capitol Hill that's a win

Force these clowns to work together

Or not...

No legislation means no new spending

I'm ok with it



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baldy]

Tuesday was a blue ripple.

Source: CNN

Only Democrats seem to be getting agitated by the result, btw, if that tells you anything. Van Jones was on the verge of tears on Tuesday night. It was awesome!

Still rippling...

Florida Governor
Florida Senator
Georgia Governor

[93henfan]

Still rippling...

Florida Governor
Florida Senator
Georgia Governor

[JohnStOnge]

Guys, try as you may to remain in denial, you know very well that the Democrats are in much better position now than they were before the election. You know that it was always the case that the Senate was very tough for them because of the States that were up for Senate elections this year.

And, yes, the popular vote does tell you something. It tells you about national sentiment. And the overall national sentiment right now is clearly anti Trump and anti Republican.

Again: It was the biggest gain in House seats for Democrats since 1974. The popular vote edge is now up to 7.6%. The biggest popular vote edge the Republicans have ever had in my 1957-Present lifetime is 7.1%. It was a very clear expression of rejection of the Republican Party.

Things could change at any time. But that's what it was.

[Pwns]

Trump gets it on this one.

[AZGrizFan]

Guys, try as you may to remain in denial, you know very well that the Democrats are in much better position now than they were before the election. You know that it was always the case that the Senate was very tough for them because of the States that were up for Senate elections this year.

And, yes, the popular vote does tell you something. It tells you about national sentiment. And the overall national sentiment right now is clearly anti Trump and anti Republican.

Again: It was the biggest gain in House seats for Democrats since 1974. The popular vote edge is now up to 7.6%. The biggest popular vote edge the Republicans have ever had in my 1957-Present lifetime is 7.1%. It was a very clear expression of rejection of the Republican Party.

Things could change at any time. But that's what it was.

Mmm Kay, Nostradumbass. I guess we’ll see how Trump is “rejected” in 2020.

[JohnStOnge]

Guys, try as you may to remain in denial, you know very well that the Democrats are in much better position now than they were before the election. You know that it was always the case that the Senate was very tough for them because of the States that were up for Senate elections this year.

And, yes, the popular vote does tell you something. It tells you about national sentiment. And the overall national sentiment right now is clearly anti Trump and anti Republican.

Again: It was the biggest gain in House seats for Democrats since 1974. The popular vote edge is now up to 7.6%. The biggest popular vote edge the Republicans have ever had in my 1957-Present lifetime is 7.1%. It was a very clear expression of rejection of the Republican Party.

Things could change at any time. But that's what it was.

Mmm Kay, Nostradumbass. I guess we’ll see how Trump is “rejected” in 2020.

What I wrote about in the post to which you responded is what already happened. And what happened is that the Republicans suffered an overall defeat. If you ask which Party is better off after the election and which is worse off the answer is clear: The Democrats are better off now and the Republicans are worse off now.

It's also objectively true that it was not a "small" win for the Democrats in the House in historical terms.

What happens in 2020 depends on a lot of things including what the Democrats can come up with in terms of a candidate. But if they come up with even a decent one they should be able to beat Trump.

Trump was not a strong candidate in 2016. He won because of some very unique circumstances in spite of getting a lower percentage of the popular vote than Romney did. He's probably not going to be a strong candidate in 2020.

It's also interesting that, though the Republicans gained a little in the Senate because the map was SO much in their favor this time, Democrats won the Senate races in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. And, yes, Trump did try to influence those Senate elections.

I think he'll probably win Ohio in 2020 if he runs. But Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are very iffy.

[AZGrizFan]

Spin, spin, spin away, Jon boy. You’ve become the consummate donk shill.

[CAA Flagship]

It's also objectively true that it was not a "small" win for the Democrats in the House in historical terms.

Not saying it's not true, but let's see the numbers on that.

[Ivytalk]

Mmm Kay, Nostradumbass. I guess we’ll see how Trump is “rejected” in 2020.

What I wrote about in the post to which you responded is what already happened. And what happened is that the Republicans suffered an overall defeat. If you ask which Party is better off after the election and which is worse off the answer is clear: The Democrats are better off now and the Republicans are worse off now.

It's also objectively true that it was not a "small" win for the Democrats in the House in historical terms.

What happens in 2020 depends on a lot of things including what the Democrats can come up with in terms of a candidate. But if they come up with even a decent one they should be able to beat Trump.

Trump was not a strong candidate in 2016. He won because of some very unique circumstances in spite of getting a lower percentage of the popular vote than Romney did. He's probably not going to be a strong candidate in 2020.

It's also interesting that, though the Republicans gained a little in the Senate because the map was SO much in their favor this time, Democrats won the Senate races in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. And, yes, Trump did try to influence those Senate elections.

I think he'll probably win Ohio in 2020 if he runs. But Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are very iffy.

Why don’t you abandon the “conservative” posturing, JSO. If the Donks capture the government in 2020, you’ll be happily singing the statist tune as our few remaining liberties slip away. You don’t care. Fuck off.

[JohnStOnge]

It's also objectively true that it was not a "small" win for the Democrats in the House in historical terms.

Not saying it's not true, but let's see the numbers on that.

I posted some numbers on that before but I will do it again. It was the biggest net gain for Democrats in a House Election since 1974. 1974 is notable because that election came a few months after Nixon resigned from office after Watergate in August of that year.

It was the best year for Democrats in terms of net gain in House seats for a long time.

Also, let's face it, this completely changes things. Trump had a House that was running interference for him. It had no interest in actually engaging in oversight or investigating what is undoubtably a very fertile background for investigation. It was even attacking Federal Law Enforcement entities trying to get at the truth. That's completely changed now.

[CAA Flagship]

Not saying it's not true, but let's see the numbers on that.

I posted some numbers on that before but I will do it again. It was the biggest net gain for Democrats in a House Election since 1974. 1974 is notable because that election came a few months after Nixon resigned from office after Watergate in August of that year.

It was the best year for Democrats in terms of net gain in House seats for a long time.

Also, let's face it, this completely changes things. Trump had a House that was running interference for him. It had no interest in actually engaging in oversight or investigating what is undoubtably a very fertile background for investigation. It was even attacking Federal Law Enforcement entities trying to get at the truth. That's completely changed now.

No. That angle was already debunked. That's like saying the Atlanta Braves were amazing in 2018 because they won 18 more games than they did in 2017. Well they sucked in 2017.
I want numbers.

[Skjellyfetti]

But, if a baseball franchise has their best season since 1974... doesn't matter which team it is... it's a pretty fucking good season.


numbers

[JohnStOnge]

I posted some numbers on that before but I will do it again. It was the biggest net gain for Democrats in a House Election since 1974. 1974 is notable because that election came a few months after Nixon resigned from office after Watergate in August of that year.

It was the best year for Democrats in terms of net gain in House seats for a long time.

Also, let's face it, this completely changes things. Trump had a House that was running interference for him. It had no interest in actually engaging in oversight or investigating what is undoubtably a very fertile background for investigation. It was even attacking Federal Law Enforcement entities trying to get at the truth. That's completely changed now.

No. That angle was already debunked. That's like saying the Atlanta Braves were amazing in 2018 because they won 18 more games than they did in 2017. Well they sucked in 2017.
I want numbers.

No. This is kind of like saying that the Atlanta Braves won more games in 2018 than they'd won in 44 years.

There's also the popular vote thing. It wasn't all that remarkable by Democrat Standards. But the Democrats had a bigger popular vote edge in the 2018 House elections than the Republicans EVER had in my lifetime. The high water mark for the Republican popular vote margin in my lifetime was 7.1 percentage points in 1994. Contract with America and all. The Democrats had a 7.6 percentage point edge this time.

FYI, the Democrat performance in terms of popular vote edge was 13th best among the 31 House elections of my 1957-Present lifetime. 1 through 12 were all also Democrat edges. Best ever was a 16.8 percentage point edge by Democrats in 1974. That Nixon Watergate thing again.

Anyway, again: It was not a small thing by historical standards. It was a very strong performance by the Democrats.

[CAA Flagship]

No. That angle was already debunked. That's like saying the Atlanta Braves were amazing in 2018 because they won 18 more games than they did in 2017. Well they sucked in 2017.
I want numbers.

No. This is kind of like saying that the Atlanta Braves won more games in 2018 than they'd won in 44 years.
: It was not a small thing by historical standards. It was a very strong performance by the Democrats.

NUMBERS!!!!!!!
Geesh.

Here's what I want to see.
Number of red seats at risk.
Number of blue seats at risk.
Number of red seats won.
Number of blue seats won.

Let's look at that data over the last few decades.
That is the only (macro)data that will provide a decent measure.

Telling me that you scored 10 points in a basketball game is nice, but how many shots did you take?

[GannonFan]

No. This is kind of like saying that the Atlanta Braves won more games in 2018 than they'd won in 44 years.
: It was not a small thing by historical standards. It was a very strong performance by the Democrats.

NUMBERS!!!!!!!
Geesh.

Here's what I want to see.
Number of red seats at risk.
Number of blue seats at risk.
Number of red seats won.
Number of blue seats won.

Let's look at that data over the last few decades.
That is the only (macro)data that will provide a decent measure.

Telling me that you scored 10 points in a basketball game is nice, but how many shots did you take?

JSO's a stats guy, he'll only give you the stats that support whatever position he decided in advance. It's how he rolls.