Forecasting the race for the House

DIDM said:
Yes
Click to expand...

Seems inconsistent with the concept of individual liberty. You're not voting for platforms extremely biased against the economics of any individual states, like in slavery times. Presidential platforms are run on national level, not state. The individual is affected more than the state is (at least more often than not). So why should the state supersede the vote of the individual?
 
Limbo Pete said:
Now Trump is a known commodity as an actual elected politician with a record. It's not a race to the bottom anymore.
Click to expand...
He wasn’t a known commodity when he first ran?

There’s no difference in what folks know now and then
 
JamesRussler said:
When you say "the Pelosi wing," are you contrasting that with "the Progressive wing?" If so, I disagree. The far Left is alienating many voters who otherwise would vote Dem. My criticism of Pelosi is that she has courted the far Left / Progressive wing.

If Dems really want to throw a curve ball, they should just run Jeb Bush in 2020. I'm serious. He might be able to beat Trump if he runs of the Democratic ticket. He'd split moderate Republicans, and Dems would unite behind him to beat Trump. If Dems insist on losing, they should nominate someone like Kamala Harris.
Click to expand...
I'm talking organizational leadership and administration. The party has been poorly ran from a logistical perspective.
Edit: I probably wasn't clear about that.
 
Limbo Pete said:
I can't agree with that. I think parts of his base like him way more, but those that were already turned off to a greater or lesser degree hate him. And a whole lot of those people sat on their asses last time.
Click to expand...

That might be true in some part of the county (e.g., the SouthWest), but is it true in the states which Trump flipped from blue to red? My sense is that they are very satisfied with their purchase. His popularity in that region is not suffering at all.
 
JamesRussler said:
That might be true in some part of the county (e.g., the SouthWest), but is it true in the states which Trump flipped from blue to red? My sense is that they are very satisfied with their purchase. His popularity in that region is not suffering at all.
Click to expand...
Think about how close some of those states were. I think increased voter turnout flips those narrow margins at the least.
 
Limbo Pete said:
Think about how close some of those states were. I think increased voter turnout flips those narrow margins at the least.
Click to expand...

We'll see... I'm not convinced the increased turnout will break for the Left.
 
Limbo Pete said:
It's not just having money. It's how you use it.
Click to expand...
No, it’s not

She had every advantage, and lost, it’s the will of the people throughout the nation, not just in over populated states
 
Truth said:
I remember watching videos of election night. "Hillary has a 92% chance on winning the election tonight"

And it was over pretty fast.
Click to expand...
This. 538 was heralded by many, including some posters on here, as the most reliable predictor of election results prior to the 2016 election but their credibility went right out the window after Hillary lost, imo. They had her winning in an epic landslide right up until Trump had 200 or so electoral votes then it was all: 90% chance of winning...- 75% - 60% - 30% - 20% - She lost.
 
JamesRussler said:
You're saying she didn't push it through to the right races, or promote the right causes?
Click to expand...
I'm saying she got caught napping and didn't have a broad enough strategy. Red Map showed everyone the kind of depth that is both possible and now neccessary. It's forgivable to a degree, but we need fresh leadership now that has a better grasp on how things are. This is just imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,994
Messages
55,460,121
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top