Frank LoBiondo quitting. Could be a get for Dems. Instantly goes from safe Republican to toss up On the other hand, he was not a fan of Trump so a chance to fix that This is South Jersey. The seat was +8 Obama in ‘12, but +4 Trump in ‘16
This is what I don't get about the VA governor race... MSM on both sides are calling it a test of DT's political clout. How so? Seems pretty clear recent election trends say VA is a Dem stronghold. VA is replacing a Dem gov 3 of the last 4 gov's were Dems VA voted HRC 50-44 in 2016 VA voted Obama 51-47 in 2012 VA voted Obama 53-46 in 2008 How would a Dem winning be any knock on DT? Even making it a dead heat should be viewed in favor of Reps by gaining more ground than the norm.
It all depends on how close is it. If Gillespie barely loses (within a point or to), that's nothing to be ashamed of. If he gets blown out, that's cause for serious concern. If he wins, that's cause for concern for Democrats. With the media help they're getting, this should be an easy hold for them.
Northam is projected to win the VA Governor's race. That transgender candidate that was a longshot to unseat a 20+year incumbent? She won too. This is the Charlottsville Mayor: Dems will play it up but the only major surprise is the Transgender person. It was only a state seat but that may be more of a canary in the coal mine to Trumpism than Northam or Murphy in NJ. Her opponent sponsored a failed bathroom bill of his own and openly gay bashed.
The Koch Brothers spent $3 Million to lose Virginia Trump lets them, Gillespie and the GOP know what he thought about it
Trump's late Robocall for Gillespie didn't have an effect: It's true that Gillespie didn't openly embrace Trump but he carried Trumps anti-immigration platform.
I noticed that Democrats believe that this a referendum on Trump and that republicans are in trouble in 2018 and 2020. Way too early to tell, boys and girls.
It's too early to tell, but this is a terrible outcome. Furthermore, the Governor's race isn't the biggest problem. It's the kick-in-the-balls they took in state legislative races. Link. If the GOP loses the Virginia legislature (and that's going to be a close call even though they previously had big majorities), it'll cost US House seats because it is a state in which the House districts are gerrymandered for the GOP. If they control the Legislature, the Dems will flip it the other way. Could cost us 3 or 4 seats just in Virginia.
Were you saying that in 1991? If you were, great. My guess is that your weren't. Gerrymandering was rampant back then especially in the South as Democrats struggled to keep their House majority, but it didn't get 100th of the media attention and political commentary that it gets now. Hmm. Can't imagine why.
I recall some of the polling in the immediate aftermath of the election last year, something like 30% of Trump voters said that would not vote again if they did not repeal Obamacare.
I was not knowledgeable about gerrymandering or any real political issues then. I mean I had voted for GHWB and was about to not vote for Bill Cliinton twice. I was more worried about who had the best beer prices. I just think they should turn it over to computers. I get a kick out of the Austin congressional districts.
To be fair to you, virtually nobody but political professionals were, because it got virtually no political coverage or discussion at all. And that was because it benefited the preferred political party. Why have your priorities gotten so screwed up with age????
I think gerrymandering happens on both sides. I think some things have happened over the last 40 years to make it more significant. We've gotten better with political and social science. They've been able to break down the demographics at a much more scientific level to take advantage of technology. And, as we've grown more partisan, it just keeps getting worse.
What does anyone expect to happen in two Dem states with the embarrassing lack of output so far from Congress? Neither state voted DT into office, and the Rep controlled Congress has done absolutely nothing to address any of the major issues of the 2016 election. Why would a moderate VA or NJ voter favor a Rep when no major legislation has been passed to improve their lives? Those with immigration beefs got the finger. Those paying through their nose on poorer healthcare got muscled aside. Those with businesses being strangled by unreasonable tax policies continue to get the short end. DT went full steam on immigration, healthcare, and tax reform. He presented plans to Congress for all three and demanded swift action giving them all but a signed blank check. In a year they haven't passed a f'n thing addressing any of it. I see three possible bad strategies in play for Congress... 1) Stalling so they can pass major legislation on multiple fronts in early 2018 to add fuel to their campaigns. If so it's a mistake considering the lag time it takes for results to be realized. Actually adds fuel for Dems who can paint the lack of early returns and temporary hardships as a failure of policy. 2) They're arrogantly underestimating the 2018 backlash coming from being complacent, in-fighting slackers. Most likely the case for the Senate as their hold isn't in danger. As for the House, hard to imagine they're this naive. 3) They're jumping on the grenade to torpedo DT and return normal establishment rule. Can't imagine that being the case in 2018 for any Rep up for re-election. Self preservation at all costs is the golden rule in Congress. Poking DT in the eye won't help Rep re-election in the least. Whatever the reason for the lack of action in Congress, they're going to pay for it dearly if they don't get their sh*t together quickly. If tax reform bombs or passes severely diluted, it'll be the death nail confirming to moderates the current power structure is impotent and change is the only option.
As I said last night, Northam winning is not a surprise. What was a surprise was the 9-pt margin of victory. Based on voter turnout in Dem districts, their base was very motivated against Trump. Most POTUS lose seats at the middterm. The question is how many for Trump. Before it appeared that the House was out of reach for Dems and the Senate though in play was stacked in the R's favor. Those perspectives need to be reevaluated now.
It would be extremely hard for them to retake the Senate with the current map, but if I had to bet today, I'd bet on the Ds retaking the House.
Don't get the point to that post SH? Any and all analysis you will see on MSM will go on and on about how the results are about Trump's influence pro or con, so what's Hume's point other than to state the obvious and try to make a negative slur of it?
The D's have been wandering the wilderness as Brazile's recent revelations have shown. What's disappointing about the D victories last night is that nearly all the candidates appeared to be running against Trump, rather than on issues. It's tiring when the out of power party is solely running on an "we aren't them" platform. Yes, I know it worked for Trump and his supporters but I'm naive enough to hope for better.
I thought it was an interesting comment coming from a conservative broadcaster that has been cited on this site as neutral previously. "Didn't embrace me or what I stand for". We know the latter is false, does a candidate need to bow to the POTUS? To Trump's credit, he embraced Gillespie.
Gotcha, Hume is kinda interesting, he comes across, or tries to I should say, as so intellectually honest and nonpartisan but then makes some imo, idiotic or otherwise bias comment. Uh, no I am not going to go to the trouble of citing same. Just my opinion as stated.
Wait until voters realize he has no real policies in place to benefit anyone other than his very narrow special interest group...calling it now as a one and done.
No links??? Just kidding. I don't want to overstate the impact of the elections last night but they do portend to show that the "cult of Trump" or Trumpism is having a negative impact in the voting booth, just as it has had on his agenda to date. If this snowball becomes an avalanche the Trump movement could flameout pretty quickly.
That will be up to the voters of Prince William County to decide whether Danica is representing them or herself.
What is always confusing to me on the Anti-Trump reference is exactly from whence it comes, anti-Trump policy, Trump himself, or Trump as anti-Washington. I seriously believe there are three factions and THAT is why I think the GOP faces serious problems, they have many who still don't see the general public basic guttural anger at Washington in general.
