PLEASE READ!!!

***** ALL users will have to request a password reset BEFORE you will be able to log into the forum. See the thread in the forum issues section for further instructions. If you have issues with this, email us at admin@urbanohio.com. *****

Author Topic: The Democratic Party  (Read 21872 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #630 on: May 16, 2018, 09:23:17 AM »
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/did-democrats-just-have-their-first-tea-party-moment-of-the-2018-primaries/

Did Democrats Just Have Their First Tea Party Moment Of The 2018 Primaries?

Quote
Eastman’s, Jordan’s and Wild’s victories were part of another trend on Tuesday night: Women dominated. They won 11 out of the 16 contested Democratic primaries for Senate, House or governor that featured at least one female candidate and no incumbent. In Pennsylvania alone — currently the largest state with no women in its congressional delegation — three women won Democratic primaries in seats likely to elect them in November: Madeleine Dean in the 4th District, Mary Gay Scanlon in the 5th District and Chrissy Houlahan (though it was uncontested) in the 6th District.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pennsylvania-dsa-major-primary-wins-state-house_us_5afbba0fe4b06a3fb50bb5d7?ncid=APPLENEWS00001

Quote
Four Pennsylvania state House candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) won their Democratic primaries, marking another milestone in the radical left’s march into electoral politics.

The wins by the four candidates ― all women unseating men ― were the product of a variety of political forces and groups. But in a country where “socialist” remains an epithet in certain quarters, the growing electoral success of a once-marginal socialist organization is an especially notable political development.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #631 on: May 16, 2018, 09:24:56 AM »
https://www.thedailybeast.com/democrats-flip-a-pennsylvania-seat-making-41-since-trumps-inauguration-3

Quote
Democrats flipped another seat in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Tuesday night, bringing the total number of state legislative flips to 41 since Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Online ethlaw

  • Metropolitan Tower 224'
  • *
  • Posts: 111
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #632 on: May 16, 2018, 10:10:43 AM »
There's one really interesting thing about the PA primary that I haven't really seen talked about in the news. The new US-14 district contains the majority of Conor Lamb's current district (US-18) which he won in that upset election a few weeks back against Rick Saccone. The new US-14 is even more conservative than US-18 since it does not include any of Allegheny County, so it's been written off as a likely Republican win. However, the two party primaries had almost the same number of voters: 41,254 for Democrats and 41,979 for Republicans. For some context, Trump won this district by 29 points in 2016 so it seems like a pretty big deal that the number of primary voters for each party would be within a percentage point of each other.

It's looking like Democrats may have a very solid chance at making this seat blue (unless there's some other factor that could explain these surprising numbers). I'm wondering if this is a sign that rural districts are once again winnable for Democrats, or if this is just specific to this part of PA.

The source for my numbers is the NYT election webapp, which is always fun to check out on election days:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/15/us/elections/results-pennsylvania-primary-elections.html?

Online freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2916
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #633 on: May 16, 2018, 10:26:07 AM »
^ How the independent voters will break is the huge wildcard along with voter turnout on election day. 

Online ethlaw

  • Metropolitan Tower 224'
  • *
  • Posts: 111
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #634 on: May 16, 2018, 10:51:53 AM »
^ That is true, but still, such a similar turnout between both parties in a district that Trump won by 29 points is not even close to typical. Look at all the other races in that link I provided. US-14 is the only one that has such close results. All the other conservative districts show the Republicans winning significantly more votes than Democrats. And I can't think of a reason that turnout would be especially low for Republicans or high for Democrats. Both parties had relatively competitive primaries (with the Republican primary being far more interesting so if anything they should've had higher turnout). Also interesting is that Republican nominee does not live in the district, while the Democrat does, so that may also be another potential benefit for the Democrat in November.

Online freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2916
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #635 on: May 16, 2018, 10:59:30 AM »
^ I agree with you in general.  What's important about this district (correct me if I'm wrong)is that it appears to be suburban and exurban Pittsburgh.  These are the type of districts that Democrats have a chance at regaining, especially with Connor Lamb types.

Online YABO713

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2944
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #636 on: May 16, 2018, 11:10:10 AM »
^ I agree with you in general.  What's important about this district (correct me if I'm wrong)is that it appears to be suburban and exurban Pittsburgh.  These are the type of districts that Democrats have a chance at regaining, especially with Connor Lamb types.

Only* with Connor Lamb types.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #637 on: May 16, 2018, 11:59:17 AM »
^ I agree with you in general.  What's important about this district (correct me if I'm wrong)is that it appears to be suburban and exurban Pittsburgh.  These are the type of districts that Democrats have a chance at regaining, especially with Connor Lamb types.

The Pennsylvania map was redrawn.  That district no longer includes Allegheny county if I'm not mistaken.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #638 on: May 16, 2018, 11:59:52 AM »
https://twitter.com/DaveAHopkins/status/996649050677145600

Quote
In the 10 states that have held primaries so far, by my math:

Total Democratic nominees for House: 53 percent men, 47 percent women

Democratic House nominees in seats with no Democratic incumbent seeking re-election: 56 percent women, 44 percent men

Which party wants women to have a seat at the table and hold elected office?

Online KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 48730
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #639 on: May 16, 2018, 11:52:45 PM »
Democratic Socialist-backed candidates sweep primary elections in major win for movement: https://t.co/59eEkhdnOH
"Many Americans are willing to die for their country. But pay taxes for it? No way." -- Me.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #640 on: May 17, 2018, 12:05:30 PM »
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-time-for-a-new-2020-democratic-primary-draft/

538 held a 2020 primary draft.  A few off-the-beaten path choices, but the usual suspects dot the top 10 - Sanders, Harris, Gillibrand, Biden, Warren

Online ethlaw

  • Metropolitan Tower 224'
  • *
  • Posts: 111
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #641 on: May 17, 2018, 01:07:56 PM »
^ A Bullock/Warren ticket would be my choice for both strategic and ideological reasons. Bullock is a strong choice for a lot of reasons: 1) he's governor (historically, the US likes to elect governors over senators); 2) he's very popular in Montana which means he could have appeal to the Midwestern voters who turned away from the Democratic Party in 2016; 3) he has solid political experience but can also be seen as a bit of a Washington outsider since he isn't in national politics; 4) he's a strong voice for campaign finance reform and he first gained national attention for mounting a challenge against Citizens United (which should get a lot of progressives on board).

Warren is a good choice for VP because of her name recognition and her popularity with the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party. She's been pretty successful at walking the line between the Bernie faction and establishment faction, so her presence on the ticket could be unifying.

If not Warren, then I'd choose Kamala Harris for VP.

Online YABO713

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2944
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #642 on: May 17, 2018, 01:10:40 PM »
^ A Bullock/Warren ticket would be my choice for both strategic and ideological reasons. Bullock is a strong choice for a lot of reasons: 1) he's governor (historically, the US likes to elect governors over senators); 2) he's very popular in Montana which means he could have appeal to the Midwestern voters who turned away from the Democratic Party in 2016; 3) he has solid political experience but can also be seen as a bit of a Washington outsider since he isn't in national politics; 4) he's a strong voice for campaign finance reform and he first gained national attention for mounting a challenge against Citizens United (which should get a lot of progressives on board).

Warren is a good choice for VP because of her name recognition and her popularity with the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party. She's been pretty successful at walking the line between the Bernie faction and establishment faction, so her presence on the ticket could be unifying.

If not Warren, then I'd choose Kamala Harris for VP.

Warren will lose you any of the vote you gain with Bullock...

It would have to be Harris, Cory Booker, JKIII, or Gillibrand

Online freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2916
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #643 on: May 17, 2018, 01:12:27 PM »
^ A Bullock/Warren ticket would be my choice for both strategic and ideological reasons. Bullock is a strong choice for a lot of reasons: 1) he's governor (historically, the US likes to elect governors over senators); 2) he's very popular in Montana which means he could have appeal to the Midwestern voters who turned away from the Democratic Party in 2016; 3) he has solid political experience but can also be seen as a bit of a Washington outsider since he isn't in national politics; 4) he's a strong voice for campaign finance reform and he first gained national attention for mounting a challenge against Citizens United (which should get a lot of progressives on board).

Warren is a good choice for VP because of her name recognition and her popularity with the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party. She's been pretty successful at walking the line between the Bernie faction and establishment faction, so her presence on the ticket could be unifying.

If not Warren, then I'd choose Kamala Harris for VP.

Warren will lose you any of the vote you gain with Bullock...

It would have to be Harris, Cory Booker, JKIII, or Gillibrand

I think Corey Booker/ Sherrod Brown is a good ticket.

Online YABO713

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2944
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #644 on: May 17, 2018, 01:22:05 PM »
^Imo you have to have a blue dog dem somewhere on the ticket or you lose

Online freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2916
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #645 on: May 17, 2018, 01:26:57 PM »
Obama/Biden did not have a Blue Dog.  I read somewhere that dems are best with a black candidate so that they can run race neutral but still encourage black voters. It makes a lot of sense to me.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #646 on: May 17, 2018, 01:38:08 PM »
It will be difficult to navigate - the "base" clearly wants a Progressive and a lot of these newer faces positioning themselves to be Progressive - Harris, Gillibrand, Booker - have some ties that make that hard, be it the prosecutor angle (Harris), formerly conservative (Gillibrand), or with ties to Big Pharma and/or Wall Street (Booker).

The balance is finding someone who can motivate the base but also having at least one person on the ticket who appeals to swing voters in swing states.  If you go too far left, the ticket will only get 30-35% of the popular vote, almost entirely on the coasts.  If you run more moderates, you risk alienating the base and suppressing turnout.  The message in 2020 needs to be on jobs, the economy, and healthcare (provided Trump doesn't do something crazy like go to war with North Korea or Iran).  I think whoever it ends up being shouldn't push some of the social issues too much during the campaign.  Midwestern swing voters don't care as much about that as they do about being able to afford medical costs and finding good, steady jobs.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #647 on: May 17, 2018, 01:48:34 PM »
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/30/17285240/senate-elections-2018-midterms-trump-approval-rating-by-state

The 10 toughest Senate seats to defend for Democrats in 2018 - West Virginia, Indiana, Montana, Missouri, Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, North Dakota, Michigan, Pennsylvania.

If you're an optimist and take current polls as a good predictor, Dems could keep every one.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #648 on: May 17, 2018, 01:51:33 PM »

I think Corey Booker/ Sherrod Brown is a good ticket.

https://www.vox.com/2018/5/17/17357360/cory-booker-american-progress

Quote
The traditional path out of this box for Democrats is to argue that racial division is a distraction, created and exploited by nefarious elites for their own purposes. But it can be hard for a white politician to say this without coming across as naive (or worse) and likely to ignore the real needs and interests of people of color. Booker’s solution is essentially the one Obama offered — reassure voters of color by putting one of their own in charge, and then let the politician spend his time making his case to white swing voters.

Online YABO713

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2944
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #649 on: May 17, 2018, 01:57:40 PM »
Obama/Biden did not have a Blue Dog.  I read somewhere that dems are best with a black candidate so that they can run race neutral but still encourage black voters. It makes a lot of sense to me.

We're not even in the same political stratosphere as we were in 2008.

Online mu2010

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1479
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #650 on: May 17, 2018, 02:21:58 PM »
^ I wouldn't be so sure on that one. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Online YABO713

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2944
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #651 on: May 17, 2018, 02:24:45 PM »
^ I wouldn't be so sure on that one. The more things change the more they stay the same.

A) The campaign was being run as the greatest financial crisis in a generation loomed.

B) At that time, there were eleven (11) blue dog senators and over 30 blue dog reps. They weren't refreshing, or dare I say nostalgic. Today, you pretty much have Heidtkamp, Manchin, and Donnelly.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #652 on: May 18, 2018, 09:05:40 AM »
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell


Online Brutus_buckeye

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2559
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #653 on: May 18, 2018, 10:02:42 AM »
I cant see the Senate changing hands. Too much ground for the Dems to defend, plus it is not a presidential year. For the one or 2 GOP seats that the Dems could realistically flip, the GOP will flip 2-3 of their own.

The house could be much more likely especially with PA redistricting and the retirements of key reps in CA and other more liberal states.

In reality, having the Senate under GOP control would be the best thing long term for the Dems because they can keep up their position as a Trump foil but will not be pressured about doing something stupid like trying to impeach Trump. There are many people in the base who are frothing at the mouth to do this once they can get control of Congress and it is their number one goal. Such a ploy would be a huge mistake and would hurt them significantly in the long run. The vast majority does not want to go through an impeachment unless it is the most dire circumstances. See Bill Clinton.

Online mu2010

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1479
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #654 on: May 18, 2018, 10:04:30 AM »
Agreed, one-party impeachment would be a disaster for Democrats.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #655 on: May 18, 2018, 10:23:24 AM »
I cant see the Senate changing hands. Too much ground for the Dems to defend, plus it is not a presidential year. For the one or 2 GOP seats that the Dems could realistically flip, the GOP will flip 2-3 of their own.

Look, it's way too early to be trusting polls but every Dem running in red states is up in the available polls at this juncture.

Do I think that will hold?  Not likely.

Online Brutus_buckeye

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2559
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #656 on: May 18, 2018, 10:31:29 AM »
I can easily see MT, ND, IN, and WV flipping.

I think FL, MO remains with the Dems

I think AZ flips

I think NV is a tough call but could also very well flip.

That is net +2 GOP which in most cases that would be considered a big win for the Dems given the shape of the map.

Offline E Rocc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 9130
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #657 on: May 18, 2018, 10:46:20 AM »
^ I wouldn't be so sure on that one. The more things change the more they stay the same.

A) The campaign was being run as the greatest financial crisis in a generation loomed.

B) At that time, there were eleven (11) blue dog senators and over 30 blue dog reps. They weren't refreshing, or dare I say nostalgic. Today, you pretty much have Heidtkamp, Manchin, and Donnelly.

The 1994 election took out a lot of blue dogs and even moderates, leaving leftists in positions of seniority.  They ran with this, and between 2006 and 2016 the bulk of the erstwhile cerulean canines had shifted to the GOP.

They had no philosophical ties to conservatism and were quite susceptible to populism.

They were a key part of Trump's primary season support.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2862
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #658 on: May 18, 2018, 10:51:22 AM »
I can easily see MT, ND, IN, and WV flipping.

I can "see" that too - but all of our current data points show that isn't the case right now.

Online freefourur

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2916
Re: The Democratic Party
« Reply #659 on: May 18, 2018, 10:59:40 AM »
I can easily see MT, ND, IN, and WV flipping.

I think FL, MO remains with the Dems

I think AZ flips

I think NV is a tough call but could also very well flip.

That is net +2 GOP which in most cases that would be considered a big win for the Dems given the shape of the map.

This seems pretty accurate.  But if the a Dem house is a foregone conclusion the additional R senators won't be of much help legislatively.  This will help with judicial appointments though.  I don't think current GOP senate leadership is bullish on any Senate gains which is why they want to skip recess and appoint as many judges as they can.