2017 Democratic Thread

[Reddy]

Then they never understood "Trumpism" in the first place. Trumpism isnt beholden to "failing" or "facts", it is continually changing the facts/narrative to fit whatever conclusion that they want.

 

To them it doesnt matter what happened last night, they will just make things up. That is why losing those races last night "doesnt change everything." For some people in Congress it will definitely make them more nervous about their specific seat, but none of the Governor races were heavy Republican states, in fact both states went for Clinton. Now if it was Wisconsin, maybe youd be talking about some major implications, but again these races (imo) were must wins, not upsets.

 

A little over a year ago the idea Trump would beat Clinton was only held by a very small minority. Im not going to start saying "everything changed" until there is some actual change in a state that needs to be flipped

FYI, I appreciate your perspective, but I'm not pulling this out of my ass and it's not unbridled optimism. I'm telling you what top Republican strategists have been saying, and were saying last night to me and the group of people I was with as we watched returns in the White House.

 

The GOP is in full crisis mode.

[Reddy]

You will see more GOP retirements in the coming weeks and months, and Republicans in suburban seats are going to lose in 18 if all things remain the same (ie: the GOP has trouble passing legislation, Trump remains Trump). The thing is, this wasn't just VA and NJ. Long-time red areas like Westchester NY overwhelmingly voted out their GOP executive. An area near the Delaware Water Gap which had NEVER gone blue, did. This wasn't relegated to blue districts turning out, there was also a shift in typically red suburban districts that are fiscally conservative but don't support the fear mongering of Trumpism.

 

Dive into the results a bit more - they're pretty fascinating.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Reddy

[StrangeSox]

You will see more GOP retirements in the coming weeks and months, and Republicans in suburban seats are going to lose in 18 if all things remain the same (ie: the GOP has trouble passing legislation, Trump remains Trump). The thing is, this wasn't just VA and NJ. Long-time red areas like Westchester NY overwhelmingly voted out their GOP executive. An area near the Delaware Water Gap which had NEVER gone blue, did. This wasn't relegated to blue districts turning out, there was also a shift in typically red suburban districts that are fiscally conservative but don't support the fear mongering of Trumpism.

 

Dive into the results a bit more - they're pretty fascinating.

 

In VA, white college educated people gave a slight edge to Northam whereas they had gone for Trump in November.

[Soxbadger]

I'm more in line with your thinking SB, but keep in mind it wasn't just governors' races. 3 or 4 of the top 5 GOP Congressmen in Virginia were tossed out last night in a huge wave. Democrats also managed to break the supermajority in one of GA's chambers. We've also seen a pretty steady trickle of GOP retirement announcements at the federal level, and it'll be interesting to see if that picks up pace now.

 

e: it won't be in effect until the 2022 election, but last night conceivably opened up a couple of US House seats for Democrats from Virginia since they'll have a major say in the post-2020 census redistricting now. So that's some actual change, even if the effects won't be seen for awhile.

 

Yeah those state house victories are big, but some of that has been brewing for a while. VA/GA are states that have had the writing on the wall for potentially moving Democrat. So Im not just yet going to write this up as "changing everything."

 

FYI, I appreciate your perspective, but I'm not pulling this out of my ass and it's not unbridled optimism. I'm telling you what top Republican strategists have been saying, and were saying last night to me and the group of people I was with as we watched returns in the White House.

 

The GOP is in full crisis mode.

 

Many of the top Republican strategists thought Trump was going to lose last year. In fact Im not sure any living past Republican President voted for Trump (Bush Sr. voted for Clinton, Bush Jr. voted for neither.) So I just dont really put a lot of faith into these "strategists" anymore. Last year I had a bad feeling (I jokingly posted on Facebook that after the Cubs won the WS nothing felt right in the world and that Trump would win.) And while Id love to think that this is a "big change", these are all states that Democrats need to win in the next election anyway.

 

A year is a long way away, if anything my fear is that this happened to early. Surprise is a great weapon, now they have an entire year to figure out "what went wrong."

 

In a year from now we may be saying that this was a good indication of what to come or it could be an aberration. A million things could happen between now and then that could completely change the election cycle dynamics. If I was a strategist, id be cautiously optimistic, but I would definitely be preparing for the worst.

 

That is a lesson that needs to be learned from 2016, prepare for the worst outcome and how to combat it.

[Reddy]

You know I meant "changes everything" in terms of the midterms, right? Not in perpetuity.

[Reddy]

Oh, and yeah, of course you prepare for the worst. I was completely prepared for a Gillespie win yesterday and was operating over the last week as if we were running from behind. That's the way you play this game.

[Soxbadger]

You know I meant "changes everything" in terms of the midterms, right? Not in perpetuity.

 

Actually I thought you meant for the next Presidential election.

 

Historically speaking there are usually losses for any party who controls the Executive and Legislature. Its just the nature of US politics, voters dont seem to like 1 party in control.

[caulfield12]

I'm more in line with your thinking SB, but keep in mind it wasn't just governors' races. 3 or 4 of the top 5 GOP Congressmen in Virginia were tossed out last night in a huge wave. Democrats also managed to break the supermajority in one of GA's chambers. We've also seen a pretty steady trickle of GOP retirement announcements at the federal level, and it'll be interesting to see if that picks up pace now.

 

e: it won't be in effect until the 2022 election, but last night conceivably opened up a couple of US House seats for Democrats from Virginia since they'll have a major say in the post-2020 census redistricting now. So that's some actual change, even if the effects won't be seen for awhile.

 

 

The biggest impact is that lots of GOPers are going to be scared of Trumpian primary challenges on the right...realizing that tacking back towards the middle for general elections is becoming increasingly difficult.

 

A modest (at best) tax relief program for the middle class (increases for many) is not enough to win over independents. Not to mention the economy likely slowing, interest rates rising/borrowing becoming more expensive and the GOP losing the right to claim they’re the party of fiscal responsibility after what the last two Republican admins have done (Bush’s unfunded Medicare B giveaway, now Trump) to further increase the debt burden.

 

Then there’s the fallout for blowing up the ObamaCare individual markets even more without providing any effective solutions.

Edited November 8, 2017 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

So Much Winning

 

In short, a slew of discrete victories--won in different places and for distinct reasons--have amounted to wholesale change in the Commonwealth of Virginia. But the unified themes of Tuesday night's election in Virginia can't be measured solely in terms of available votes in the House of Delegates, or an overall change in the political tides. On Tuesday night, Virginia voters notched an important victory over blather.

 

After all, the way the media had set the stage for Tuesday night's tilt made it look like everyone should be prepared for a long day's journey into despondency, with the perpetually back-on-his-bulls*** Chris Cillizza leading the way with an Election Day piece that all-but predicted a Democratic Party failure. Still, it's hard to fault Cillizza. If anything, the hyperactive shiny-ball chaser was trailing in the wake of a larger media narrative that included a solid week of supposition that Donna Brazile's infinitely publicized tell-all account of the inner wranglings of the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 election was sure to depress Democratic turnout and cost Northam the election. And all of that was preceded by the verdict of the pundit class that held that the Virginians who had stood athwart the incursion of white supremacists in Charlottesville were equally guilty of divisiveness and political violence as Richard Spencer's hopeful neo-Nazi genocidaires.

 

Virginians, to their shining credit, tuned out all of that noise, and refused to be demoralized. Moreover, they refused to succumb to the false choices that have become a media-inflated theme in the Democratic Party's post-Trump autopsy. The notion that Democrats had to make an either-or choice between advancing the civil rights of marginalized Americans and the economic remedies that could help the working class held no sway in Virginia. Neither did the notion that a choice needed to be made between Hillary Clinton-style incrementalism and Bernie Sanders-style boldness.

 

On Tuesday night, wherever a potential avatar of a responsible form of politics arose to challenge the sucking vacuum of Trumpism, Virginians voted for said avatar. Whether they could claim an inch, or a yard, or a mile, they claimed it. Wherever it was possible to make something--anything--a little bit better, they seized the opportunity. There was no quibbling over what item on the menu might be more digestible or more pure in its creation--Virginia voters just carted off the whole buffet.

 

Perhaps the most hopeful thing that happened in America on Tuesday night happened at the start of Ralph Northam's victory speech, when a group of protesters who hadn't forgotten about his mealy-mouthed support for that anti-sanctuary city bill briefly crashed the party and let their disapproving voice be heard. There's no doubt that this will be spun as Northam's unsteady beginning, or some other black mark on an otherwise impressive victory. In reality, though--non-punditized, un-Twitterfied reality--the encounter demonstrated that a new generation of Democratic voters were ready to do more than cast a vote and hope for the best, but rather, come walking through that door left ajar.

[StrangeSox]

Roy Moore, the twice-removed Alabama SC Justice fundamentalist Christian bigot, likes 'em young

 

Woman says Roy Moore initiated sexual encounter when she was 14, he was 32

[GoSox05]

If you thought Roy Moore couldn't get any worse.

 

It should end ones political career, but it he will probably still win and the GOP will fully support him.

 

[BigSqwert]

If you thought Roy Moore couldn't get any worse.

 

It should end ones political career, but it he will probably still win and the GOP will fully support him.

 

The Evangelicals will find an excuse to ignore this.

[StrangeSox]

The Evangelicals will find an excuse to ignore this.

 

See: all of the incest molestation s*** with the Duggars

[StrangeSox]

WaPo found this woman while reporting on another story. She's a Republican Trump voter. And it's not just one.

 

Aside from Corfman, three other women interviewed by The Washington Post in recent weeks say Moore pursued them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18 and he was in his early 30s, episodes they say they found flattering at the time, but troubling as they got older. None of the women say that Moore forced them into any sort of relationship or sexual contact.

 

Wendy Miller says she was 14 and working as a Santa’s helper at the Gadsden Mall when Moore first approached her, and 16 when he asked her on dates, which her mother forbade. Debbie Wesson Gibson says she was 17 when Moore spoke to her high school civics class and asked her out on the first of several dates that did not progress beyond kissing. Gloria Thacker Deason says she was an 18-year-old cheerleader when Moore began taking her on dates that included bottles of Mateus Rosé wine. The legal drinking age in Alabama was 19.

 

Of the four women, the youngest at the time was Corfman, who is the only one who says she had sexual contact with Moore that went beyond kissing. She says they did not have intercourse.

 

Neither Corfman nor any of the other women sought out The Post. While reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought relationships with teenage girls. Over the ensuing three weeks, two Post reporters contacted and interviewed the four women. All were initially reluctant to speak publicly but chose to do so after multiple interviews, saying they thought it was important for people to know about their interactions with Moore. The women say they don’t know one another.

 

“I have prayed over this,” Corfman says, explaining why she decided to tell her story now. “All I know is that I can’t sit back and let this continue, let him continue without the mask being removed.”

 

This account is based on interviews with more than 30 people who said they knew Moore between 1977 and 1982, when he served as an assistant district attorney for Etowah County in northern Alabama, where he grew up.

Edited November 9, 2017 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

Breitbart's already defending him

[StrangeSox]

Alabama law doesn't allow Moore to step down at this point, not that he would.

 

Murkowski is allegedly talking to Strange about running a write-in campaign.

[Reddy]

Alabama law doesn't allow Moore to step down at this point, not that he would.

 

Murkowski is allegedly talking to Strange about running a write-in campaign.

McConnell was just speaking to Strange as well in the Senate chamber.

[StrangeSox]

Portman's put out the strongest of the GOP statements thus far:

 

Rob Portman goes a touch further: "If what we read is true -- and people are on the record, so I assume it is -- that he should step aside."

— Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) November 9, 2017

 

The rest of them have all said "if true" without clearly stating, like Portman does here, that they believe the allegations are true or are likely to be true. WaPo's got 3 people on the record and 30+ sources.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that Moore is a crazy fundamentalist asshole that nobody in the Senate, D or R, wants to actually deal with. Especially McConnell. They can't remove him from the ballot, but maybe they launch a Luther Strange write-in campaign?

 

 

It's still a huge longshot, but a D taking Sessions' seat would be Peak 2017.

[Reddy]

Portman's put out the strongest of the GOP statements thus far:

 

Rob Portman goes a touch further: "If what we read is true -- and people are on the record, so I assume it is -- that he should step aside."

— Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) November 9, 2017

 

The rest of them have all said "if true" without clearly stating, like Portman does here, that they believe the allegations are true or are likely to be true. WaPo's got 3 people on the record and 30+ sources.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that Moore is a crazy fundamentalist asshole that nobody in the Senate, D or R, wants to actually deal with. Especially McConnell. They can't remove him from the ballot, but maybe they launch a Luther Strange write-in campaign?

 

 

It's still a huge longshot, but a D taking Sessions' seat would be Peak 2017.

True, but if anyone knows how to run a write-in campaign, it's Murk. Getting that many people to spell Murkowski correctly? Impressive. Even in Alabama they should be able to write "Strange". Either way, though, this is obviously a pretty big boost for Jones.

[StrangeSox]

Alabama has a sore-loser law so Strange can't even run as a write-in.

[Reddy]

Alabama has a sore-loser law so Strange can't even run as a write-in.

He can. Just looked it up. http://sos.alabama.gov/newsroom/casting-wr...e-press-release

 

All votes for “write-in” candidates will be counted in the event that the candidate is qualified to hold the office and not a fictional character. It is also required that the “write-in” vote be hand-written. Additionally, there are no existing stipulations that prohibit a candidate from being elected despite having unsuccessfully run for a party’s nomination, which would normally apply due to Alabama’s sore loser law.

[Reddy]

McCain beats Portman:

 

The allegations against Roy Moore are deeply disturbing and disqualifying. He should immediately step aside and allow the people of Alabama to elect a candidate they can be proud of.

[StrangeSox]

"what's the big deal about child molestation?"

 

 

Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler, a Moore backer: "Even if you accept the Washington Post’s report as being completely true, it’s much ado about very little. " #ALSEN #alpolitics

— Brian Lyman (@lyman_brian) November 9, 2017

 

 

 

Family Values Evangelicals are going to stick behind Moore just like they stuck behind Trump

[Quin]

Party of personal responsibility and family values.

[BigSqwert]

"what's the big deal about child molestation?"

 

 

Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler, a Moore backer: "Even if you accept the Washington Post’s report as being completely true, it’s much ado about very little. " #ALSEN #alpolitics

— Brian Lyman (@lyman_brian) November 9, 2017

 

 

 

Family Values Evangelicals are going to stick behind Moore just like they stuck behind Trump

 

Wonder what Lyman's response would be if it were his 14-year-old daughter this happened to. Loser