Northren had a slight advantage in the polls and wasn’t expected to smoke him as he did last night, nor were the Dems expected to retake the Va house. This was an asswhoopin’ by any measure. Don’t underestimate the fierce rejection of Trumpism across the country, especially in states with sizeable suburbs.
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Northren had a slight advantage in the polls and wasn’t expected to smoke him as he did last night, nor were the Dems expected to retake the Va house. This was an asswhoopin’ by any measure. Don’t underestimate the fierce rejection of Trumpism across the country, especially in states with sizeable suburbs.
The real charlatans are the ones who desperately want to go back to successions of how things were before Trump and claim to be representing the average American. The normality in America was sick and Trump is a symtom. He is not some freak anomaly appearing in a vacuum.
He is just that - an anomaly. The Dems need to get back to pushing their message of jobs, healthcare, and a return to civility and they will be well positioned to sweep back into power in 18 and 20. They should also stop worrying about establishment v Bernie and just focus on getting things done by way of creating an aspirational message their candidates can run on.
A few interesting things in the exit poll:
No big variation in voting based on income - gender, age, education and race still a lot more predictive
Northam had better margins than Clinton among moderates and liberals (did worse among conservatives)
Twice as many voters said they were voting to oppose Trump than support him (34-17)
GOP favourability - 37-59 (-22); Dem favourability - 51-46 (+5)
Trump rides slightly ahead of the GOP at -17 (but 47% strongly disapprove)
No big variation in voting based on income - gender, age, education and race still a lot more predictive
Northam had better margins than Clinton among moderates and liberals (did worse among conservatives)
Twice as many voters said they were voting to oppose Trump than support him (34-17)
GOP favourability - 37-59 (-22); Dem favourability - 51-46 (+5)
Trump rides slightly ahead of the GOP at -17 (but 47% strongly disapprove)
Last edited:
Nice to see the great state of Virginia doing the right thing.It's always interesting to see the voting map; solid red in the countryside and solid blue where most of the people live, Tidewater, Richmond, Charlottesville, Northern VA, Roanoke.
Let me also add this: Georgia is much more red than Virginia is blue. Yet, Jon Ossoff did MUCH better in GA6 than Gillespie yesterday (Osoff lost by 3.5% or so). This was a beatdown of the GOP in Virginia, but we need to see the same energy next November.
Idc if he speaks to Fox, but I don't like that he speaks to their worst anchor, Tucker Carlson.
Ohio mayor who left Dem Party to back Trump goes down in humiliating electoral defeat
This is like leftist fanfic.
This is like leftist fanfic.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Ossoff come back and claim the seat in the next cycle, especially if the Dems manage to sweep into power in the House through an anti-Trump wave.
Can you explain what you mean? Is it that Ossoff was closer to victory in a red state than Gillespee in a blue-purple state?
Did you find a good link? They seem to have taken most of it down, only a summary remains.
They did a good job of hiding them for some reason, took me ages to find - just scroll down this a bit and switch the tab over to "exit poll" from "county" - http://edition.cnn.com/election/2017/results/virginia-governor
Another thing I noticed - Gillespie matched Trump (give or take a little) among white non-college, and did equally bad with minorities, but lost by 3 on white-college compared to Trumps 4 point win. To compound it, the white college proportion of the electorate was up from 38% to 41%, whereas white non-college was down accordingly from 29% to 26%. Those figures also show that this was possibly an exaggerated result compared to many other states where the Dems need to improve.
Yes.
The 6th district of GA has been a VERY stronghold of republicans for a long period of time. It was held by Newt Gingrich for 20 years (1979-1999) and by Tom Price for more than a decade. No Democrat has won it in the last 40 years.
Besides, the margins of victory has been overwhelming. For example, over the last decade or so:
2014: 66-34
2012: 65-35
2010: 99-1
2008: 68-32
2006: 72-28
On the other hand, in 2017: 51.8- 48.2, a 3.6% margin only.
Were they running Saddam Hussein?
Saddam would've won more than 1%.Seriously, in 2010 (as well as in 2004), Tom Price was running against himself. The democrats didn't have a candidate for this district. That just tells you how difficult it has been for this party in that specific district.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia's_6th_congressional_district
Ugh, that is stupid (the site). Thanks.
IIRC, there was some redistricting and also Trump disgust which meant that in 2016 it was a literal 1% win for Trump. (Obama lost both times by >20). What is remarkable though was the turnaround as compared to Tom Price.
To me it seems to be a district which is traditionally Republican but anti-Trump, and I'm afraid there aren't too many of those. Also that in fighting for them by going right, the Dems might have to deal with an increasingly disillusioned base.
Anyway, in less high-profile GA state leg races yesterday, the Dems had 3 pickups. http://www.ajc.com/news/state--regi...ats-special-elections/9KdkpqNX1CrVKyfal4qj7N/
An Indian American Sikh guy was elected as the mayor of Hoboken yesterday - this after a few last minute racist flyers were distributed opposing the guy.
http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2017/11/bhalla_bests_defusco_to_win_hoboken_mayoral_race.html
http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2017/11/bhalla_bests_defusco_to_win_hoboken_mayoral_race.html
@Fergie's gum
https://theintercept.com/2017/11/08...ats-socialists-and-populists-sweep-elections/
A good summary of the progressives (Berniecrats and DSA) yesterday. About 50-50 success, which isn't bad for such a new movement.
https://theintercept.com/2017/11/08...ats-socialists-and-populists-sweep-elections/
A good summary of the progressives (Berniecrats and DSA) yesterday. About 50-50 success, which isn't bad for such a new movement.
Those flyers
I agree on both. This seat will be up for grabs next fall, and it will be interesting to see if Democrats can win it. I doubt that though.
Also, from the link that you brought, I saw this: "A Bernie Sanders-backed candidate falters in Atlanta mayor race". I am happy that Sanders-backed candidates are not winning or taking over the party. I never liked his candidacy even though I'm in favor of a universal healthcare system (or at least more universal than we have right now). His campaign put Hillary in a tougher position and many of his supporters adopted the "Bernie or bust" approach that, among other factors, led the party (and the country) to where we are now.
Will give a read later. Think last nights result of the socialist who defeated the GOP whip will be an eye opener for those who have been going on about how left wing candidates could never win in places like Virginia.
Not this again. More Clinton supporters voted for McCain in 2008 than Sanders voters who voted for Trump.
That doesn't make the "Bernie or bust" right. Besides, McCain is no Trump.
And I must say that I have my own criticism of Hillary herself before and during the 2016 campaign. The private email server, the "deplorable" comment, etc. only made things worse for her.
But, this was a very unusual election cycle, and Bernie had to drop earlier (I know that Hillary took longer to drop in 2008). He should've never questioned her judgement publicly and, by so doing, giving the GOP more reasons to attack her.
Whilst that's true, that doesn't include voters who abstained, or voted third party/write ins. Not sure what that does to the overall. Also worth remembering that Clinton's demographic in 2016 was very different to 08.
@ManUtd1999
Also wanted to add this in the Ossoff post:
Same time as Ossoff was the Montana special election. This is another red seat, and the closest Dems had come was -3 in 2008 (presidential) and its been about -10/-20 for the Congressional vote. Trump himself won by 20.
Unlike Ossoff, the candidate here had a significant funding disadvantage, and was running in a seat that was both red and pro-Trump.
It ended -6 (50-44), a 10 point swing from the 2016 Cong race and a 14 point-swing from the 2016 pres. race. The Dem candidate was a leftist backed by Sanders.
In other words, there are many ways to skin a cat
@Fergie's gum
Final bonus:
Also wanted to add this in the Ossoff post:
Same time as Ossoff was the Montana special election. This is another red seat, and the closest Dems had come was -3 in 2008 (presidential) and its been about -10/-20 for the Congressional vote. Trump himself won by 20.
Unlike Ossoff, the candidate here had a significant funding disadvantage, and was running in a seat that was both red and pro-Trump.
It ended -6 (50-44), a 10 point swing from the 2016 Cong race and a 14 point-swing from the 2016 pres. race. The Dem candidate was a leftist backed by Sanders.
In other words, there are many ways to skin a cat
@Fergie's gum
Final bonus:
Some of Clinton voters will have abstained as well. I know its been nearly a decade and people forget, but 2008 was a really divisive primary season for the Democrats and plenty of bad blood between the Obama and Clinton campaigns.
Typical that Biden lists a bunch of candidates to congratulate on his Twitter and he doesn't bother to include the left wing candidate Lee Carter, who pulled of one of the biggest shocks of last night.
@berbatrick that Montana election - wasn't that with the clown that attacked the reporter?
Yes, he won. Gianforte vs Quist. The reporter was Ben Jacobs. AFAIK the polls didn't move either way after the attack, and recently another Republican praised him for it.
The problem with this is that "voters don’t vote their self-interest, they vote their values"
The Republicans learned this far earlier than the Democrats who still struggle to understand this fact. Frank Luntz, the US Republican strategist was a master at using focus groups to learn what messages spoke to voters and then crafting specific messages that appeal to those values. Polling can't reveal that type of thing. Also as Luntz realized, the way you phrase a question can drastically affect the poll's results.
Here is a great primer on Luntz from the Daily Show
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/yv88qv/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-gop-whisperer
From the 90s Luntz produced a manual that would go out to GOP candidates that was packed with talking points and strategy that he formed from his dozens of focus groups. I have a copy of the 1996 Luntz Manual so here are a few screen shots just to give you an idea of how the messaging strategy works behind the scenes.
Please, show me. Denmark, Norway, Austria and Sweden are the exemptions by the way, you can spare your time. They are pretty much the smallest of the lot and thus only 4 out of 17. Spain admittedly still has time to develop, history so far is a bit inconclusive as it only covers a short time span. Same for Greece.
Some extremely serious allegations coming out about Roy Moore, the GOP candidate in the special election for the Senate in Alabama.
He could do it again today, in front of everyone voting, and still win the seat in Alabama.
Rand Paul in a very weird assault story, his neighbor smashed up Rand's ribs in a dispute that may or may not have been over lawn clippings/leaves.
You are behind a few days
Sickening allegations. Think its too late to have him replaced him as a candidate.
Murkowski's talking about getting Luther Strange (not a DC villain, it's his actual name - the person this guy beat in the GOP primary) to mount a write-in campaign. Would make for an interesting election day.