BertramCooper
Banned
I'm starting to think Kasich has a better chance than Walker.
I'd say Kasich will prove more appealing to moderates than Walker will.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2014 |OT2| We need to be more like Disney World
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
I'm starting to think Kasich has a better chance than Walker.
I'd say Kasich will prove more appealing to moderates than Walker will.
How will he explain expanding Medicaid to the base, among other things? I think the far right will drown him out, but you may be right.
Of course they would.
RustyNails
Member
I cant believe Martin O Mlley done lost...what in the what what. Clinton/O Malley 2016 no more.
jamesinclair
Banned
Elections have consequences.
From maryland
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...-trust-fund-larry-hogan-transportation-issues
From maryland
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...-trust-fund-larry-hogan-transportation-issues
He wasn't running but it was his Lt. Gov, so in way he kind of was since his reputation likely factored into the vote.
The rain tax is pretty controversial, really. But I still cannot understand how a Democrat lost the Governors race in MD. It just blows my mind. What is going on in that state?
It'd be a great window into their psyche as far as their confidence in electoral math is concerned.
Avon Barksdale
Member
He wasn't running though.
All of the state level stuff from all red states is gonna be depressing. From voter ID/suppression to electoral math to, in states even with blue legislatures, transportation.
I hate Christie. He's a shitstain and he knows it. He is so incredibly corrupt.
Fuck, the GOP has such a deep bench of people for Presidential politics.
I hate Christie. He's a shitstain and he knows it. He is so incredibly corrupt.
Fuck, the GOP has such a deep bench of people for Presidential politics.
BertramCooper
Banned
Considering Romney still managed to get the party nomination in 2012, I don't think Medicaid expansion or the ACA in general will prove to be that big of an albatross for Kasich.
Ultimately the GOP will pick a moderate candidate, but like in 2012, that moderate candidate will have jumped all over the place ideologically in order to first secure the support of the base and then to appeal to the general electorate.
Wow, in the end things didn't end up so bad for Colorado. Hickenlooper is going to hang on (barely) and Polis beat Leing. Really, the only thing we lost was Udall and that campaign was so horribly run that there's no surprise there. In the end, I think that Colorado is still ultimately a blue state, albeit barely. I have no doubt it will go blue in 2016.
Too bad about Udall. He really would have won the election if he was at least a semi-competent campaigner. My big hope is that Gardner only serves one term and we get someone better next time.
Too bad about Udall. He really would have won the election if he was at least a semi-competent campaigner. My big hope is that Gardner only serves one term and we get someone better next time.
jamesinclair
Banned
Obozo should have pushed to have this news released yesterday
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-adp-jobs-private-sector-economy-20141105-story.html
Bad campaigner or not, Udall's voting record was generally pretty good. Losing him is still a big blow for people with progressive priorities.
Agreed. By "someone better" I meant someone who could win. Udall was actually pretty awesome. Sad to see him go just because he ran a bad campaign.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Liberals aren't going to enact policy changes till 2024 or later. The GOP has the legislature and states.
I'm depressed. We're following in Europe's footsteps and going to have a lost generation. I'm in it
I'm depressed. We're following in Europe's footsteps and going to have a lost generation. I'm in it
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Why 2024? Why not just go all the way to 2032?
If democrats can't find a way to win in the midterms, we're not going to see any gerrymandering get undone next census, and Republicans have just proven that "don't cooperate at all until you get your way" is a successful strategy.
How did this happen? Does it spell doom for 2018?
Next census is 2020, a presidential year. We may actually get back some of the ridiculously gerrymandered districts after that.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
civil rights act and yes, unless republicans win the white house in 2016
I didn't think I'd be depressed even though I knew this was coming. I'm just really frustrated our elections system is anti-democratic and rewards gridlock and conservatism.
I really don't know what the path forward is.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
And here's what your governorships are going to look like for that gerrymander:
And from what I've seen in 2012, democrats still aren't so great at going all the way down the ballot and voting for things like state legislators even when they do show up.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
And here's what your governorships are going to look like for that gerrymander:
no, there is 2018. There will be many open seats still, its a midterm
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
That's what I'm saying. They need to figure out how to do better, or it'll just be that all over again in 2018.
That's what I'm thinking.
Until then, hold the White House, keep stacking the judiciary, and continue to challenge/knock-down any bullshit that the GOP tries to enact either from Congress or on a state level. That's pretty much the best we can hope for.
^^Yup.
A Hillary win with another shellacking in 2 years.
2018 like 2014 & 2010?
You can forget a Dem House for the next 15-25 years.
BertramCooper
Banned
Maybe I'm just being naive, but I don't see the next two midterms being as bad for Democrats as 2010 and 2014 have been if the next Democratic president is white.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Gentrification of Detroit will take care of the rest. At best we'll be a purple state.
NihonTiger90
Member
It is. Lots of people around my age are leaning libertarian. They hate the Dems and blame them for not finding work/underemployment, and find libertarianism to be a choice that fits them. Why? Anti Drug War, pro-gay marriage, less taxes = more money for them and less handouts to folks who don't deserve it.
Ohio is very similar. Liberals seem to have been wiped out outside of the big urban areas to the point that they don't even have candidates for most local elections around here. People grow up only knowing Republican rule and vote accordingly.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Remember, GOP only got this fucking retarded and bats hit insane because the American people had the audacity to put a black man in the White House
Some observations:
Alaska is becoming an interesting state politically. It was one of the few states that Obama significantly gained a percentage of a vote in last election and the election of the fusion governor over the Republican incumbent was a surprise.
New Hampshire went Democratic, more so in the gubernatorial races than even Vermont, Connecticut, or Maine. Shea-Porter lost re-election though.
At least in the swing states, people are still splitting their tickets, between referendums and governors, legislatures, or senators. It happened in Michigan, Pennsylvania and number of other states.
Democrats would most likely have had 3 more seats in Pennsylvania without redistricting. The Democrat state legislators voting for the last redistricting in 90% districts should be ashamed. Two suburban districts that voted for Obama in the last election had no Democratic challenger!
Alaska is becoming an interesting state politically. It was one of the few states that Obama significantly gained a percentage of a vote in last election and the election of the fusion governor over the Republican incumbent was a surprise.
New Hampshire went Democratic, more so in the gubernatorial races than even Vermont, Connecticut, or Maine. Shea-Porter lost re-election though.
At least in the swing states, people are still splitting their tickets, between referendums and governors, legislatures, or senators. It happened in Michigan, Pennsylvania and number of other states.
Democrats would most likely have had 3 more seats in Pennsylvania without redistricting. The Democrat state legislators voting for the last redistricting in 90% districts should be ashamed. Two suburban districts that voted for Obama in the last election had no Democratic challenger!
Baron_Calamity
Member
Here is what is going on in Maryland. unlike most states, a majority of its GDP depends on government spending on multiple levels. With Federal workers wages suppressed and actually decreased due to inflation, to works projects at the state level stalled, GDP growth has been little to none and jobs just aren't appearing. Hogan ran completely on bringing jobs to Maryland and change. Great idea and it ran well. Instead Brown, the democratic running, did very little to define himself and just attacked Hogan. The attacks were mostly valid but it just didn't play well. So the frustrated Democrats voted for Hogan.
Hogan's platform consist of 3 things: Cut taxes and reduce government spending, and repeal gun safety laws. Typical republican party line. Problem: in Maryland thats going to be a disaster. Even the last republican Governor of Maryland, Bob Ehrlich, knew the negative consequences of it and at least pushed for other things such as legalize casino gambling instead of pushing that agenda. Maryland doesn't have a mythical other resource to generate resources, income and jobs that a tax cut would offset the loss of government spending. We have the Chesapeake Bay but its past its peak for providing for the state. What will happen is the rich will take their tax cuts and invest in neighboring states thus making Maryland's situation worse at both money and jobs start flowing out of the state.
Also Hogan wants to "defend marriage" and push other right wing social agendas. Its going to be a fantastic mess.
eBay Huckster
Member
no, they got this batshit insane as a result of 4-plus decades of concerted effort since the Powell Memo to drive the center of their party as far to the right as possible
Aaron Strife
Banned
Well, here's my little post-mortem I guess.
The polls were wrong... unfortunately not in our direction like I'd hoped. Just like in 2010 and 2012, there were two states missed by polling averages, Kansas and North Carolina. Of course, the Rs won this time.
Democrats are done in Appalachia. We all knew Pryor was going to lose but he ran a very competent campaign and still got blown out by 17 points. Landrieu still has her run-off but she won't win it, she got like what, 42% this go? It looks like the Democratic caucus is going to be sitting right at 46.
IA and CO are painful because they're such a necessary part of the Democrats' coalition to win the presidency. The media was charmed by Ernst and Gardner while Braley and Udall ran less-than-stellar campaigns. Hickenlooper won re-election which is something of a bright spot I guess as we didn't get totally hosed there. Same for Democrats holding the Iowa State Senate - it won't be turning into Wisconsin anytime soon. And NC really hurt because we were up in the polls the entire campaign.
I don't know how we can make our base care about the midterm elections. We may be seeing a similar dynamic to the one faced by Republicans through the Nixon-Reagan-Bush years, wherein they were able to win the White House consistently but Congress was under firm Democratic control. While I think Democrats should be able to win the Senate in 2016 (unless things go really bad), we're even further back in the House than we were after 2010. I've always thought that - provided we didn't get blown out this year - Hillary's coattails might have been able to win a majority. Count me now as a member of the chorus saying we'll have to wait for the next round of redistricting to have a shot.
Anyway. Clinton 2016, yeah whatever.
The polls were wrong... unfortunately not in our direction like I'd hoped. Just like in 2010 and 2012, there were two states missed by polling averages, Kansas and North Carolina. Of course, the Rs won this time.
Democrats are done in Appalachia. We all knew Pryor was going to lose but he ran a very competent campaign and still got blown out by 17 points. Landrieu still has her run-off but she won't win it, she got like what, 42% this go? It looks like the Democratic caucus is going to be sitting right at 46.
IA and CO are painful because they're such a necessary part of the Democrats' coalition to win the presidency. The media was charmed by Ernst and Gardner while Braley and Udall ran less-than-stellar campaigns. Hickenlooper won re-election which is something of a bright spot I guess as we didn't get totally hosed there. Same for Democrats holding the Iowa State Senate - it won't be turning into Wisconsin anytime soon. And NC really hurt because we were up in the polls the entire campaign.
I don't know how we can make our base care about the midterm elections. We may be seeing a similar dynamic to the one faced by Republicans through the Nixon-Reagan-Bush years, wherein they were able to win the White House consistently but Congress was under firm Democratic control. While I think Democrats should be able to win the Senate in 2016 (unless things go really bad), we're even further back in the House than we were after 2010. I've always thought that - provided we didn't get blown out this year - Hillary's coattails might have been able to win a majority. Count me now as a member of the chorus saying we'll have to wait for the next round of redistricting to have a shot.
Anyway. Clinton 2016, yeah whatever.
AnotherNils
Member
So, in an election where voters cite economy as their top concern, the Governors of Kansas and Wisonsin get re-elected. Am I missing something? Is this somehow Obama's fault too?
cooljeanius
Member
Along those lines, make females sign up for the Selective Service, too; then we'd really have a "War on Women" that they could turn out against.What was the turnout for 18 to 30 year-old crowd? If it was less than that of 2010, bring back the draft.
So I guess if I ever move back to DC, no more trips out to the Maryland suburbs...
The Alaska shift from 2008 to 2012 is all due to Palin. As for Shea-Porter in NH, well, the Seacoast always flip-flops back and forth about who they want.
Edit: nvm, O'Malley not Martin >_>
Aaron Strife
Banned
Just in case anyone was worried, Manchin said he'll stick with the good guys. I think the era of opportunistic party-switching ended when Arlen Specter lost his primary.
Really good article from Politico on what went wrong for the Ds last night:
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B622FCDC-625F-4D6A-8AF8-61F0A00036FD
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B622FCDC-625F-4D6A-8AF8-61F0A00036FD
I wouldn't say I am salty about this election, I am more concerned given the current direction of the GOP and how batshit they are... Unfortunately, the old people of America have spoken, and we get two years of batshit crazy people making policy.
It's going to be an interesting, if not depressing, ride.
It's going to be an interesting, if not depressing, ride.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Haven't people been saying that Clinton could make Arizona competitive?
PhoenixDark
Banned
Democrats had largely presided over a crumbling status quo of painful economies and promises that go nowhere, especially in states like Michigan and Ohio. Every two or four years some democrat runs on "ending tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas" and other things that don't mean anything. The thing I hope democrats take from 2014 is that people elect you to get things done. Kaish, Walker, and Brownback pushed their agenda through no holds barred, and bet on the economy improving enough for voters not to focus on the extremism. And it worked. Democrats pushed through ACA on the national level sure, but it's becoming more and more clear they should have shitcanned the filibuster and gone no holds barred. If it works it works, if not...you tried.
What we're left with is a large group of people who think "nothing" has gotten accomplished since 2009. And while they're wrong, they aren't wrong by much. Democrats had nothing to run on in 2014, just as they had nothing to run on in 2010. That's a problem that Walker didn't have. Scott didn't have it in Florida, or Snyder in Michigan. When Kaish couldn't get the Medicaid expansion passed he went around congress and got it done. They have actual records to run on, not "vote for me or x will ban abortion!"
2009 and 2010 should have been nonstop ramming through shit. Yes there were blue dogs and Lincoln Blanche types, but not enough was done to handle that. They passed the stimulus and decided that was enough, from an economic standpoint. And now here we are.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Not just 2009 and 2010. They should have been ramming through shit in 2011-2014 too. Who the hell cares if it gets filibustered. At least then you can straight up blame the other side for obstruction with actual examples. Even when they did end up voting on stuff that had no chance of passing, it was relatively insignificant or extremely watered down, and democrats largely kept silent about it.
WayneMorse
Banned
How badly do you think the immigration exec. order delay depressed turnout?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Not that I disagree with you, but the media is pretty complicit in jumping down Democrats' throats whenever they try and do something. Walker busts unions and explodes the deficit? That just means he's a strong leader. Hickenlooper pushing for gun control and vote-by-mail on the other hand is a gross overreach.
(And he still won so fuck off NRA)
Think of it like Katrina coverage where white people "found" food and supplies and black people "looted" it. To the media GOP rule is the norm and they always get the benefit of the doubt in coverage.
(And he still won so fuck off NRA)
Think of it like Katrina coverage where white people "found" food and supplies and black people "looted" it. To the media GOP rule is the norm and they always get the benefit of the doubt in coverage.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This isnt really true. Especially on the issues you mentioned.
PhoenixDark
Banned
True. How many times did they vote on the minimum wage bill? I would have been bringing that up once a month, at least. Personally I feel like minimum wage bills are best left to the states, but bringing it up in the senate solely as a news ploy would have made a lot of sense. Every month.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Joni Ernst's campaign was rife with this shit man. Republicans get coddled.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Only one candidate called famers uneducated losers. That's all that mattered.
BertramCooper
Banned
I'd say the bigger issue with the media in this election is that they basically called the race a year in advance and have been hammering about the inevitability of a Republican takeover ever since.
At what point does it become a self-fulfilling prophecy? I don't think it's a stretch to assume that the prevailing media narrative of a GOP wave had an impact on voter turnout.
Apparently, the red state Dems couldn't get their shit together on what those bills would even be.
Another thing: If your opponents only strategy is OBAMA! and HARRY REID!, make the election about your populist positions. Don't just say you want to help the middle class. Actually make some piece of policy legislation cornerstone towards your election.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked