Nobody votes for a Presidential candidate on the strength of their running mate.
If anyone would reject the opportunity it's Brown. I don't see him tying himself to the inevitable corporatist/crony administration Hillary will no doubt institute.
Besides I think Hillary needs someone younger who excites the base. Brown doesn't fit that category.
#hotgayRepublicansdontknowhowtotaketheLstove
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-congress-to-respond-to-gay-marriage-ruling/
#hotgayRepublicansdontknowhowtotaketheLstove
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-congress-to-respond-to-gay-marriage-ruling/
They need to stop touching that hot gay stove.
I remember some talk about how the SC ruling in favor of gay marriage would be the best thing to happen to republicans, as it would take the issue off the table. Nope. Chalk it up as another issue for moderate-ish candidates to get crucified over.
The debates are going to be utterly insane, and I can't possibly see how a Bush type "moderate" can break through in this climate. The base wants blood.
I remember some talk about how the SC ruling in favor of gay marriage would be the best thing to happen to republicans, as it would take the issue off the table. Nope. Chalk it up as another issue for moderate-ish candidates to get crucified over.
The debates are going to be utterly insane, and I can't possibly see how a Bush type "moderate" can break through in this climate. The base wants blood.
Um I would say this is quite the opposite.Everyone is so obsessed with VA when the real action will be in OH and FL. They still matter and as the last election showed the earliest to call. If Hillary is losing OH and FL then VA is probably at waters edge.
Yeah I never bought this either. What the behind-the-scenes GOP analysts want and what their base wants rarely match up. Did they expect to just go "Welp, law of the land!" and everyone would be okay with it? Because that clearly didn't happen with Obamacare or abortion.I remember some talk about how the SC ruling in favor of gay marriage would be the best thing to happen to republicans, as it would take the issue off the table. Nope. Chalk it up as another issue for moderate-ish candidates to get crucified over.
The debates are going to be utterly insane, and I can't possibly see how a Bush type "moderate" can break through in this climate. The base wants blood.
1000% no. Nothing says past more than that. He also has the socialist baggage.
Maybe Hillary should ditch trying to balance the ticket with someone who has youth and charisma and go for a pick reinforcing her strength. Pick an older, experienced person and run as the grown-up ticket. Especially if Republicans pick someone like Walker who is easily characterized as kind of dangerous.
Yeah I never bought this either. What the behind-the-scenes GOP analysts want and what their base wants rarely match up. Did they expect to just go "Welp, law of the land!" and everyone would be okay with it? Because that clearly didn't happen with Obamacare or abortion.
There isn't enough corn in the world to pop for the coming debates.
How much is "the base?" This is what I've always wondered. I keep hearing this, but I don't think everyone who votes in the primaries are insane right-wing nuts. I mean, Romney got through.
I think this board vastly overestimates how many people make up this 'base.' I think we have a VERY vocal minority of republican voters.
Um I would say this is quite the opposite.
The media fetishizes Florida and Ohio due to them being big swing states that would have flipped the presidency to Gore and Kerry, respectively. However Obama didn't need them either time, even though he won anyway.
Colorado and Virginia are far more crucial to Democrats in a path to 270.
Y'mean like Bill Clinton?
Part of me would laugh like a loon if she won with the COVA route. Imagine a bunch of angry/confused people pointing at the big electoral prizes going red on the map while she's giving her comfortable victory speech. After months of the media going "OHIO-FLORIDA-OHIO-FLORIDA.." - and then this? Comedy gold!
Oh no Ben Shapiro got into a fight with a trans journalist after calling her Sir and mentally ill.
Do I dare even watch the video?
Republicans have their work cut out for them next year. 270 EVs for Hillary is easy, the rest is just gravy.If this study is right and Republicans need to get 40-something percent of the Latino vote to win we should just go ahead and give Hillary the Presidency once Sanders runs out of momentum:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-latino-gop-20150717-story.html
If this study is right and Republicans need to get 40-something percent of the Latino vote to win we should just go ahead and give Hillary the Presidency once Sanders runs out of momentum:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-latino-gop-20150717-story.html
If this study is right and Republicans need to get 40-something percent of the Latino vote to win we should just go ahead and give Hillary the Presidency once Sanders runs out of momentum:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-latino-gop-20150717-story.html
If this study is right and Republicans need to get 40-something percent of the Latino vote to win we should just go ahead and give Hillary the Presidency once Sanders runs out of momentum:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-latino-gop-20150717-story.html
I hope to be around when Texas turns blue. How many years until that happens?
If the GOP doesn't change their anti-immigration attitude, with their usual side sneer of underlying racism, they are never going to win a general election. It seems like from at least 1976, the majority of Latinos have voted for a Democratic president, even during the Reagan and Bush Sr. days. There was a dip with Kerry, but Obama has picked up at least 70% of the vote in 2012. Asian Americans are also shifting to the Dems, which is also a fast growing demographic in America.
I hope to be around when Texas turns blue. How many years until that happens?
Scenario one: Hispanic turnout increases to 45 percent (which is still less than the national average for Hispanic voters) and support for the Democratic presidential candidate remains at 65 percent, and only 25 percent of whites back the Democratic candidate. In that case, the Republican candidate would get almost 54 percent of the vote.
Scenario two: Hispanic turnout increases to 50 percent(which is still less than neighboring New Mexico), and support for the Democratic candidate climbs to 72 percent (which is still less than Hispanic support for Democrats in Colorado), but white support for the Democrat remains at 25 percent. In this case, the Republican squeaks by with a little over 51 percent of the vote.
Scenario three: Hispanic turnout only increases to 45 percent and support remains at 65 percent, but the Democrat gets 30 percent of the white vote. The Republican squeaks by with a little over 50 percent of the vote.
Scenario four: Hispanic turnout remains at 50 percent and support at 72 percent, but white support for the Democrat climbs to 30 percent. Then the Democrat gets 51.5 of the vote.
In other words, a Democratic presidential candidate could carry Texas in 2020 if Hispanic turnout grows, support for the Democratic candidate nears or exceeds 70 percent, and Democrats gather 30 percent of the Anglo vote. If the Democrats can’t attract more than 25 percent of the Anglo vote, then even the most energetic efforts at Hispanic mobilization won’t get their candidate across the finish line
hopeful: 2020 or 2024
Serious: 10-20 years.
White vote outvotes minority vote and registration is abysmal among minority vote. A quarter of them also votes R. Registering new voters may not bring democrats any closer in the short term. Long term is possible.
Found it:
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...hispanic-vote-111508_Page2.html#ixzz3gCcKFSqn
This last statistic is even more striking given the fact that nearly 20 percent of the nations 52 million Hispanics call Texas home. It is also a statistic that is unlikely to change in the near future. Sixty-nine percent of Hispanic Texans were born in the U.S., with a median age of only 19 years old, compared to 38 years old for Hispanics born outside the country. The systemic problem of voter apathy makes a little more sense given that 22 percent of voting age Hispanics lives in poverty, and their median income is 43 percent less than non-Hispanic whites. Education rates bear the same kind of results. Impoverished Americans with less educational opportunities generally vote at a much lower rate than those that are more affluent. Until the overall quality of life for Texas Hispanics improves, their turnout rate is unlikely to change. It will certainly be a challenge for any Democrat to overcome these types of trends in just a few election cycles.
Both of Texas senators are Republicans; as are 24 out of its 36 members in the House of Representatives. Republicans dominate the state legislature as well, with 19 out of 31 seats in the State Senate and 95 out of 150 seats in the State House. How can a minority-majority state, with such a large Hispanic population consistently elect a broad majority of Republican candidates? Much of the answer follows from the voter turnout analysis above, but that does not account for the whole story. There is another trend that is perhaps even more distressing for Democrats. Hispanic representation in its Congressional delegation is the second highest in the country, and the groups representation within the state is increasing. However, these Hispanics are not all Democrats. Two Democratic Hispanic state representatives, Aaron Pena and J.M. Lozano, switched their allegiances to the Republican Party in the last two years. New Republican Senator-elect Ted Cruz is also Hispanic.
The Republican Party in general ignores and sometimes demonizes would-be Hispanic voters. However, Republicans in Texas have made a concerted effort to attract more Hispanic voters and candidates. At a press conference in July, state Republican Party Chairman Steve Munisteri said, There will not be a future Republican Party of Texas as a majority party unless the Republican Party of Texas is successful in getting a very high percentage of the Hispanic vote. The states amended party platform providing for a guest-worker program for immigrants reflects this knowledge. Texans may want to protect the border, but many of its businesses depend on those who have crossed it. According to Bob Price, the director of Café Con Leche Republicans, an organization developed to create better relations with the Hispanic community, the GOPs platform will create an effective guest worker program which will help businesses in finding legal workers for their employment needs. There is evidence to suggest that Republican outreach in Texas is working; 46 percent of Hispanics identify as conservative compared to just 18 percent who identify themselves as liberal, with 36 percent not identifying with either label.
Another important factor likely to prevent Texas from becoming a swing state in the near term is the fact that the national Democratic Party has failed to commit the resources necessary to make Texas competitive. At a July fundraiser in San Antonio, his seventh in the state since taking office, President Obama asserted, Youre not considered one of those battleground states But thats going to change. However, according to former Democratic Lieutenant Governor and national party fundraiser Ben Barnes, the Democratic Partys actions have not matched its leaders rhetoric, I dont think the state party has been funded enough to be a powerful, functional organization. The states senatorial election bears this out. Republican Ted Cruz raised a whopping $11.8 million compared to Democrat Paul Sadlers meager total of $497,391. Until the Democratic Party is willing to put its money where its mouth is, Democratic candidates for statewide elections will continue to lose at an alarming rate.
Julian Castro represents the changing face of the Democratic Party and the changing face of America as a country. The rise of the Hispanic vote has no doubt given Democrats a firmer foundation for which to contest elections at the local, state, and national levels. But the rising tide has not yet lifted every boat. Texas Hispanics simply do not vote at high enough rates to dim Texas bright red tint.
Despite their efforts, the Texas Democratic Party has thus far failed to capitalize on the states minority-majority status. Perhaps Mayor Castro is the politician the Democrats need to turn the state blueas it was for almost a century until the 1980sbut the states demographics will not be the only driving factor. For Texas to be competitive, more of the national partys resources must be committed to the state. For their part, deep-pocketed Texas Democrats must keep their money in house as well. The party must consistently engage Hispanics at the local and state levels in Texas and must remain committed even if the prospects for immediate electoral success are dim. The Texas Democratic Party recently made Gilberto Hinojosa the organizations first Hispanic chairman. This is an important signal that must be backed by a greater allocation of human and monetary capital within Hispanic communities.
The Obama re-election campaign was so successful because it recognized the importance of neighbor-to-neighbor contact and was willing to devote significant resources to this community-centric organization. If Democrats have learned anything about todays electorate, it should be that Hispanics are more willing than ever to help put a Democrat in the White House. The sheer number of Hispanics in Texas will not make the state competitive on its own, but a consistent ground game could make a huge difference. When that happens, a Democratic Texas will be much closer to becoming a reality.
So basically, Democrats don't want to waste any money on Texas until it starts turning purple, but it won't really start turning purple until Democrats start putting more money into it, which they will do once it starts turning purple, and so on.Yes, that's true, but also, Democrats are just not putting any money into Texas races:
http://gppreview.com/2012/11/12/why-...rn-texas-blue/
Arizona will probably get there eventually too, won't it?
I am sure by that point CA and NY will return to being swing states lol. There is no way AZ, GA and TX will change without other safe states becoming swing states again. That would be electoral doom for the GOP to lose TX while CA, NY and IL remain safely Democratic.
http://www.270towin.com/2016_election_predictions.php?mapid=bLVv
NY is too populous, multicultural, and urban to go GOP. There's literally no reason for it to swing right, given current political trends.
It's worth remembering that there's 2 NYs: the City and... uh, everything else. Upstate would be solidly republican if you broke it off.
This is true, but the city and it's suburbs make up most of the state's population and those are all solid blue.
Christians sure do have a lot of money to just give away... It must be all those taxes they don't pay.
Holy mother of god, his twitter account is the greatest thing in the history of everything.Other John Dingell winners:
https://twitter.com/JohnDingell/status/491586961392816128
(After someone at the official EPA account accidentally tweeted that something from the Kardashian mobile game)
https://twitter.com/JohnDingell/status/533287839820439552
https://twitter.com/JohnDingell/status/494569132772569090
This is true, but the city and it's suburbs make up most of the state's population and those are all solid blue.
That still blows my fucking mind.
Shit, that's nothing. The NY metropolitan area has 23 million people in it. States it outnumbers include... um, all of them, except Texas and Cali.
The city proper has "only" 8.5 million people, which makes it larger than all but 12.
Welp.
I had to sit down when I read that.
Shit, that's nothing. The NY metropolitan area has 23 million people in it. States it outnumbers include... um, all of them, except Texas and Cali.
The city proper has "only" 8.5 million people, which makes it larger than all but 12.
Larger population than most developed countries
Holy mother of god, his twitter account is the greatest thing in the history of everything.
So basically, Democrats don't want to waste any money on Texas until it starts turning purple, but it won't really start turning purple until Democrats start putting more money into it, which they will do once it starts turning purple, and so on.