View Poll Results: Was it a Blue...
Bust 12 5.97%
Trickle 22 10.95%
Small Wave 90 44.78%
Wave 64 31.84%
Big Wave 13 6.47%
Tsunami 0 0%
Megatsunami 0 0%
Voters: 201. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-06-2018, 07:32 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,345
Your opinion of the Blue Wave

There has been a wide spectrum of what the Blue Wave of '18 would look like: From tsunami to not-gonna-happen.

Well, as the dust finally settles, what's your verdict for how big (or disappointing) it ended up being?

Poll to come, and you can base your opinion on anything you'd like: the opinions of Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity, the results of your state elections, the result of the Texas Senate race, the position of Venus in the pre-dawn sky, or any other criteria you choose.

So, this ain't a prediction thread, it's a post-election opinion thread.
  #2  
Old 11-06-2018, 10:25 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 20,376
I think it's going to end up having been a near Presidential-election turnout, which would in a sense be a wave but, unfortunately, it's matched on both sides.

The Democrats needed to convince the Republicans to stay home. They failed to do so. And the Republicans were able to crazify their base and convince them to show up despite having no big reason to do so.

For the most part, though, getting the House to flip is pretty much all you'd really need to keep sanity alive. (Though, it being the House, that's less thrilling than one could hope for.) But I would say that the election is a strong indication of how much the communication has broken down between regions of the country and how we've fallen fully into the clutches of rule by the uneducated and insane - and I don't mean that just on the side of Republicans.

Democrats needed to promise institutional change and all they mustered was "Keep ObamaCare alive!" The Democratic party is still living for the Democratic party. They need to step back and work for the nation again, because the Republican party sure ain't. We need a solution to be offered in 2020. Now that it's out in the wild that you can win on conspiracy theories and nonsense, we're basically fucked unless we change how everything works and patch all the holes that we've put into the system over the last few decades.
  #3  
Old 11-06-2018, 11:00 PM
FlikTheBlue FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,348
The night isn't over yet, but here's my overall takeaway from the results so far. Democrats will take the house, but are doing so because, in the words of John King on CNN, they "recruited good candidates." The victories are coming in normally red areas where the Democratic candidate is someone who has not run for office before and tend to have advantages such as being a veteran. They are going up against "we want to drain the swamp" type incumbents that are less popular because they have been there forever and are seen as part of the swamp. While this is a good thing for this election cycle, I don't think it's a viable long term strategy. Those new congresspeople will be the incumbents defending redish leaning purple seats the next go round, likely against Republicans that are going to be political outsiders who are more charismatic and have the same type advantages such as being veterans. I think the Democrats need to come up with a message that will resonate with voters in these districts rather than relying on winning with more charismatic candidates. Issues that need to be dealt with include immigration policy, a health care plan (not just let's keep Obamacare), and an overall economic plan. Those are things this new congress will have to work on, and hopefully they will come up with ideas that resonate in 2020 rather than relying on winning with individual personalities.
  #4  
Old 11-06-2018, 11:09 PM
Ashtura Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,447
I give Democratic performance a solid meh. They would have had to have done better than I thought they did to call it a wave and instead they did a bit worse. I would give them a polite golf clap for their efforts and suggest they strongly examine the significance of every angle of this election before doing anything particularly drastic.
  #5  
Old 11-06-2018, 11:18 PM
Velocity Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 12,555
Republicans gained 63 seats in 2010. Was that gerrymandering?
  #6  
Old 11-06-2018, 11:55 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,345
As I make my assessment, I'm looking at not just House and Senate, but governor races. I probably won't make a vote in my poll until tomorrow or so.

Florida, as is typical, makes me shake my head and weep for humanity.

Last edited by Happy Lendervedder; 11-06-2018 at 11:55 PM.
  #7  
Old 11-06-2018, 11:56 PM
Lantern Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,844
It looks the Dems will retake the House but do poorly in the Senate and the governerships. That is pretty disappointing but given the Senate map and the vital importance of the House in keeping a check on Trump I think that qualifies as a small wave.
  #8  
Old 11-07-2018, 12:09 AM
Thing Fish Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 2,813
Mildly disappointing, especially in the Southeast. Still, a comfortable House majority was the goal going in, and we did it.
  #9  
Old 11-07-2018, 12:18 AM
Velocity Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 12,555
Lost in all this is that with a larger margin in the Senate, Republicans are likelier to nominate someone far right-wing to the Supreme Court should Ginsburg or Breyer depart. Had it stayed at 51, they would have needed to find a more centrist nominee whom either Collins or Murkowski would support. But now neither Senator will be needed by the GOP.
  #10  
Old 11-07-2018, 12:23 AM
Ashtura Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,447
What happened tonight in the house is completely ordinary, precedented and expected, by realists on both sides. Never before has anything like this been considered special or a 'wave'. It is only considered a "small wave" because it's a lesser achievement than many hoped would happen, a "blue wave", which clearly didn't happen.. I think the widespread adoption of that term was a mistake.
  #11  
Old 11-07-2018, 12:32 AM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,044
It was a wave. Not a tsunami as I had hoped and predicted, but it had to be a wave to overcome the structural disadvantages built into a gerrymandered map.

Thank fuck the Dems have prevailed in the House, and despite Republican gains in the Senate, those won't amount to much. They'll continue to appoint ideologue judges, but that's about it -- unless they get the chance to appoint another SCOTUS seat. The Senate was always a heavy lift for Dems in 2018.

Re-taking the House for Dems is huge. Guardrails at last.

Oh, and I hate Florida.

And I feel like I can take an unfettered breath for the first time in 2 years.

Last edited by Aspenglow; 11-07-2018 at 12:37 AM.
  #12  
Old 11-07-2018, 01:00 AM
pjacks pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 142
A trickle at best. Dems did about as well as expected in the House, and compared to other midterms it's not much of a wave election at all.
It's also looking like the worst-case scenario is occurring in the Senate.

There is a saying for when one chamber of the legislature is controlled by a different party than the other chamber & the White House.... "Nothing really happens, unless something terrible happens."

Although with the Senate even more deeply in Republican control, the Supreme Court might welcome 1 or 2 more Trump appointees. He could literally nominate anyone now and have as many as 5 republican NO votes to spare. Say hello to Justice Sarah Palin once Ginsburg croaks. And then there's the rest of the judiciary, along with cabinet appointments... Ooph.

Our long nightmare continues.
  #13  
Old 11-07-2018, 01:24 AM
Tim R. Mortiss's Avatar
Tim R. Mortiss Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 6,742
One thing to remember is that the Republicans never claimed Trump as one of their own in the first place. Losing the majority in the House is not that much of a negative for the President. He is still dealing with a legislative body that is as hostile to him as they have always been.
__________________
It's a good thing this board doesn't display signatures, because mine sucks!
  #14  
Old 11-07-2018, 01:30 AM
Omar Little's Avatar
Omar Little Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 12,230
What has been the historical overturn of the house at the midterms when it and the White House are held by the same party of a new president? My recollection is that it is very common. I would not characterize tonights results as a blue wave, and not surprising.
  #15  
Old 11-07-2018, 01:40 AM
Lantern Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omar Little View Post
What has been the historical overturn of the house at the midterms when it and the White House are held by the same party of a new president? My recollection is that it is very common. I would not characterize tonights results as a blue wave, and not surprising.
It happened in 2010 and 1994 but not in 2002,1978 and 1962. So I don't know if I would call it "very common". Plus the Republicans have a structural advantage in the House partly because of geographical distribution and partly because of gerrymandering so it was far from obvious that the Democrats would win the House.
  #16  
Old 11-07-2018, 01:47 AM
madmonk28 madmonk28 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 11,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim R. Mortiss View Post
One thing to remember is that the Republicans never claimed Trump as one of their own in the first place. Losing the majority in the House is not that much of a negative for the President. He is still dealing with a legislative body that is as hostile to him as they have always been.
What are you talking about? There has been virtually no oversight of this president by the GOP congress.
  #17  
Old 11-07-2018, 02:04 AM
Tim R. Mortiss's Avatar
Tim R. Mortiss Tim R. Mortiss is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lincoln Park, Chicago
Posts: 6,742
Quote:
Originally Posted by madmonk28 View Post
What are you talking about? There has been virtually no oversight of this president by the GOP congress.
Exactly!
  #18  
Old 11-07-2018, 03:08 AM
Quartz Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 29,646
The President's party is expected to lose in the mid-terms. So losing by a few seats is not a bad result.

However, all reports are that the turnout was very high, which means that voters on all sides are enthusiastic and engaged. So it's a victory for democracy.
  #19  
Old 11-07-2018, 03:11 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 20,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
So it's a victory for democracy.
We don't live in a Democracy, so it's a loss that people are still thinking that we do and should.
  #20  
Old 11-07-2018, 03:21 AM
Velocity Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 12,555
The Kavanaugh controversy really juiced up the Republican vote. Prior to that, the GOP was listless and waiting to be rolled over.
  #21  
Old 11-07-2018, 06:57 AM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 24,606
I meant to vote trickle but clicked on bust.

The House came out okay. The Senate was a disaster (if things hold as they are this morning). Governorships? Heh.

Dems need some soul searching after this.
  #22  
Old 11-07-2018, 07:15 AM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 20,488
It was a small wave. Turnout was up quite a bit, about 115 million votes in the house (near presidential levels) but both sides voted.

I'm surprised gop turnout was so high. In 2010 when the gop was locked out of power, only 45 million Republicans went out to vote. It's probably closer to 50 million for them this year and that is just to hold onto power.

Ah well. We did win the house but due to gerrymandering we will probably lose it in a few years. But at least we'll get some investigations.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #23  
Old 11-07-2018, 07:16 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
The Kavanaugh controversy really juiced up the Republican vote. Prior to that, the GOP was listless and waiting to be rolled over.
I think this is probably true.

The Republicans seemed dead in the water a few months ago, but the Kavanaugh thing lit a fire under some asses and inspired the same kinds of passions among conservatives that they had in 2016. On the one hand, they lost educated white women and some educated suburban whites altogether nationally, but they also gained in certain regions, like Florida -- Florida Republicans mopped the floor with Democrats there, as well as in Ohio and Indiana. Democrats still have a rural white problem, and as much as they can inspire the barista, hipster vote to put their Macbooks down for a few hours to vote, that won't be enough. They need to start talking to people they don't necessarily like all that much.

Last edited by asahi; 11-07-2018 at 07:17 AM.
  #24  
Old 11-07-2018, 07:26 AM
Gyrate Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 21,794
Small wave, countered by the GOP also being fired up by Kavanaugh and by insane levels of fearmongering (I mean, "MUSLIM PEDOPHILES WITH SMALLPOX ARE INVADING FROM MEXICO" ought to be a parody headline but that's an accurate summary of right-wing messaging lately), and also by various vote suppression efforts. Georgia in particular was a massive shitshow of gaming the system; when the guy making and enforcing the rules has a heavily vested interest in the outcome, democracy is going to take a hit.

Still, I'll take the wins, accept the losses and hope that any very close races are properly checked and verified.
  #25  
Old 11-07-2018, 07:30 AM
Barack Obama Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 314
Just being a democrat isn't what "we" want. Having progressive and further left dems is what we want. If you're satisfied with the likes of nancy pelosi and accept people like joe manchin then you aren't apart of solution you're part of the problem. You might as well go vote for some corporate welfare queen republican if you're satisfied with having corporatist shills in leadership of the democrat party. An overwhelming majority of Americans want to get money out of politics, yet people like pelosi literally brag and make their claim to fame their ability to raise money.

We did good this time, but it's not enough. We need to push the dems further left to balance out the shitfest republicans and moderate democrats have caused.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
We don't live in a Democracy, so it's a loss that people are still thinking that we do and should.
We live in a plutocracy. The ultimate fate of any capitalist society trying to hold a democratic government.

Last edited by Barack Obama; 11-07-2018 at 07:32 AM.
  #26  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:06 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,345
I don't know how this could be seen as anything but a blue bust. Dems barely took the House (it wasn't nearly the repudiation of Trump that many people thought was gonna happen). The Senate is a disaster (Nevada was a nice pick-up, but Florida sucked, Missouri sucked, Indiana sucked, and it's looking like Montana sucks.) And aside from a few states (Kansas! Wisconsin! Michigan!), governor races were largely meh. But...the fact that the economy is humming pretty nice right now and unemployment is way down, I'd say these results are sorta the best we could've expected from House and Senate races. I'd also say that if we had a normal president (Hillary, Jeb!, Kasich, Mitt), we wouldn't have flipped the House and we wouldn't have won governor seats in Michigan or Wisconsin.

That being said, I'm stoked about my state of Michigan. It's looking like Dems will take the governorship (called for Dems), AG (Dem leads) and SoS (called for Dems). We flipped a couple House seats and Stabenow returns to the Senate. Plus we have a couple new constitutional amendments that will make it easier to vote and eliminate gerrymandering. Oh, and legal weed!

All that said, I think these results are actually going to be a net win for the Dems. We got a few victories in key states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania) to make activists and lefty political nerds happy, we flipped the House...but it's not a very satisfying victory overall. As a result, I think people will stay activated and motivated and pissed over the next two years, and I think with the fact that 2020 will probably see even more Dem voters turn out, I think 2020 will be the wave we (well, Dems anyway) were looking for here.



We just need a charismatic Dem nominee for president to lead the charge.
  #27  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:07 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Just being a democrat isn't what "we" want. Having progressive and further left dems is what we want. If you're satisfied with the likes of nancy pelosi and accept people like joe manchin then you aren't apart of solution you're part of the problem. You might as well go vote for some corporate welfare queen republican if you're satisfied with having corporatist shills in leadership of the democrat party. An overwhelming majority of Americans want to get money out of politics, yet people like pelosi literally brag and make their claim to fame their ability to raise money.

We did good this time, but it's not enough. We need to push the dems further left to balance out the shitfest republicans and moderate democrats have caused.
In a way, I think it's good that so-called 'moderate' Dems were defeated last night, because it's becoming clearer that there's no safe space in the middle. There was in 2012 and 2014, and maybe even in 2016, but not anymore. Republicans have already made it clear that their future is an America that's more racist, more sexist, and more hostile to anyone who's not making six figures. You can't fight Trumpism with weak coalitions. There are no more right-left coalitions. Those days are over. It's now about how to sell the independents on the value of what progressives can offer.
  #28  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:12 AM
Jasmine's Avatar
Jasmine Jasmine is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,447
In Illinois, it was a BIG wave. Rauner got blown out 54% to 39% and conceded 45 minutes after the polls closed. Roskam, a career politician who was basically untouchable for decades was stunned by his democratic challenger. The democratic candidate for Attorney General won.

In all, it was a big night for Illinois democrats.
  #29  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:31 AM
Barack Obama Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
In a way, I think it's good that so-called 'moderate' Dems were defeated last night, because it's becoming clearer that there's no safe space in the middle. There was in 2012 and 2014, and maybe even in 2016, but not anymore. Republicans have already made it clear that their future is an America that's more racist, more sexist, and more hostile to anyone who's not making six figures. You can't fight Trumpism with weak coalitions. There are no more right-left coalitions. Those days are over. It's now about how to sell the independents on the value of what progressives can offer.
Here in my district we had a long time rep and former gov get beaten by some lady who was massively in favor of trump. They specifically collided on the issue of offshore drilling, she wanted trump to shove it right up our asses while Sanford told him to go get fucked. Of course that didn't pan out too well for sanford during the primaries and he got kicked out. Now heres where it gets juicy, she was entirely in favor of offshore drilling and anything trump says. That should in theory play real good down here in the heart of trump land, but it turns out actual conservatives care more about conserving their precious beach house scenery than playing identity politics. As a result we had endless ads running with a multitude of republicans SUPPORTING the fucking democrat running against the extremely pro-trump republican. It's fucking amazing, people actually care more about reality than fake political bullshit. Republicans down here idiotically threw sanford under the bus because he attacked trump, and they lost as a result.

People will respond to policy and substance. I don't even like calling trump supporters republicans, because many of them are so ignorant they don't even know which party is for what. I've spoken to people who thought Bernie wanted to destroy healthcare and Trump wanted universal healthcare. That's not just one isolated person either I've met multiple people who've had this exact same delusion. And it doesn't stop there, there is so many things these people are ignorant about and if you educate them sometimes they'll actually be convinced. Many people may find it odd but it's true, there are a lot of trump supporters who actually support bernie sanders' policies. The only problem is once you use big scary words like democratic socialism you instantly lose them and they go full 1930s nationalist on you.
  #30  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:41 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Republicans gained 63 seats in 2010. Was that gerrymandering?
Whatever it was, the GOP won the national House vote in 2010 by 6.8%, which got them a 242-193 majority.

The Dems are looking at a bigger popular vote win this year, for a distinctly smaller majority. The consensus going in was that the Dems would need a ~5.5% popular margin to have a 50-50 shot at winning the House.

Can we agree that that's crazy, that something's wrong with our system if a Dem popular win by 5% doesn't easily translate into a House majority, while the GOP's win by 1.1% in 2016 won them a huge 241-194 House majority?
  #31  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:50 AM
sciurophobic sciurophobic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Silver Spring
Posts: 1,635
Evidence of a blue wave can be found in Iowa. In 2016 Iowa voted for Trump over Clinton 51-41% and three out of the four House seats went Republican. This time two seats flipped to the Democrats, leaving mega-racist Steve King as it's only Republican representative. And he won with less than 50% of the vote, when in 2016 he had over 60.
  #32  
Old 11-07-2018, 08:59 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,670
Big wave, would have been a bluenami but for gerrymandering and voter suppression. Flipping the House is a BFD, now we can provide adult supervision for the White House daycare center and also hire Bob Mueller to carry on after he is fired.
  #33  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:11 AM
FlikTheBlue FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
In a way, I think it's good that so-called 'moderate' Dems were defeated last night, because it's becoming clearer that there's no safe space in the middle. There was in 2012 and 2014, and maybe even in 2016, but not anymore. Republicans have already made it clear that their future is an America that's more racist, more sexist, and more hostile to anyone who's not making six figures. You can't fight Trumpism with weak coalitions. There are no more right-left coalitions. Those days are over. It's now about how to sell the independents on the value of what progressives can offer.
I think this is the exact wrong way to go. Democratic politicians have gone this route before, most recently in 1984 and 1988 with Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis. I don't think 2020 will be as bad as 1984 or 1988, but someone like say, Elizabeth Warren, would probably lose even worse than Clinton did, probably losing some of the weaker Democratic states like Nevada, New Hampshire, and Minnesota.* The Democrat's can't win the presidency or senate by running up the score in the northeast and on the west coast. They have to start appealing to moderates more strongly, and if that means having a Joe Manchin wing of the Democratic Party, I'm willing to live with that.

* Yes, I'm lumping in Minnesota with Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. It's the same type of state, and just so happens to still have a little more of a blue base likely due to some old school Democratic voters still loyal to party from back in the Mondale days.

Last edited by FlikTheBlue; 11-07-2018 at 09:14 AM.
  #34  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:25 AM
Blank Slate's Avatar
Blank Slate Blank Slate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
I meant to vote trickle but clicked on bust.

The House came out okay. The Senate was a disaster (if things hold as they are this morning). Governorships? Heh.

Dems need some soul searching after this.
It's not all bad. What matters is the Electoral College in two years.

Democrats rebuild Blue Wall in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

Clinton lost those three states, and thus the presidency, by a total of (roughly) 70,000 votes. It's a given that the blundering dope in the White House will mess up the economy with his brainless meddling. Trump won't have the Obama economy to prop him up like he had during this midterm, so 2020 is looking ripe for the picking.
  #35  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:43 AM
FlikTheBlue FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blank Slate View Post
It's not all bad. What matters is the Electoral College in two years.

Democrats rebuild Blue Wall in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

Clinton lost those three states, and thus the presidency, by a total of (roughly) 70,000 votes. It's a given that the blundering dope in the White House will mess up the economy with his brainless meddling. Trump won't have the Obama economy to prop him up like he had during this midterm, so 2020 is looking ripe for the picking.
I wouldn't count on those three states staying blue based solely on last night's results. They could go blue with the right candidate, but they could easily go red with the wrong candidate. The states that I would feel comfortable calling part of the blue wall aren't enough to win the presidency. IMHO the blue "wall" at this point consist of the Clinton 2016 blue states minus Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Nevada. That's only 212 electoral votes. The rest have to be strongly fought for, not just put on some guaranteed to win and so can be safely ignored list.
  #36  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:46 AM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,019
Small wave, although I could easily have gone for trickle as well. Would have been more enthusiastic if Beto had won his senate race, and the FL/GA governors' contests had gone the other way.

I'm going to assume the results hinged more on the economy than the ludicrous fearmongering leading up the election, and in this I remain highly disappointed with my fellow voters. Although I see no evidence that Trump has anything significant to do with its relative health, the President usually gets credit (and blame) for the economy, so the result isn't all that surprising; I just wish people would recognize that an economy that isn't all that hot for a person without a strong position in equities, and lots of jobs that don't pay anywhere a living wage, is not a great bargain. Likewise, Republicans needed to be sent a message that they were going to get their collective asses kicked if they try to go ahead with their plan to blame deficits due to unnecessary tax cuts for a 'need' to cut Social Security and Medicare, and that didn't really happen.

About all positive than can be said, is that with a Dem House majority, there is some reasonable chance of putting the brakes on the Trump train before it derails us all. So that's something, I guess.
  #37  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:51 AM
suranyi suranyi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
I don't know how this could be seen as anything but a blue bust. Dems barely took the House (it wasn't nearly the repudiation of Trump that many people thought was gonna happen). The Senate is a disaster (Nevada was a nice pick-up, but Florida sucked, Missouri sucked, Indiana sucked, and it's looking like Montana sucks.) And aside from a few states (Kansas! Wisconsin! Michigan!), governor races were largely meh. But...the fact that the economy is humming pretty nice right now and unemployment is way down, I'd say these results are sorta the best we could've expected from House and Senate races. I'd also say that if we had a normal president (Hillary, Jeb!, Kasich, Mitt), we wouldn't have flipped the House and we wouldn't have won governor seats in Michigan or Wisconsin.

That being said, I'm stoked about my state of Michigan. It's looking like Dems will take the governorship (called for Dems), AG (Dem leads) and SoS (called for Dems). We flipped a couple House seats and Stabenow returns to the Senate. Plus we have a couple new constitutional amendments that will make it easier to vote and eliminate gerrymandering. Oh, and legal weed!

All that said, I think these results are actually going to be a net win for the Dems. We got a few victories in key states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania) to make activists and lefty political nerds happy, we flipped the House...but it's not a very satisfying victory overall. As a result, I think people will stay activated and motivated and pissed over the next two years, and I think with the fact that 2020 will probably see even more Dem voters turn out, I think 2020 will be the wave we (well, Dems anyway) were looking for here.



We just need a charismatic Dem nominee for president to lead the charge.
If itís a net win for the Dems, which I agree it is (they also made significant gains in several state legislatures) then how could it be a bust?
__________________
Right now, itís Girlsí Generation. Tomorrow, itís Girlsí Generation. Forever, itís Girlsí Generation!
  #38  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:54 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 20,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
We live in a plutocracy. The ultimate fate of any capitalist society trying to hold a democratic government.
Which took hold once we opened up the votes of the individual politicians to the public, because we wanted to be able to hold them accountable for not voting as the mob demanded, and subsequently allowing votes to be purchased and for politicians to be booted if they didn't obey the mob.
  #39  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:06 AM
bump bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16,064
Here in Texas, I'd say a small wave. Democrats picked up 10-ish State House seats, which doesn't give them the majority, but it does break their supermajority, meaning that all the things that take 2/3 majority now require Democrat buy-in. So that's a great thing!

Something like 11 US House seats flipped as well- this is also good.

Looking at the election results, the most interesting thing is that NONE of the statewide races were blowouts. Even Greg Abbott only won 56% to Valdez' 43%, and that's a white male GOP incumbent running against a gay Hispanic woman. The other races were all closer than that, with several being VERY close- Ken Paxton vs. Justin Nelson was a very close race for Attorney General.

That, I think is the message here- not that the Democrats didn't flip the legislature or statewide offices, but that they didn't blow anyone out. Things might change in a relatively short time-frame around here.
  #40  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:13 AM
Ashtura Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post

I'm surprised gop turnout was so high.
You can thank Kavanaugh for that.

Quote:
Ah well. We did win the house but due to gerrymandering we will probably lose it in a few years. But at least we'll get some investigations.
If the Democrats squander the next two years on investigating instead of legislating, 2020 is going to be a disaster for them. I have no zero doubt about that.

This is standard run-of-the-mill churn, nothing more. It certainly wasn't a censure for Trump. I strongly believe that if Trump hadn't done his blitz at the last bit, this would have been a much worse night for Republicans. The more Trumpy candidates won for the most part, and the less Trumpy candidates lost. Trump has as much political capital as ever. Keep going after Trump at your peril, and you better hope, God forbid, that the economy crashes over the next two years.

Last edited by Ashtura; 11-07-2018 at 10:15 AM.
  #41  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:15 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
If the Democrats squander the next two years on investigating instead of legislating, 2020 is going to be a disaster for them.
God forbid they provide oversight! Precious Trump and his cabinet would never do anything that might come close to violating the law... how dare anyone think about looking into it?

Quote:
I have no zero doubt about that.
Your lack of doubt is utterly convincing!
  #42  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:17 AM
suranyi suranyi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
Here in Texas, I'd say a small wave. Democrats picked up 10-ish State House seats, which doesn't give them the majority, but it does break their supermajority, meaning that all the things that take 2/3 majority now require Democrat buy-in. So that's a great thing!

Something like 11 US House seats flipped as well- this is also good.

Looking at the election results, the most interesting thing is that NONE of the statewide races were blowouts. Even Greg Abbott only won 56% to Valdez' 43%, and that's a white male GOP incumbent running against a gay Hispanic woman. The other races were all closer than that, with several being VERY close- Ken Paxton vs. Justin Nelson was a very close race for Attorney General.

That, I think is the message here- not that the Democrats didn't flip the legislature or statewide offices, but that they didn't blow anyone out. Things might change in a relatively short time-frame around here.
As someone at 538 said, based on yesterdayís results the Democratic presidential candidate would be crazy not to campaign aggressively for Texas in 2020.
__________________
Right now, itís Girlsí Generation. Tomorrow, itís Girlsí Generation. Forever, itís Girlsí Generation!
  #43  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:19 AM
senoy senoy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,246
Bottom line is that Dems really overplayed their hand with Kavanaugh. While they were doing it, I thought they were overplaying. Democratic turnout was already going to be sky high and was near peak. Taking a stand on Kavanaugh was not going to bring out more Democratic voters. What you wanted to do was suppress Republican turnout. Giving them a rallying point was idiocy. The Republican talking point was 'If you give Democrats control, they're going to start a McCarthy style "witch hunt" of Trump and his supporters. So giving them what could easily be portrayed as a McCarthy style "witch hunt" of a Trump nominee was perhaps the dumbest thing you could do. And to what end?

Kavanaugh was a done deal and I said it as soon as he was nominated. There was nearly a zero chance Republicans were going to let him fall. The drama and the theater just made it something that they could talk about. Who is the Republican base? White men. So attacking a white man when you don't have a completely solid case makes them all feel under attack and that's what gets them to the polls. Kavanaugh is what cost them the Senate and at least some of the House. Current Democratic leadership needs to change. We can bash the Clintons for all of their mistakes, but they knew how to play the game. Current Dem leadership is playing checkers at a chess match. Geeze, even Trump wants Pelosi as House Majority leader because they know she's divisive and someone they can use as a foil to rile their base in 2020. Dems are also going to give her to them, because it doesn't matter how right the Dems are, you can always count on them to do the stupid thing.
  #44  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:19 AM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 24,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blank Slate View Post
It's not all bad. What matters is the Electoral College in two years.

Democrats rebuild Blue Wall in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.

Clinton lost those three states, and thus the presidency, by a total of (roughly) 70,000 votes. It's a given that the blundering dope in the White House will mess up the economy with his brainless meddling. Trump won't have the Obama economy to prop him up like he had during this midterm, so 2020 is looking ripe for the picking.
Well, I'm not wishing for bad things, but I just have this feeling like the economic expansion is going to hit a wall at some point, and we're going to have some kind of contraction. That could bear heavily in the 2020 elections, but who knows.

But based on Republicans' strong showing in the Senate is that even if a Dem wins the White House in 2020, and Dems hold onto the House, the Senate is pretty much getting to the point of being beyond Dems' reach in even a good year. That's sad.
  #45  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:20 AM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 40,104
The problem with defining what happened is that there is such a huge, huge difference between how Americans voted and who wins.

In terms of how people actually voted, their preference was extremely clear; they wanted the Democratic Party to run the country. There is no argument to the contrary. A clear majority of Americans voted Democratic.

However, that does not translate to an equivalent level of power, because the system is set up to return Republican winners; the Senate is structured to give more seats to small, poor, Republican states, the House is gerrymandered to deliver more Republicans than merited, and voter suppression programs allow Republican voters to vote more than Democratic voters to an extent that it changes results. Additionally, 2018 was odd in that the mix of Senate seats being decided made it nearly impossible for the Democrats to do well.

Saying the Democrats did a bad job or "overplayed their hand on Kavanaugh" is ridiculous. They earned a bigger share of the vote than in any midterm election since at least 2006 and, depending how the numbers play out, maybe in decades; there is nothing they can presently do about the fact that the game is rigged. It's as if an NFL team was being expected to win despite the league spotting their opponents seven points at the start of every game; if that team could end up finishing the season 9-7, you wouldn't say they were just okay, you'd say they did great.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!

Last edited by RickJay; 11-07-2018 at 10:31 AM.
  #46  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:21 AM
Blank Slate's Avatar
Blank Slate Blank Slate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
You can thank Kavanaugh for that.



If the Democrats squander the next two years on investigating instead of legislating, 2020 is going to be a disaster for them. I have no zero doubt about that.

This is standard run-of-the-mill churn, nothing more. It certainly wasn't a censure for Trump. I strongly believe that if Trump hadn't done his blitz at the last bit, this would have been a much worse night for Republicans. The more Trumpy candidates won for the most part, and the less Trumpy candidates lost. Trump has as much political capital as ever. Keep going after Trump at your peril, and you better hope, God forbid, that the economy crashes over the next two years.
Puhleez. Trump is still unpopular with the booming Obama economy. Nobody wants the economy to crash, nor is it necessary to defeat Trump in 2020. He is only president because of a wildly unpopular Democratic candidate. That's all.

Of course, the economy will be sinking in the next two years because it's Donny and daddy isn't around anymore to fix everything.
  #47  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:22 AM
FlikTheBlue FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
Here in Texas, I'd say a small wave. Democrats picked up 10-ish State House seats, which doesn't give them the majority, but it does break their supermajority, meaning that all the things that take 2/3 majority now require Democrat buy-in. So that's a great thing!

Something like 11 US House seats flipped as well- this is also good.

Looking at the election results, the most interesting thing is that NONE of the statewide races were blowouts. Even Greg Abbott only won 56% to Valdez' 43%, and that's a white male GOP incumbent running against a gay Hispanic woman. The other races were all closer than that, with several being VERY close- Ken Paxton vs. Justin Nelson was a very close race for Attorney General.

That, I think is the message here- not that the Democrats didn't flip the legislature or statewide offices, but that they didn't blow anyone out. Things might change in a relatively short time-frame around here.
I think a lot of those results are due to Beto being on the ballot. Anecdotes do not equal data, but I know several people who voted only because of Beto and who would otherwise have stayed home if he wasnít running. If Democrats can gain a temporary advantage due the the help of a particularly charismatic politician thatís a good thing, but not something we can rely on in the next election.
  #48  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:24 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,075
It was a wave. I agree with Harry Enten:
Quote:
See to me this is a wave election. In the House, where the entire country got to vote, Dems are winning with ease. Further, there have been some surprises, which is indicative of a wave in my mind.
I don't think you get the Dems winning unexpectedly in SC and OK House races in anything less than a wave.
  #49  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:25 AM
Ashtura Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
God forbid they provide oversight! Precious Trump and his cabinet would never do anything that might come close to violating the law... how dare anyone think about looking into it?
Leave that up to Mueller. Look, even Ed Rendell said you ought to legislate not investigate. You have been given the chance to prove you can make the country better and lessen our divisions. Trump will be the president over at least the next 2 years. The senate pickup virtually guarantees that. You're spinning your wheels.
  #50  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:26 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,220
It was a wave here in Michigan. Total replacement of executive Republicans with Dems (Gov, AG, Sec'y of State). Flipped two House seats. Republicans still hold on to control of legislature but that's due to gerrymandering. The anti-gerrymandering referendum also passed, so enjoy it while you can, pubbies.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017