Considering that the district isn’t even going to exist in its present form past the next election, are the Republicans going to pour more money and effort down that pit? They should maybe focus on getting the petitions they’ll need by next Tuesday to run in the new districts.
I don’t know. I didn’t see the speech or really catch any of the media coverage around it other than enough headlines to know that there was a visit by Trump.
Well, in the post I was responding to, ThelmaLou said “the Pubs”. As one of them, I can tell you that I never thought it was “a sure thing”, and most of the ones that I’ve heard or read opine on the matter didn’t think it was “a sure thing” either.
You posted a lot of stuff here. None of it appears to confirm that “the Pubs” ever thought it was “a sure thing”.
To say nothing of calling additional attention to the narrative of Democratic momentum and their Glorious Leader’s political Merde-as Touch.
If there’s a chance of breaking the narrative of a Dem deluge this fall, it could be worth it. If that becomes established as the expectation, they won’t have the political capital to do anything much this year (make your own jokes).
It is not really far of something that is “key”. In any case, Trump made the boast that he was what made the difference in the Georgia election. Perhaps he did then, but the divisiveness he does produce eventually had to catch up with him.
It is most interesting that “a lot of what was posted” was not worrisome to you.
This really looks to me like you’re quibbling over a pedantic triviality: the National Republican Party apparently thought it would be a boon to their candidate to bring in Trump, and said so. Sniping over the difference between “a boon” and “a sure thing” is a peculiar choice to make, especially when you’re not willing to make it clear what you think would be the more precise thing to say.
Actually, it’s not peculiar at all; the motive for this sniping suggests itself all too readily. Better luck next time.
There really isn’t any significant chance of doing that at this point. A recount is very unlikely to change the result by 600+ votes (which is what they’d need) unless something really unusual (i.e. likely to be widely interpreted as election-stealing shenanigans, and thus tending to amplify rather than dissipate the narrative of Republican desperation) happens.
I’m not going to Fox to check, but it would surprise me if the election-stealing claims weren’t already circulating. Something about Soros money, I’d expect.
“a boon” is much more precise thing to say, and I wouldn’t quibble with that. I would not be surprised if Trump and the RNC and Saccone all thought it would be a boon to have a rally before the election with Trump. I don’t think we have any way of confirming whether it was or not. In other words: Saccone appears to have lost by a few hundred votes. In an alternative timeline with no Trump rally, he might have lost by thousands, or he might have won. We don’t really have any way of knowing, do we?
And to say it was a “sure thing” to Republicans, one only needs to review the districts voting history to see how badly they blew it:
https://ballotpedia.org/Pennsylvania's_18th_Congressional_District
Your post didn’t appear to be on point, so I didn’t feel the need to offer what was worrisome to me or not. From what you did post, the world would probably be a bit better if our politics were less-mean-spirited, and on the front, it would be better if Trump didn’t refer to Warren as Pocahontas or call Waters “a low IQ individual”. The rest of it seemed like fairly mundane campaign-type stuff. Yes, he rehashed his shocking upset win over Hillary, and exaggerated how popular he is. He’s a politician. That’s what they do: play up past accomplishments and spin current problems to minimize them. I’m not terribly “worried” by it.
There is one good lesson to learn out of this election: Do not throw your vote away on a useless 3rd party candidate. The Libertarian candidate drew 1379 votes (according to the New York Times which I will cite) Now, perhaps some of those Libertarian voters will never vote for a Republican, but I bet the most of them would prefer Saccone over Lamb. Politics is the art of the possible, not the dreams of unicorns.
Actually, it was about miscalibrated voting machines.
Well, Trump continues to bring his divisiveness and insults that are disparaging now more than half the Americans that he is supposed to represent or lead. That and how he offers harebrained ideas to issues like gun control, were some reasons why one former voter of Trump gave for voting for Lamb.
It should be time for the Republicans to stop their 3 monkey act and control the president, but instead they continue to gladly embrace the dead albatross.
They are in for a penny, in for a pound at this point I guess.
In all fairness to those who voted Libertarian, if they went into their voting booths completely unaware that this race was down to the wire between the Democratic and Republican candidates, the weight of whatever rocks they’ve been living under the last couple weeks were probably compressing their brains too much for them to assess whether or not they’d prefer Saccone over Lamb.
The appellation needs another -s.
Does that mean the Republicans thought the race was a sure thing? Well, it certainly means they thought the race would be a sure thing in any year prior to this one.
Anyway, more to the point:
If poor, uneducated Whites are beginning to turn from the GOP, it’s over. They don’t have any other constituency to use to make up the loss.