CNN: Gloomy days for Southern Dems

[Evil_Captor]

@BobLibDem

I think we have to use the presidency as the engine to pull the whole train. The key to success in the state and local level is to have success in statewide elections in years that end in zero. Then if you control the state house, you control redistricting. The Republicans won the House in 2012 not by getting the most votes (they didn’t) but by gerrymandering their way in. The whole trouble started with Democratic failure to defend Obamacare against the continuous smear campaign against it in 2009-10, allowing Republicans to create a groundswell of opposition to what should have been a popular program. They rode this to victory in 2010, and took advantage of that to put their thumb on the electoral scale for a decade.

The way to end this is to take advantage of the every 20 year presidential election that takes place in a year ending in zero in 2020. If Hillary performs well and leads a popular re-election campaign, she can pull enough state and local Dems to victory with her and undo the GOP gerrymandering.

Hillary’s not going to do well because shes’ a centrist war hawk Wall Street lover who will alienate the progressive base, and the majority of Americans who hate Wall Street. Given a choice between a faux Republican (like Hillary) and a real Republican, Americans generally elect real Republicans.

[Velocity]

Strange that Republicans seemingly stand a better chance of winning office in the Northeast than Democrats in the South.

[Bryan_Ekers]

How is that strange and not simply unfortunate?

[BobLibDem]

@Evil_Captor

Hillary’s not going to do well because shes’ a centrist war hawk Wall Street lover who will alienate the progressive base, and the majority of Americans who hate Wall Street. Given a choice between a faux Republican (like Hillary) and a real Republican, Americans generally elect real Republicans.

Sure she will. She’s probably not as much a hawk as her record suggests, she well may be overcompensating for her gender in order to not to look like Mike Dukakis in drag. She admits that her vote to authorize Bush’s Iraqalypse was a mistake. Given that we’d be hard pressed to elect Elizabeth Warren, I’ll gladly take a Wall Street friendly moderate who will not nominate clones of Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts.

@Velocity

Strange that Republicans seemingly stand a better chance of winning office in the Northeast than Democrats in the South.

Not strange at all. I think Northeasterners are simply more open-minded than Southerners.

[Velocity]

@BobLibDem

Not strange at all. I think Northeasterners are simply more open-minded than Southerners.

Electing Republicans = “open-minded?”

[BobLibDem]

@Velocity

Electing Republicans = “open-minded?”

Sure. They may tend liberal by nature, but if a Republican comes by who isn’t batshit crazy they may well elect them. Look how Christie and Romney got elected in states that would never elect a Republican presidential candidate.

[BigAppleBucky]

@The_Joker_and_the_Thief

But that’s due almost exclusively due to liberal voters in the suburbs and exurbs of DC, a liberal enclave. The majority of Virginia geographically, especially the southern parts, are very conservative.

There are other enlightened enclaves in the state. Roanoke and Blacksburg, for example.

[astorian]

@Velocity

Strange that Republicans seemingly stand a better chance of winning office in the Northeast than Democrats in the South.

That’s a gross overstatement based on VERY recent developments. Until this year, Mary Landrieu’s Louisiana Senate seat had been held by Democrats since Reconstruction. Within recent memory, Georgia elected liberal Democrats like Wyche Fowler and Max Cleland to the Senate.

Unless you’re prepared to say that the South is MORE racist than it was 50 years ago (an absurd notion), how can you suggest Democrats have no chance in the South even now?