I guess the title carries the message, but some detail:
With all ten precincts within the district reporting, Revis led Republican David Linton by 108 votes, or about three percentage points.
If Revis’s lead holds, it would mark a significant swing from the 2016 elections, when Trump won the district by a 61 percent to 33 percent margin.
That’s a 30 point swing, comparable to the Roy Moore election. I assume this guy wasn’t a child molester, though.
Good to see Revis is supporting right of workers to organize.
“Right-to-Work is a 60-year old bad idea, pushed by big corporations to lower wages. When it was passed by the Missouri General Assembly, I felt the call to take action and run for office. This constant assault on the rights of working men and women is funded by just a few multi-millionaires who buy influence with elected officials.”
Ah! Illegal alien voters smuggled in by union thugs!
Yes, I’ve been reading that. Looks like swings from 19% - 31% (!) towards the Democrats.
Quite heartening.
Meh, in 2012 the R won 52%-48%. I have trouble buying that it’s all that “deep-red”, but cherry-picking is best-picking, so there’s that.
Whatever you have to tell yourself.
"it would mark a significant swing from 2016, when President Trump won the district by a 61 percent to 33 percent margin.
Four years before that, Mitt Romney beat President Obama in the district, south and west of St. Louis, by a 55- to 43-percent margin."
A pro life, pro death penalty, NRA member winning that district isn’t all that shocking. A union friendly Republican with a D after his name beat the actual Republican. It probably doesn’t speak much to trends for November unless the primary results are really surprising.
Don’t tell them that. You’re raining on their parade with facts. You’ll spoil all the fun. Don’t you see? Objective analysis clearly isn’t the purpose in this thread. It’s a party thread, meant to cherry-pick a few data points and translate those into a hoped-for blue tsunami, and you’re doing it all wrong.
Might surprise you two that there are pro-life Democrats, pro death penalty Democrats. I know, shocking because you guys drive away people who don’t tow the entire party line.
Speaking as a Missourian, I think that’s nice, but the Republicans won two other special elections tonight (with another race not called yet) and this Democratic win will bring their total in the state House to 47 out of 162 seats.
Now, if the Democrats win the remaining district, which is located deep in the Ozarks, I might be more excited.
That’s how Democrats won the house in 2006, wasn’t it? Selecting and running candidates that actually fit their district? I mean, the goal should be flipping control first and worrying about some insistence of ideological purity second.
Yes …
… and that’s how they lost it four years later.
Sure. So running a pro-life, pro-gun Democrat and him winning is a good thing if you want to see Democrats retake the House (I realize this was a state election). I’m not familiar with everyone who is running in every district but this is a proven working model.
Absolutely, I’d love to see Dems soften their anti-gun and pro-choice positions. I get the impression they’re not very interested in doing that.
Hey I can stomach a few anti-choice, pro-death by gun Democrats if it means taking Congress.
Is it possible the huge Trump percentage says more about sexism in those areas?
I think someone who labels people “anti-choice” tells us much more about themselves than anything else with that decision.
Really? What does it say?
It’s honest, unlike “pro-life”.
“Forced-birth advocate” fits the bill too.