CSNbbs

The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

Because a large number of people that voted for them have no idea how far left they are. They are not informed.

My thoughts on Georgia-demonization and lots of money worked to make it close. Note that Abrams hasn't conceded. Kemp is 75k up (Libertarian has 35k) with only absentees to be counted. You need 50% to avoid a runoff.

The constant harping on the Sec. of State overseeing the election hurt Kemp. His subordinate will have to have a runoff for Sec. of State. The rest of the Republicans ran ahead of him. And other than Sec. of State, Kemp ran behind the rest of the Republicans. They had plenty of ads. But there was a really nasty Republican primary. I know someone who worked with the loser's campaign who wasn't ready to vote for Kemp as of about a month ago. I think the Democrats had a money edge. I was flooded with mailers and saw more Abrams ads on TV, not that Kemp didn't have any.

Kemp is a really nice guy (my wife has met him and I know a number of people who know him). But they just painted him as some sort of radical right demon, worse than they have with Trump. And it seemed to stick for the left, motivating them.

(11-07-2018 08:44 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

Because a large number of people that voted for them have no idea how far left they are. They are not informed.

And to think they call the Right uneducated...

Democrats win personality contests, republicans win when they can make it about issues. See 1994 and Newt's Contract for the clearest example. Democrats are better at identity politics.

In Georgia, the voting is racially polarized. Democrats typically only get 20-25% of the white vote while getting 90-95% of the Black vote. And those people tend to be very liberal. So Democrats have a minimum of about 40%. But someone like Abrams shouldn't be getting 48%.

(11-07-2018 08:44 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?
Thoughts anyone?

Because a large number of people that voted for them have no idea how far left they are. They are not informed.

Then it's the job of republicans to inform them. Republicans lose when elections become personality contests. Democrats are better at identity politics. But make it about issues, and call democrats out on their off the wall issue positions, and republicans win. It ain't rocket science.

(11-07-2018 08:45 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]Democrats win personality contests, republicans win when they can make it about issues. See 1994 and Newt's Contract for the clearest example. Democrats are better at identity politics.

Well that plus the MSM covers for them and goes 90% negative on their opponents.

Most people voting for them have no idea of what they really support or say.

Its hard to believe a republican can win anything with our current media, which is not media at all but the PR of the Democrat party.

It energizes their base and unlike a Corey Stewart, the media doesn't dismiss them to brand them a racist. Same reason Bernie Sanders polled better than Hillary vs the Republican candidates. They have a lower ceiling and a higher floor than a moderate. Without high republican turnout, they win.

(11-07-2018 08:51 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2018 08:45 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]Democrats win personality contests, republicans win when they can make it about issues. See 1994 and Newt's Contract for the clearest example. Democrats are better at identity politics.

Well that plus the MSM covers for them and goes 90% negative on their opponents.

The MSM can help democrats a lot on identity politics. But if republicans can make it about issues, the ability of the MSM to influence elections is reduced. The MSM can make Robert O'Rourke look like cute Beto with his toothy grin, but they can't change the fact that he voted with Nancy Pelosi 90+% of the time, or his position on gun control, or his website positions on the economy that read like something out of Das Kapital. I would not be surprised if half the people who voted for O'Rourke had no idea what his issue positions were, and the other half would have voted for Karl Marx. I have students who told me they were voting for O'Rourke because they were Hispanic and Beto was the Hispanic in the race. Seriously.

I thought that should have been the big takeaway from 1994. Media kept trying to make it about personalities, but Newt kept forcing every republican to stay on message. No matter what they ask you, take it back to message. It worked, and republicans promptly forgot about it.

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

Look no further than your president, and give him all the thanks.

Finally. I was wondering if the left on the board was still waiting for their talking points.

Or if they were devasted they only won 30-35 seats in the House and lost seats in the Senate.

Does this thread qualify as the first indication that right actually has become sick of winning?

Be relieved that yesterday's election wasn't the threatened "blue wave" sweep -- thanks in part to an economy that is booming in the absence of the awful Obama policies and thanks in part to an opposition party that has near-totally lost its mind.

Be concerned that after dealing out such a winning hand to the Republicans, President Trump is still capable of finding a way to squander the advantage thanks to his uncontrollable mouth and thumb.

(11-07-2018 09:32 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote: [ -> ]Does this thread qualify as the first indication that right actually has become sick of winning?

Be relieved that yesterday's election wasn't the threatened "blue wave" sweep -- thanks in part to an economy that is booming in the absence of the awful Obama policies and thanks in part to an opposition party that has near-totally lost its mind.

Be concerned that after dealing out such a winning hand to the Republicans, President Trump is still capable of finding a way to squander the advantage thanks to his uncontrollable mouth and thumb.

It doesn't take much to go from 50.5% to 49.9%. That's scary against these type of candidates.

(11-07-2018 08:45 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]Democrats win personality contests, republicans win when they can make it about issues. See 1994 and Newt's Contract for the clearest example. Democrats are better at identity politics.

I've for a while said "if you're an attractive young politician that gives a good speech libs will swoon over you"....take Beto for example.

(11-07-2018 09:32 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote: [ -> ]Does this thread qualify as the first indication that right actually has become sick of winning?

Be relieved that yesterday's election wasn't the threatened "blue wave" sweep -- thanks in part to an economy that is booming in the absence of the awful Obama policies and thanks in part to an opposition party that has near-totally lost its mind.

Be concerned that after dealing out such a winning hand to the Republicans, President Trump is still capable of finding a way to squander the advantage thanks to his uncontrollable mouth and thumb.

a lot of yesterdays R wins stemmed from the actions of D leaders during the Kavanaugh hearings too, IMO.

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

(11-07-2018 09:31 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]Finally. I was wondering if the left on the board was still waiting for their talking points.

Or if they were devasted [sic] they only won 30-35 seats in the House...

Count me totally devasted!

(11-07-2018 09:27 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

Look no further than your president, and give him all the thanks.

No, that's not it.

(11-07-2018 09:27 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-07-2018 08:42 AM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]The big question. How did people as far left as Gillums in FL and Abrams in Georgia come so close to becoming governor? Same for O'Roarke in TX and Sinema in AZ in the Senate?

Thoughts anyone?

Look no further than your president, and give him all the thanks.

Praise be to him.