Results are coming in from New Jersey and Virginia, two states that held statewide elections and could offer a glimpse of what's in store for 2018.

New Jersey's switch was a sure thing given Christie's abysmal approval ratings. The question is whether that translates into more Assembly and Senate seats to expand on an already large Democrat majority.

Virginia was the state to watch and results show Democrats having a very good night, keeping the governor's mansion and on their way to retain the AG and Lt. Gov offices. While Virginia's Senate was not up for election until 2019, the House of Delegates is and so far, Democrats have netted six more seats and the chance to be able to flip control of the chamber.

In the words of Trump: #SOMUCHWINNING

Amen! May the tide continue away from the party of the wealthy and powerful. Not us for sure.

As of right now, Democrats kept all 3 statewide offices and have netted 12 seats, while remaining in the lead in about 5-7 more. They need 6 more seats to flip control of the House of Delegates.

A very strong night: Republicans came in with a 66-34 margin and will likely lose it altogether. Ed Gillespie fared worse than his 2014 Senate run and ran behind Trump in several parts of the state.

I can't wait for the analysis of the election in the coming days.

It's an exciting night.

Pellegrine wrote:

It's an exciting night.

I have my fingers crossed that it is a disaster for these Conservative Folks who support Trump and who would screw us all.

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

I am fine with the results, the one I am mad about is the low information voters of NYC voted back in DeBlowsio despite his awful job at running the city.

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

I am fine with the results, the one I am mad about is the low information voters of NYC voted back in DeBlowsio despite his awful job at running the city.

One must wait to see how the low information voters in those misdirected states are willing to swallow the bull handed out by Conservatives. Why are they always low wage, high welfare states. I am always mystified how people like to be screwed over. I cannot figure it out for the life of me.

WarRI1 wrote:

Amen! May the tide continue away from the party of the wealthy and powerful. Not us for sure.

Well...the issue I have with this statement is Phil Murphy is a former Goldman Sachs executive and a stereotypical Wall Street Billionaire. Last time NJ elected a guy like Murphy was Jon Corzine, and he was ousted by Christie four years later in a deep blue state.

A number of comments on Virginia. One is the DC suburbs are turning more and more blue as a good chunk of residents are government workers who would be threatened by cuts in spending. Secondly, Northam is as close to a moderate as you will find in the Democratic party (the best comparison I can come up with would be Evan Bayh), and this allowed him to attract some never Trumpers who would normally balk at voting for a democrat. Thirdly, Gillespie is the ultimate establishment swamp politician and that is exactly the type of person voters are mad at and want to boot from DC (Even though this was a governors race). Lastly, even though this is a state election that should have no ties to Washington at all, the anti trump setiment cant be overlooked. Although it should be noted the GOP LT Gov Nominee got more votes than Gillespie and she didnt distance herself from Trump like Gillespie tried to do.

The Democrats will have total control of NJ now. The tricky thing about a state like NJ is most of the residents work in other states (Mainly NY City or Philadelphia) and NJ really doesn't have a big corporate presence. It will be interesting to see how this state is run going forward. If the GOP tax reform gets passed and signed by Trump, they will have some tough choices to make in Trenton as they will almost certainly have to look to some type of tax cut so that their residents dont feel the sting as much.

In summary. Trump was the big loser here. But both parties are still in disarray, and there were no real upsets here at all. It is still too early to tell how 2018 will be impacted.

WarRI1 wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

I am fine with the results, the one I am mad about is the low information voters of NYC voted back in DeBlowsio despite his awful job at running the city.

One must wait to see how the low information voters in those misdirected states are willing to swallow the bull handed out by Conservatives. Why are they always low wage, high welfare states. I am always mystified how people like to be screwed over. I cannot figure it out for the life of me.

I must say, it's funny how most conservatives bash on welfare, while the Southern red states have the highest rates of welfare. Then it's also funny how many very left wing cities like Chicago, NYC, LA, Baltimore, New Orleans, Detroit, St. Louis etc have high rates of crime, corruption, failing public schools, and welfare recipients. Make you wonder if these politicians go down two separate paths but come out in the same place...

Oh, it was also interesting to note that Northam won more districts/counties and by a wider margin than Hillary did. Two things probably happened, one Democratic voters finally realized they have to go out and vote, and two being that this should've been an easy election for the Democrats to win if they weren't so corrupt in pushing Clinton to be their candidate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... 17fab62f5e

It's all about ME:

President Trump on Tuesday quickly sought to distance himself from Republican gubernatorial hopeful Ed Gillespie in the Virginia governor’s race as Democrat Ralph Northam was projected to win by multiple news outlets.

“Ed Gillespie worked hard but did not embrace me or what I stand for,” Trump said on Twitter in the midst of his visit to South Korea, as Virginia results continued to roll in, suggesting a comfortable Northam victory.

Super80Fan wrote:

Oh, it was also interesting to note that Northam won more districts/counties and by a wider margin than Hillary did. Two things probably happened, one Democratic voters finally realized they have to go out and vote, and two being that this should've been an easy election for the Democrats to win if they weren't so corrupt in pushing Clinton to be their candidate.

I most certainly agree with your statement. I voted for Hillary holding my nose because I knew what was coming from the party of the wealthy who cannot change their spots. Every time they get power, same O same O.

Super80Fan wrote:

WarRI1 wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

I am fine with the results, the one I am mad about is the low information voters of NYC voted back in DeBlowsio despite his awful job at running the city.

One must wait to see how the low information voters in those misdirected states are willing to swallow the bull handed out by Conservatives. Why are they always low wage, high welfare states. I am always mystified how people like to be screwed over. I cannot figure it out for the life of me.

I must say, it's funny how most conservatives bash on welfare, while the Southern red states have the highest rates of welfare. Then it's also funny how many very left wing cities like Chicago, NYC, LA, Baltimore, New Orleans, Detroit, St. Louis etc have high rates of crime, corruption, failing public schools, and welfare recipients. Make you wonder if these politicians go down two separate paths but come out in the same place...

It does make one wonder about that, deep down, all about who is going to screw you more. They both do a good job of that. I find the Republicans cannot stand success, they must support the wealthy all to the cost of us all.

Apodino

In summary. Trump was the big loser here. But both parties are still in disarray, and there were no real upsets here at all. It is still too early to tell how 2018 will be impacted.

I agree, too early to count chickens. Let us hope Trump continues to be the loser. if not Lord help us all.

Virginia elected their first openly transgender woman to the legislature for the 13th district. Her name is Danica Roem. The person who ran against her, a 73yo self proclaimed "chief homophobe", refused to publicly debate Roem. He also refused to refer to her by her proper gender and instead did so by her birth gender. Referendum much???

Also touching was the election of Chris Hurst (D) to Virginia's House of Delegates. He was the boyfriend and coworker of Alison Parker, the reporter killed live on TV in Roanoke in 2015. He ran to honor her life on a gun control platform against NRA-endorsed Republican incumbent Joseph Yost.

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states.

New Jersey, yes. Virginia, not so much. It's only recently that shades of blue have begun emerging. Yes, Virginia was a Southern state that voted with the Southern block, but Virginia's root are still very much conservative. Thanks to the DC suburbs expanding and adding population, Virginia has become the definition of a purple state.

The fact that polls tightened towards the end means that there is still some decent grip for conservatives there. The HoD is currently 48-47 with 5 seats to be decided at a recount. It will likely result in 50-50. A true blue state would have already resulted in both chambers being at least slightly blue and/or a more Democratic delegation to Congress (VA's reps are split 7-4 for Republicans).

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

Virginia is a “blue state?”

You sound like trump. Get a loss, change the facts.

Virginia will be interesting to watch going forward. If this was an anti-Trump vote, good for Democrats, but if this was an anti-incumbent vote because of other reasons like the economy, this may cause trouble for Democrats and Virginia as Trump(federal government) holds the purse strings.

D L X wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

Virginia is a “blue state?”

You sound like trump. Get a loss, change the facts.

Oh man, you really like fake news don't you? Virginia has carried the Democrats in 3 of the past 4 presidential elections. It might of at one point or another been a red state but those times are in the past. It's a blue state now, get over it.

Super80Fan wrote:

D L X wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

Virginia is a “blue state?”

You sound like trump. Get a loss, change the facts.

Oh man, you really like fake news don't you? Virginia has carried the Democrats in 3 of the past 4 presidential elections. It might of at one point or another been a red state but those times are in the past. It's a blue state now, get over it.

Or three of the last 13 presidential elections, if you want to look at it differently. Virginia voting Democrat consistently on the state and federal level is a very recent thing. There were three Republican governors before the elections of Mark Warner and then Tim Kaine, and Bob McDonnell took the governor's mansion back for the GOP in 2009. Herring was the first Democrat AG since the early 90s. Obama and Clinton were the first to get Virginia since Johnson. Despite both senators being Democrat (Warner and Kaine, who have carried their popularly for several years now), all of the races before last night in which Democrats won were pretty tightly contested. Northam came away with the most dominant win of a Democrat in this state that I can recall.

einsteinboricua wrote:

New Jersey, yes. Virginia, not so much. It's only recently that shades of blue have begun emerging. Yes, Virginia was a Southern state that voted with the Southern block, but Virginia's root are still very much conservative. Thanks to the DC suburbs expanding and adding population, Virginia has become the definition of a purple state.

The fact that polls tightened towards the end means that there is still some decent grip for conservatives there. The HoD is currently 48-47 with 5 seats to be decided at a recount. It will likely result in 50-50. A true blue state would have already resulted in both chambers being at least slightly blue and/or a more Democratic delegation to Congress (VA's reps are split 7-4 for Republicans).

Things are very different here than they were 30 years ago, but the state still has a high degree of conservatism, particularly in the rural southwest. The Richmond area, especially Chesterfield, has long been fairly conservative, but Gillespie is only running about 275 votes up on Northam in that county. To me, that says a lot as a former Chesterfield resident of 15 years. They also voted out Manoli Loupassi, who has been a prominent figure in Richmond politics for going on two decades.

The tide is certainly shifting in favor of the Democrats in Virginia, but the state has absolutely not made a complete shift to blue. If the trend continues, I believe Virginia could be solid blue in just a few years, but the state will still be a battleground for many years to come. The election last night only made the state a little less purple.

Super80Fan wrote:

D L X wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

Virginia is a “blue state?”

You sound like trump. Get a loss, change the facts.

Oh man, you really like fake news don't you? Virginia has carried the Democrats in 3 of the past 4 presidential elections. It might of at one point or another been a red state but those times are in the past. It's a blue state now, get over it.

Actually, I was born here in Virginia and I've lived here most of my life. I'm 40 years old. The Republicans have held the legislature since the days of Bill Clinton. Of the last 10 presidential elections, the Republican has won 7. The three that were won by Dems were squeakers. Compare to Ohio, a state you claim is NOT a blue state, which has given 4 of its last 10 elections to the Dems. Virginia is redder. So, no, Virginia is not a "blue" state, and yes, you are being like Trump -- you got some bad news, so you simply change the facts.

And if you ever send me a harassing email again, you'll be bounced from this site. Mark it down.

Super80Fan wrote:

D L X wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Not really surprising, Virginia and New Jersey are blue states. Come back to me when Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Ohio all turn blue.

Virginia is a “blue state?”

You sound like trump. Get a loss, change the facts.

Oh man, you really like fake news don't you? Virginia has carried the Democrats in 3 of the past 4 presidential elections. It might of at one point or another been a red state but those times are in the past. It's a blue state now, get over it.

And MI, WI, and PA also went for Democrats in presidential elections, yet looking at the state level, they're redder than blue. When Virginia's delegation is majority blue and its legislature is Democrat, talk to me about blue state.

The current mix suggests it's trending blue, but it's nowhere near a safe-blue state like California and Illinois are. The same goes for MI, WI, OH, and PA. The presidential election is but one factor; other races count to whether a state is one shade or another.

I think Roem's victory is one of the most instructive. Her opponent spent the whole campaign attacking her for being transgender, while she stuck relentlessly to message, spending most of the campaign talking about roads. That's a model the rest of the Democrats need to be emulating.

Super80Fan wrote:

Oh man, you really like fake news don't you? Virginia has carried the Democrats in 3 of the past 4 presidential elections. It might of at one point or another been a red state but those times are in the past. It's a blue state now, get over it.

Well the definition is a bit murky. It's certainly not reliably blue enough that the Democrats can scale back the amount of resource they need to win races there, so I think it's a bit premature to call it true blue. Based on tonight's landslide though, it's certainly taken a big step in that direction.

I think we'll only have a clear picture in a couple of election cycles though. Trump is the least popular president in modern history, by some distance. We don't know how much that influences today's results, and how much of it is just urbanization and changing demographics.

zckls04 wrote:

I think Roem's victory is one of the most instructive. Her opponent spent the whole campaign attacking her for being transgender, while she stuck relentlessly to message, spending most of the campaign talking about roads. That's a model the rest of the Democrats need to be emulating.

Just a silly question, how can you attack anyone for just being herself? Good for her that she continued to talk about the issues instead of lowering the standards to their level.

I see the election as the classic off year result - especially when the President has moved in unpopular ways. Trump is pretty good at pushing supporters away and it is no surprise that voters reacted.

The big question is can the GOP understand that they need to change direction in order to regain strength in 2018? That is also going to be an off year election and the GOP needs to get to work now. Forget the tax goodies for the Billionaires Boy's Club and tell Trump to stop acting like the idiot he is.

Last night was a hint of what could happen next year. The problem is that the GOP is too focused on greed and might forget last night.

Ken777 wrote:

I see the election as the classic off year result - especially when the President has moved in unpopular ways. Trump is pretty good at pushing supporters away and it is no surprise that voters reacted.

The big question is can the GOP understand that they need to change direction in order to regain strength in 2018? That is also going to be an off year election and the GOP needs to get to work now. Forget the tax goodies for the Billionaires Boy's Club and tell Trump to stop acting like the idiot he is.

Last night was a hint of what could happen next year. The problem is that the GOP is too focused on greed and might forget last night.

The GOP will have an enthusiasm gap to cover in 2018. If they have nothing to show for their time in office, it may demotivate their "base". However, the democrats have always had a motivation issue,especially in off years. Perhaps the Trump thread has changed that.

Dutchy wrote:

zckls04 wrote:

I think Roem's victory is one of the most instructive. Her opponent spent the whole campaign attacking her for being transgender, while she stuck relentlessly to message, spending most of the campaign talking about roads. That's a model the rest of the Democrats need to be emulating.

Just a silly question, how can you attack anyone for just being herself? Good for her that she continued to talk about the issues instead of lowering the standards to their level.

You obviously misinterpreted what zckls04 wrote. He did not attack her.

Dutchy wrote:

Just a silly question, how can you attack anyone for just being herself? Good for her that she continued to talk about the issues instead of lowering the standards to their level.

Bob Marshall won 13 elections sticking to a hardcore socially conservative message. Up until now it has been a winning formula.

zckls04 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Just a silly question, how can you attack anyone for just being herself? Good for her that she continued to talk about the issues instead of lowering the standards to their level.

Bob Marshall won 13 elections sticking to a hardcore socially conservative message. Up until now it has been a winning formula.

I still find it so incomprehensible that one attacks someone and then wins the election. It would be the same for me if one attacks its opponent for having glasses or being unable to walk, has nothing to do with the issues, will not better the lives of the voters. I know it works like crazy (luckily not this time): negative campaigning.

Just another question, how come one can win 13 elections in a row? Seems these people are sitting a lifetime in parliament.

BobPatterson wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

zckls04 wrote:

I think Roem's victory is one of the most instructive. Her opponent spent the whole campaign attacking her for being transgender, while she stuck relentlessly to message, spending most of the campaign talking about roads. That's a model the rest of the Democrats need to be emulating.

Just a silly question, how can you attack anyone for just being herself? Good for her that she continued to talk about the issues instead of lowering the standards to their level.

You obviously misinterpreted what zckls04 wrote. He did not attack her.

No I didn't, zckls04 did interpret my comment correctly.........

zckls04 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Just a silly question, how can you attack anyone for just being herself? Good for her that she continued to talk about the issues instead of lowering the standards to their level.

Bob Marshall won 13 elections sticking to a hardcore socially conservative message. Up until now it has been a winning formula.

That area forming District 13, Central Prince William County, begins about 5 miles away from my boyhood home of Eastern Prince William County, where my parents still live. The big difference between the central and eastern parts of the county is a small amount of wealth and a larger amount of military. Military = diversity + pragmatism. Bob Marshall's antics would have found an audience in the eastern part, but not enough to get him elected there. But in Central Prince William County, where everyone was white and a bit poorer, and mocked for being less well-off than the eastern part, that ish went far.

But times are changing. Central Prince William County has seen a wave of wealthier families moving into their McMansions, as well as a sizeable Muslim and Latino population. Trump lost all three of those groups with his BS, and Bob Marshall, utterly incapable of shedding his bigotry, managed to unite Muslims, Latinos, and wealthy folks to support a transgender candidate who made the campaign ALL about fixing Route 28. So while Bob Marshall was writing bills to keep Ms. Roem from the women's room, Ms. Roem was working to give her district what it needed: a new road.

I've always been a proud Virginian, but I gotta say, THIS election has made me the proudest.

Ken777 wrote:

The big question is can the GOP understand that they need to change direction in order to regain strength in 2018? That is also going to be an off year election and the GOP needs to get to work now. Forget the tax goodies for the Billionaires Boy's Club and tell Trump to stop acting like the idiot he is.

Last night was a hint of what could happen next year. The problem is that the GOP is too focused on greed and might forget last night.

That's why GOP needs to bring good results with tax reform and healthcare so that they gain the trust of public before 2018 ends. So far it seems like a difficult task. Ryan repeated loudly how he has to keep his promise with those, he wants to keep his seat as speaker after all.

Even if GOP manages to pass the bills they wanted, I still think democrats will succeed at flipping the table around this time.

Eyad89 wrote:

That's why GOP needs to bring good results with tax reform and healthcare so that they gain the trust of public before 2018 ends. So far it seems like a difficult task. Ryan repeated loudly how he has to keep his promise with those, he wants to keep his seat as speaker after all.

Trump and the GOP are incapable of delivering either a successful tax reform for the nation or a decent, affordable health care system. The tax system will pander to the wealthy because hat is what the GOP does PLUS Trump wants estate taxes killed AND taxes changed to where he never pays again.

Health care is a lost cause until we end cost shifting, I've made a "few comments" on that in the past, but if you need a reminder let me know.

Virgina could be important on another front. While this election was going on, the WI assembly quietly passed a resolution calling for an Article V convention. So far 28 states have passed such a resolution and if 6 more do, we could have an Article V convention convened to propose amendments to the constitution. The key one is the Balanced Budget amendment, which if passed would really make Congress' job harder going forward. Any amendment proposed would still need 3/4s of the state legislatures to ratify, and losing VA will make it harder to do so.

If such a convention is convened, this would be the opportunity to deal with Citizens United, which is why I think progressives should be on board with the idea.

lot of seats were flipped last night. grassroots politics. got to love it. This is my America.

Super80Fan wrote:

I am fine with the results, the one I am mad about is the low information voters of NYC voted back in DeBlowsio despite his awful job at running the city.

OK..so the there are low information voters in NYC. Last week, according to you, there were low information voters in Frederica Wilson's district in Florida.


So my question is...WHERE EXACTLY DO YOU LIVE????

I got news for you...there are low information voters everywhere....and they vote for Republicans too. JEEZ

This is what happens when a bunch of people suddenly realize the consequences of political apathy and inaction at the voter's level.

I also see this as a direct consequence of Trump's ineptitude and the constant chaos surrounding him, along with the GOP's constant assault on the middle/low tier Americans they have led since Trump breached the door for them.

The faster the Democratic party can distance itself from Hillary and associate itself with the grassroot movement that saw a lot of traction in VA, the faster this country can rejoin the realm of sanity.

Dutchy wrote:

Just another question, how come one can win 13 elections in a row? Seems these people are sitting a lifetime in parliament.

Elections are every other year for the House of Delegates. 26 years is certainly a long time to serve the same district, but far from unheard of.

Tuesday was a good day for Progressives/Liberals, however, I won't jump for joy too soon. Next year's midterms will be a much bigger bellwether for where this nation is politically. While gains at the local level are important, it's imperative that Democrats flip at least one of the two national legislative bodies next year. As hard as it is to flip the House (thanks to gerrymandering), it's more likely than the Senate in 2018. 9 Democrats from Trump states are up for re-election, while just 1 Republican from a Clinton state is up (Heller from NV), and overall, more Democrats are up for re-election in 2018. Granted, flipping the Senate is still possible (and the announced retirements of Corker and Flake give us slightly more hope....as does potentially Hatch of Utah, who is rumored to be considering retirement but not confirmed), but still a statistical long shot. In the House, Democrats are leading the generic ballot by about 15 points, but that needs to be closer to 25 points to begin getting excited about flipping a lot of House seats.

Tuesday was a good first step forward post-Trump, but I am very cautiously optimistic about next year.

I don't understand something:

My mother-in-law watches Fox "news" way too damn much. They were rejoicing because these elections are simply a fluke and not a sign of things to come. However, when Republicans won exactly like this four years ago, it was a mandate from the people and the tide was finally turning and so forth. What is the difference? Why can't We The People vote in Democrats and give a mandate using Democrats?

LittleFokker wrote:

Tuesday was a good day for Progressives/Liberals, however, I won't jump for joy too soon. Next year's midterms will be a much bigger bellwether for where this nation is politically. While gains at the local level are important, it's imperative that Democrats flip at least one of the two national legislative bodies next year. As hard as it is to flip the House (thanks to gerrymandering), it's more likely than the Senate in 2018. 9 Democrats from Trump states are up for re-election, while just 1 Republican from a Clinton state is up (Heller from NV), and overall, more Democrats are up for re-election in 2018. Granted, flipping the Senate is still possible (and the announced retirements of Corker and Flake give us slightly more hope....as does potentially Hatch of Utah, who is rumored to be considering retirement but not confirmed), but still a statistical long shot. In the House, Democrats are leading the generic ballot by about 15 points, but that needs to be closer to 25 points to begin getting excited about flipping a lot of House seats.

Tuesday was a good first step forward post-Trump, but I am very cautiously optimistic about next year.

There's no point in flipping Congress without flipping governorships and lowering majorities (or flipping chambers) at the state level. For example, Missouri's legislature is overwhelmingly Republican; getting a Democrat governor there won't be enough unless you can lower the majority past the threshold where they can override vetoes. Some chambers will be hard to flip (try flipping Wyoming's Senate, for example...good luck), but Midwestern and swing state chambers are prime for the taking, as well as governorships. John Bel Edwards and Roy Cooper (LA and NC) are proof that Democrats can win in the South with the right credentials.

If Democrats can't take the House next year but can flip a few chambers at the state level and get a few governorships, then the maps for 2022 will be vastly different and potentially more competitive.

seb146 wrote:

I don't understand something:

My mother-in-law watches Fox "news" way too damn much. They were rejoicing because these elections are simply a fluke and not a sign of things to come. However, when Republicans won exactly like this four years ago, it was a mandate from the people and the tide was finally turning and so forth. What is the difference? Why can't We The People vote in Democrats and give a mandate using Democrats?

It sounds like you expect (or hope) that irrational people will act rationally when it comes to politics.

LittleFokker wrote:

Tuesday was a good day for Progressives/Liberals, however, I won't jump for joy too soon. Next year's midterms will be a much bigger bellwether for where this nation is politically. While gains at the local level are important, it's imperative that Democrats flip at least one of the two national legislative bodies next year. .

Keep tweeting = more Dems

The Dems need to pickup 23 House seats....ironically, there are 23 seats held by Republicans in districts that Hillary won...and a further 13 that Obama won.


But they need to get Pelosi to step down

727LOVER wrote:

The Dems need to pickup 23 House seats....ironically, there are 23 seats held by Republicans in districts that Hillary won...and a further 13 that Obama won.


But they need to get Pelosi to step down

And the more and more Republicans that I see announcing their retirement (Rep Bob Goodlatte (R) of Virginia just announced he won't be seeking re-election today), the more optimistic I am for 2018. Yes, I agree Pelosi's time as House Democrat leader should come to an end, but it's more important to focus on flipping the House first. If the Dems can win the House first, then we can focus on who the Speaker shall be.

einsteinboricua wrote:

There's no point in flipping Congress without flipping governorships and lowering majorities (or flipping chambers) at the state level. For example, Missouri's legislature is overwhelmingly Republican; getting a Democrat governor there won't be enough unless you can lower the majority past the threshold where they can override vetoes. Some chambers will be hard to flip (try flipping Wyoming's Senate, for example...good luck), but Midwestern and swing state chambers are prime for the taking, as well as governorships. John Bel Edwards and Roy Cooper (LA and NC) are proof that Democrats can win in the South with the right credentials.

If Democrats can't take the House next year but can flip a few chambers at the state level and get a few governorships, then the maps for 2022 will be vastly different and potentially more competitive.

They're both important. Winning state governments is necessary, but the positive effects of that take years to manifest that out into positives for everyone. This country can't afford to wait until the 2020 election to get Trump out of office. Since the GOP has already proudly demonstrated they're putting party over country, our best chance is to get one or both legislatures flipped to force impeachment/25th Amendment proceedings to happen ASAP.

LittleFokker wrote:

Since the GOP has already proudly demonstrated they're putting party over country, our best chance is to get one or both legislatures flipped to force impeachment/25th Amendment proceedings to happen ASAP.

Mere flipping of chambers of Congress will accomplish nothing with regard to early removal of Mr. Trump. It takes significant majorities to do that.

What is needed is overwhelming evidence of impropriety (illegality, special counsel work) to force the nation to come to its senses.

The 25th Amendment requires that Mr.Trump's cronies take him down (with congressional approval).

Don't hold your breath.

727LOVER wrote:

LittleFokker wrote:

Tuesday was a good day for Progressives/Liberals, however, I won't jump for joy too soon. Next year's midterms will be a much bigger bellwether for where this nation is politically. While gains at the local level are important, it's imperative that Democrats flip at least one of the two national legislative bodies next year. .

Keep tweeting = more Dems

The Dems need to pickup 23 House seats....ironically, there are 23 seats held by Republicans in districts that Hillary won...and a further 13 that Obama won.


But they need to get Pelosi to step down

Why? Pelosi has been fairly quiet this session and she has been keeping to her own district more. I think she understands that the fake outrage against her is bad, so, as leader of the House Democrats, it is her party's best interest to stay quiet. And she has. Look at the heat Schumer has faced just because he is a Democrat.

Democrats just need to keep hitting home the point that Republicans work for the super rich and that tax cuts for the super rich will only help Republicans and the super rich. Democrats need to keep hitting home the point that the self-proclaimed "party of life and God" hates both and has proven that by taking away affordable health care and doing nothing about mass shootings. The DNC and Pelosi only need to give money to local races and let Republicans destroy themselves.

BobPatterson wrote:

Mere flipping of chambers of Congress will accomplish nothing with regard to early removal of Mr. Trump. It takes significant majorities to do that.

What is needed is overwhelming evidence of impropriety (illegality, special counsel work) to force the nation to come to its senses.

The 25th Amendment requires that Mr.Trump's cronies take him down (with congressional approval).

Don't hold your breath.

If the House changes then all hell could break loose with the changes in power in the Committees. House Intelligence Committee? Who will be the new Chairman?

How many new Chairmen can issue subpoenas?

Just as the Impeachment Investigation gets started and subpoenas for tax returns are delivered I think Trump will be ripe for the Art of the Deal.

If Pence goes first (faster to the deal) then we can have the Administration brought back to normal.

Ken777 wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

Mere flipping of chambers of Congress will accomplish nothing with regard to early removal of Mr. Trump. It takes significant majorities to do that.

What is needed is overwhelming evidence of impropriety (illegality, special counsel work) to force the nation to come to its senses.

The 25th Amendment requires that Mr.Trump's cronies take him down (with congressional approval).

Don't hold your breath.

If the House changes then all hell could break loose with the changes in power in the Committees. House Intelligence Committee? Who will be the new Chairman?

How many new Chairmen can issue subpoenas?

Just as the Impeachment Investigation gets started and subpoenas for tax returns are delivered I think Trump will be ripe for the Art of the Deal.

If Pence goes first (faster to the deal) then we can have the Administration brought back to normal.

Good luck with your political show trials, otherwise known as vendettas.

Meanwhile, how many Americans are still without power and clean water in the Caribbean? Republicans do not care because they are not English speaking and do not vote. Let's keep that point alive as well. The party of "every life is sacred" is letting Puerto Ricans die and they don't care.

BobPatterson wrote:

Good luck with your political show trials, otherwise known as vendettas.

It is only a show trial if the investigation has been done properly so far. If someone is tossing wooden shoes into the gear, otherwise known as sabotage, and you´ll just pulling those stops out, it is not a show-trial, neither a vendetta.

seb146 wrote:

I don't understand something:

My mother-in-law watches Fox "news" way too damn much. They were rejoicing because these elections are simply a fluke and not a sign of things to come. However, when Republicans won exactly like this four years ago, it was a mandate from the people and the tide was finally turning and so forth. What is the difference? Why can't We The People vote in Democrats and give a mandate using Democrats?

Information. I really wanted to know what Hanity had to say about the result, and i was quite disappointed, as he spend what... 5 to 10 seconds on the issue, just rambling through a statement in light speed ...

Fox news will obviously also not put much focus on how many of those wins have been against candidates being as Trump as can be. Transgender won against homophone, refugee against xenophobe,... ,.. ...

Was it like that four years ago? Did they win against people that ran on Obamas key "policy" points?

best regards
Thomas