Democratic Party 2017 and beyond

[frae]

It now seems clear the Democrats badly overplayed their hand. Just how badly will the Ford/Kavanaugh fiasco hurt the Democrats in November?

J

We are going to continue to disagree on this and will just have to wait until the election to see who is right. I maintain that the red state senate seats were generally long shots and while we probably lose Heitkamp we keep Manchin, and Tester. Dems don't win Ten or TX. So what are we back to? Mizzou which was destined to be close. Florida which is trending the right way. Indiana which will be close but he didn't lose his lead in any of the polls I saw during this. So those are the seats we are defending and I don't think the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings change that.

Playing offense, TX and Ten were long shots and seem to be fading, but if I wanted to say one of those in play I give the nod to Ten. Arizona seems to be still trending well for Dems. Nevada will be close until the end.

So for me not much changed except some of the red states trended back and the chances of winning the senate have gone from 1/3 to 2/9 on 538 .

As for the House the map still works for me. The Republican interest has shrunk the gap from 80% likely to 74% likely but in two weeks I won't be shocked it it lands around 77 or 78. The anger on the left is going to get people to the polls and more imporatntly get poeple to the polls in the districts that matter.

We will see soon enough.

[onejayhawk]

It was always a long shot for the Democrats to take the Senate. With ND looking like a flip, they need Nevada, Arizona, and Tennessee, I don't see them taking more than one. My question has to do with the House. The old adage is that the only thing that will unite Republicans is Democrats. Have the Democrats seriously hurt their chances to get at least one branch of Congress?

J

[frae]

It was always a long shot for the Democrats to take the Senate. With ND looking like a flip, they need Nevada, Arizona, and Tennessee, I don't see them taking more than one. My question has to do with the House. The old adage is that the only thing that will unite Republicans is Democrats. Have the Democrats seriously hurt their chances to get at least one branch of Congress?

J

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-kavanaugh-helping-republicans-midterm-chances/

Nate lays out where we have moved over the last month. We will need a week now of polls but I don’t think this will hurt. To me the districts in play aren’t going to be swung by the Kavanaugh situation. My guess as of today remains the same D +32

[B-Fly]

It was always a long shot for the Democrats to take the Senate. With ND looking like a flip, they need Nevada, Arizona, and Tennessee, I don't see them taking more than one. My question has to do with the House. The old adage is that the only thing that will unite Republicans is Democrats. Have the Democrats seriously hurt their chances to get at least one branch of Congress?

J

No, I think they'll comfortably take the House. I never thought they had a material chance at the Senate. The map of seats up this year is just too unfavorable. Lucky break for the GOP.

[onejayhawk]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...dterm-chances/

Nate lays out where we have moved over the last month. We will need a week now of polls but I don’t think this will hurt. To me the districts in play aren’t going to be swung by the Kavanaugh situation. My guess as of today remains the same D +32

I have been following 538 and Sabato's Chrystal Ball for some time. Here's an article from Cook saying, basically, that it's too early to tell much but it's not good for the Democrats, especially in Trump Districts/states. As Brian says, the standard attitude for some time has been that the Democrats should win the House.

https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/war-never-ends

That's my take. If the Kavanaugh challenge was intended to motivate the base, it may have backfired and motivated the opponents. The standard Republican perception is that the Democrats raised a false accusation against an innocent man because they could not attack him by any legitimate means. It will not help the Democrats. The question is how much it will help the Republicans.

J

[Fresno Bob]

I have been following 538 and Sabato's Chrystal Ball for some time. Here's an article from Cook saying, basically, that it's too early to tell much but it's not good for the Democrats, especially in Trump Districts/states. As Brian says, the standard attitude for some time has been that the Democrats should win the House.

https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/war-never-ends

That's my take. If the Kavanaugh challenge was intended to motivate the base, it may have backfired and motivated the opponents. The standard Republican perception is that the Democrats raised a false accusation against an innocent man because they could not attack him by any legitimate means. It will not help the Democrats. The question is how much it will help the Republicans.

J

the rest of us are pretty sure that Drunkenaugh tried to rape that girl in high school, and got blackout drunk in college and doesn't believe "no means no"

[swampdragon]

the rest of us are pretty sure that Drunkenaugh tried to rape that girl in high school, and got blackout drunk in college and doesn't believe "no means no"

I agree and hope that as many as possible of the rest of us vote

[onejayhawk]

the rest of us are pretty sure that Drunkenaugh tried to rape that girl in high school, and got blackout drunk in college and doesn't believe "no means no"

Since this thread is about the future of the Democrats and their elections, your comment says it all. I'm so sorry for you.

J

[Fresno Bob]

Since this thread is about the future of the Democrats and their elections, your comment says it all. I'm so sorry for you.

J

I'm sorry that you feel what Kavanaugh delivered is representative of the judicial temperment for the Supreme Court, but I'm more sorry for our country, and specifically the women of our country

[Sour Masher]

Since this thread is about the future of the Democrats and their elections, your comment says it all. I'm so sorry for you.

J

Hmm, that last line doesn't strike me as being 100% sincere.

Also, I've wanted to ask this forever...why do you sign your posts with J? I mean, the way forum posts work, everyone knows who is posting. Unless you have multiple people using your account. Is 1J really multiple users posting under one account? Like the opposite of what Steve used to be?!

[onejayhawk]

Hmm, that last line doesn't strike me as being 100% sincere.

Also, I've wanted to ask this forever...why do you sign your posts with J? I mean, the way forum posts work, everyone knows who is posting. Unless you have multiple people using your account. Is 1J really multiple users posting under one account? Like the opposite of what Steve used to be?!

You are partly correct. I am sorry for the Democratic party because there was a point when they had a vibrant voice. It was a voice I voted for many times. Lately, they have become the party of the elites, stuck in 20-year-old memes and having no clue why they keep getting blindsided at the ballot box. At this rate they will run someone over 70 in the 2020 Presidential election and get shredded. Some pity is appropriate.

What I would like to know is why the whole party turned its back on working people. I was a Union Steward for over 15 years. At no point in that time was the Union's political agenda been helpful to the rank and file member. Trump, in comparison, brought more jobs and better pay. Guys that used to be bore and indifferent Democrats are now MAGA hat activists. If anything, the women are worse.

Yes, I feel sorry for the Democratic party. When they buy a clue, and get rid of 90% of their leadership, they will become worthwhile again.

As for the signature, it's a habit from before sigs were available on email. I signed my first initial rather than my full name. The name onejayhawk was because I could not use #1jayhawkfan. Special characters were not allowed in names.

J

[OaklandA's]

Trump, in comparison, brought more jobs

You keep repeating this falsehood, so I will keep correcting you. Trump has not created more jobs. In fact, 2017 was the worst year for job creation than each of the previous four years.

Net Jobs Created by Year:
2013: 2.30 M
2014: 3.01 M
2015: 2.71 M
2016: 2.34 M
2017: 2.19 M

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics - https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0..._view=net_1mth

[DMT]

You keep repeating this falsehood, so I will keep correcting you. Trump has not created more jobs. In fact, 2017 was the worst year for job creation than each of the previous four years.

Net Jobs Created by Year:
2013: 2.30 M
2014: 3.01 M
2015: 2.71 M
2016: 2.34 M
2017: 2.19 M

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics - https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0..._view=net_1mth

So aggravating, thanks for posting facts.

[Sour Masher]

So aggravating, thanks for posting facts.

We live in a post-facts world.

[onejayhawk]

You keep repeating this falsehood, so I will keep correcting you. Trump has not created more jobs. In fact, 2017 was the worst year for job creation than each of the previous four years.

Net Jobs Created by Year:
2013: 2.30 M
2014: 3.01 M
2015: 2.71 M
2016: 2.34 M
2017: 2.19 M

Those number support my position. Why do you say otherwise?

Granted the pace is slowing but that was expected as unemployment hit multi-decade lows. Women and minorities are doing particularly well. Trump's numbers are in line with Obama's.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-unemployment-falls-48-low-september-134459490.html

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-scoreboard-total-jobs-created-approaches-4-million-as-wage-growth-still-lags-2018-10-05

If you want to give Obama his due, fine. He deserves the credit but so does Trump. This far into a recovery we often see job contraction.

J