Jump to content


The 2022 Congressional Elections


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

 

It's pretty telling that only 30% of White Americans - who largely comprise rural America - want to overturn Roe. 

 

And yet our minority party and their tame SC Justices are going to do just that. 

 

I can't wait for the Democrats to fumble that gift like Niles Paul on the way to the end zone against Iowa State in 2009. 

 

 

Did you have to share that video - it brought up suppressed anxiety and will induce :ahhhhhhhh nightmares.      Amazing the # of fumbles just in fromt of our end zone. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Oh Yeah! 1
Link to comment

PA is looking like a wild card for the GOP.  You have Dr Oz and former Gov duking it out and along comes a Ultra Mega candidate who

has the momentum and may win this thing.  I'm not sure who is on the Dem side but after all of the trials the GOP put PA through in 2022, the voters may

not be in the mood for an ultra mega GOP candidate thus spoiling The Turtle's dream of becoming Majority leader once again. 

 

 

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/12/gop-panics-pa-senate-wild-card-kathy-barnette

 

This is the video that is propelling her

 

 

 

Link to comment
42 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Dems have media outlets that lean their way.  However, they don't have the complete machine of disinformation working like the Repubs.  So, let's say the Dems are going to do everything they can to be honest about issues and push for these issues that supposedly a majority of Americans want?  How do they get around the disinformation to gain more power to get it done?

 

 

You don't even need to stoop down nearly as low as the Republican Outrage Machine™‬ to do so much better in this regard if you're the Democratic party.

 

Let's take one easy example. Veterans. In isolated environments dems have good talking points about helping veterans, but so does the GOP. So what do you do? You can lie and spread misinformation everywhere, or you can just get better at telling simple truths and telling them loudly.

 

"The GOP does not support veterans. Veterans, every chance they get republican politicians vote against your health and safety. We're trying to make sure you're set up for a good life after you serve this country but these people are making it impossible. Every time we try to extend your health coverage they try and block it. We have a bill ready to guarantee you are protected, but they keep trying to stop us from getting it through and stopping you from being able to be healthy."

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Hurricane that hit Puerto Rico.  He went down there and had a photo op talking to some people.  Then, started "distributing" paper towels.

 

I think this was the same trip where the only thing he did was tell them they are too corrupt to get money.

Thanks. I was genuinely curious. That sounds like Trump. He was probably right about the corruption, but we could also look in the mirror.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
59 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

PA is looking like a wild card for the GOP.  You have Dr Oz and former Gov duking it out and along comes a Ultra Mega candidate who

has the momentum and may win this thing.  I'm not sure who is on the Dem side but after all of the trials the GOP put PA through in 2022, the voters may

not be in the mood for an ultra mega GOP candidate thus spoiling The Turtle's dream of becoming Majority leader once again. 

 

 

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/12/gop-panics-pa-senate-wild-card-kathy-barnette

 

This is the video that is propelling her

 

 

 

 

She sounds like a MAGA dream come true.

Link to comment

1 hour ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

Enacting would be great, but that's not even what we're talking about here. 

 

This convo started with knapplc saying "voters are tired of Democrats sitting on their hands", and a tweet expressing that voters need to see fight and conviction. This is about the marketing and visibility game.

 

The Democrats are constantly losing the messaging game, which is one cog in the machine that leads to their awful election results. One guaranteed way to make sure you won't accomplish something is if you don't even try. Reframe the narrative. Put things to votes so you can point to people voting against it. Come up with new talking points. Fill the media with the benefits and the messaging of your goal. Create the impression that you are trying like hell to actually get this done and the people not on board are the ones standing in the way of voters having their student loans forgiven or better access to healthcare or whatever, instead of accepting defeat in the public eye by either ignoring or being weeks late in addressing the misinformation and spin from your opponents. 

 

Progressive folks want to see some actual teeth to progressive politics.

 

 

I get what you're saying, but it's just way more difficult for them. Their voting coalition is broad, so any issue is stretched and framed in a way that quickly sounds stupid.

 

Student loan forgiveness - which I think is bad policy to begin with - has to be framed as "social justice" or a way to close "racial wealth gap" or "female wealth gap". The narrative has to check all the boxes for their minority and female voting base, and as a result alienates their Union Blue Collar bloc. If they don't reframe policy as some form of "social justice" their base will be upset and Congressmen/Senators will be primaried by somebody who uses that messaging.

 

Lastly, what progressive folks need to understand is that passing what they want simply isn't going to happen. They need to immediately face that reality. The geographic nature of our electoral institutions is simply not going to allow the Warren/Sanders wing of the party to get what they want. Democrats are essentially going to have to go back to Clinton/Obama policy positions, however, their electoral position is so apocalyptic I'm not sure they can do anything that will yield tangible results.

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I get what you're saying, but it's just way more difficult for them. Their voting coalition is broad, so any issue is stretched and framed in a way that quickly sounds stupid.

 

Student loan forgiveness - which I think is bad policy to begin with - has to be framed as "social justice" or a way to close "racial wealth gap" or "female wealth gap". The narrative has to check all the boxes for their minority and female voting base, and as a result alienates their Union Blue Collar bloc. If they don't reframe policy as some form of "social justice" their base will be upset and Congressmen/Senators will be primaried by somebody who uses that messaging.

 

Lastly, what progressive folks need to understand is that passing what they want simply isn't going to happen. They need to immediately face that reality. The geographic nature of our electoral institutions is simply not going to allow the Warren/Sanders wing of the party to get what they want. Democrats are essentially going to have to go back to Clinton/Obama policy positions, however, their electoral position is so apocalyptic I'm not sure they can do anything that will yield tangible results.

 

 

It's a complicated game but they're certainly not putting their best foot forward and constantly shooting themselves in the foot by A) not being willing to be louder and more pissed off about issues and B ) trying to be everything to everybody (except somehow some bases that they could make a dent in but choose not to even try for).

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Lastly, what progressive folks need to understand is that passing what they want simply isn't going to happen. They need to immediately face that reality. The geographic nature of our electoral institutions is simply not going to allow the Warren/Sanders wing of the party to get what they want. Democrats are essentially going to have to go back to Clinton/Obama policy positions, however, their electoral position is so apocalyptic I'm not sure they can do anything that will yield tangible results.

It's an interesting take. But after watching the Dems fade for decades following the Clinton/Obama strategy, seems like continuing to do that is approaching Einstein's definition of insanity.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

 

It's pretty telling that only 30% of White Americans - who largely comprise rural America - want to overturn Roe. 

 

And yet our minority party and their tame SC Justices are going to do just that. 

 

I can't wait for the Democrats to fumble that gift like Niles Paul on the way to the end zone against Iowa State in 2009. 

 

 

 

Alright mods if this post isn't bannable either nothing is or you just don't care anymore.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
8 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

Enacting would be great, but that's not even what we're talking about here. 

 

This convo started with knapplc saying "voters are tired of Democrats sitting on their hands", and a tweet expressing that voters need to see fight and conviction. This is about the marketing and visibility game.

 

The Democrats are constantly losing the messaging game, which is one cog in the machine that leads to their awful election results. One guaranteed way to make sure you won't accomplish something is if you don't even try. Reframe the narrative. Put things to votes so you can point to people voting against it. Come up with new talking points. Fill the media with the benefits and the messaging of your goal. Create the impression that you are trying like hell to actually get this done and the people not on board are the ones standing in the way of voters having their student loans forgiven or better access to healthcare or whatever, instead of accepting defeat in the public eye by either ignoring or being weeks late in addressing the misinformation and spin from your opponents. 

 

Progressive folks want to see some actual teeth to progressive politics.

 

 

One example

 

 

Link to comment

16 hours ago, RedDenver said:

It's an interesting take. But after watching the Dems fade for decades following the Clinton/Obama strategy, seems like continuing to do that is approaching Einstein's definition of insanity.

I don't think they have a choice. Democrats won't be able to win Electoral College victories by dominating cities. Moderating on issues gives them a chance to win in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. If they don't, and current trends continue, those states are going to be lost to them just like Ohio and Iowa.

 

17 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

It's a complicated game but they're certainly not putting their best foot forward and constantly shooting themselves in the foot by A) not being willing to be louder and more pissed off about issues and B ) trying to be everything to everybody (except somehow some bases that they could make a dent in but choose not to even try for).

Yeah, I agree they could do a better job. But their coalition makes it hard. If they get pissed off about issues that appeal to their college educated whites base, it alienates their working class white and minority wings. 

 

If they want to go offensive on issues that appeal to their minority wing, it alienates their working class wing. Finding a message to go on the offensive that appeals to their 3 main coalitions is mostly impossible. 

 

They probably need to dilute their platform down to raising taxes on the wealthy and focusing on their policies that improve the safety net. Any messaging with terms like "social justice" or "latinx" or anything similar needs to be tossed into the nearest supermassive black hole. Although I doubt the progressive wing lets them.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

  

21 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Which is what??  Define that strategy IYHO. 

Commonly known as "third way" - basically try to split the differences between the GOP and Dem parties.

 

The good part is that it's basically a compromise between positions, so it's theoretically a "centrist" position between the parties. And because it's between the parties, it should get a lot of votes if there's a lot of people between the party positions.

 

The bad part is that if one side remains entrenched or moves to more extreme positions, then the third way approach moves their party towards that extreme, so over time it's no longer "centrist" like it started out, which is why we're getting Dem politicians that look more and more like Repubs from the 80's. And it encourages more extreme positions by the party that the third way is moving towards in order to distinguish themselves from the third way positions. The position being left behind (the left in this case) gets less and less representation and therefore less supportive of the third way candidates and party. Also, in the current politics of strong partisanship, being between the parties doesn't actually garner as many votes as it once did.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I don't think they have a choice. Democrats won't be able to win Electoral College victories by dominating cities. Moderating on issues gives them a chance to win in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. If they don't, and current trends continue, those states are going to be lost to them just like Ohio and Iowa.

That assumes that the left cannot appeal to rural voters, which I think they could if they focus on taxing the wealthy and safety nets and other popular policies. But pthe partisan divide is very strong now, so might be impossible for anything the Dems do to sway rural voters.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

  

Commonly known as "third way" - basically try to split the differences between the GOP and Dem parties.

 

The good part is that it's basically a compromise between positions, so it's theoretically a "centrist" position between the parties. And because it's between the parties, it should get a lot of votes if there's a lot of people between the party positions.

 

The bad part is that if one side remains entrenched or moves to more extreme positions, then the third way approach moves their party towards that extreme, so over time it's no longer "centrist" like it started out, which is why we're getting Dem politicians that look more and more like Repubs from the 80's. And it encourages more extreme positions by the party that the third way is moving towards in order to distinguish themselves from the third way positions. The position being left behind (the left in this case) gets less and less representation and therefore less supportive of the third way candidates and party. Also, in the current politics of strong partisanship, being between the parties doesn't actually garner as many votes as it once did.

You’re not making sense. 
 

you’re saying, a lot of bites are centrist so governing as a centrist is bad because the party moves away from centrists, to the extreme, to get away from the centrists where the votes are. 

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
  • Create New...