billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 25, 2022 8:10:34 GMT -5
It isn't "rally the troops" if by troops you mean voters. I encourage a (re?)-reading of the article. agree with bills. there is a concerted effort to tilt the election. Democrats can defeat it by getting out the vote. Senator Warren is not talking about voter turnout. She is calling for Democratic elected official to get off their rear ends and pass legislation that addresses issues effecting citizens. Turnout would then take care of itself.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 25, 2022 8:23:23 GMT -5
Balanced in all states, not just in some states. The article points out that this is not necessarily happening. There is more gerrymandering being allowed in red states. Also: State redistricting commissions, largely pushed by Democrats as a brake on political gerrymandering, now are preventing the party from capitalizing on the past decade’s population boom among city dwellers and minorities, who traditionally vote Democratic.
In many Republican-dominated states without such panels, GOP lawmakers are freely drawing maps that would give their party more congressional and state legislative seats. Democrats in some purple or left-leaning states, meanwhile, find themselves hampered by commissions that are giving Republicans political parity that belies the growth in Democratic-leaning populations. Bipartisan Commissions Cause Redistricting Pain for Democrats balanced meaning that it is just as fucked up in some states as others, in the opposite direction. i think this problem was worse 10 years ago than it is now, and it is improving. anything that indicates otherwise should probably get it's own thread. If I post in a separate thread a new link to the article ( Opinion: Gerrymandering on steroids is the new normal) that I previously posted that cites the proof it is not improving, will you read it there?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on Apr 25, 2022 8:53:56 GMT -5
i think there is a slow erosion, particularly of enthusiasm for that gasbag. Could be true. Has anyone noticed Trump is pretty much been taken out of the breaking news feeds lately? Unless it has to do with the Congressional investigation you do not see much of him in the news feeds, or the article dies hours after posted on the website. He is nowhere even on national news orgsnizations on the nightly news on current events. Only the stories from his Presidency are talked about these days. This isn’t a story about the 2020 election. This is a news story about how a Trump approved candidate meant to kick the GA Governor out of office on his ear is failing to find traction in advance of the 2022 midterm election cycle. That’s why I posted it in the 2022 midterm thread. Although you are right, in that Trump only seems to talk about the 2020 election, and only supports candidates who say the think he won the 2020 election. IMHO this is a big reason that some of his picks are floundering - even the MAGA minions are getting tired of hearing about the 2020 election.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,603
|
Post by Tennesseer on Apr 25, 2022 16:39:47 GMT -5
i think there is a slow erosion, particularly of enthusiasm for that gasbag. Could be true. Has anyone noticed Trump is pretty much been taken out of the breaking news feeds lately? Unless it has to do with the Congressional investigation you do not see much of him in the news feeds, or the article dies hours after posted on the website. He is nowhere even on national news orgsnizations on the nightly news on current events. Only the stories from his Presidency are talked about these days. "He has been so disrespectful to the country and I think he's an embarrassment' said the biggest embarrassment ever to the United States. Trump says Prince Harry is "whipped" by Meghan Markle and queen should have stripped them of their titlesFormer President Donald Trump has shared his opinion on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's high-profile relationship, saying the prince is "whipped." Trump made the comments during a contentious interview with British TV host Piers Morgan, during which the former president appears to end the chat early, according to a teaser Morgan shared — but which Trump disputed. "Harry is whipped, do you know the expression?" Mr. Trump said to Morgan, who replied that he's familiar with the phrase. "I won't use the full expression, but Harry is whipped like no person I think I've ever seen," Trump continued. "I'm not a fan of Meghan, I'm not a fan, and I wasn't right from the beginning. I think poor Harry is being led around by his nose.'' "Do you think it's going to end?" the controversial host asked. "I do, I've been a very good predictor, as you know, I've predicted almost everything, it'll end, and it'll end bad," the former president replied. "I wonder if Harry's going to go back on his hands and knees and say please. You know, I think Harry's been led down a path." Morgan has repeatedly criticized the Duchess of Sussex, with whom he had a brief friendship prior to her dating Harry. Meghan and Harry famously stepped down from their roles as senior royals in 2020 and moved to California. In September 2020, then-President Trump said during a press conference that he's "not a fan" of Meghan. During a White House briefing, a reporter asked him about the couple, who were encouraging Americans to register to vote ahead of the 2020 presidential election. "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election and essentially encouraged people to vote for Joe Biden. I wanted to get your reaction to that," the reporter asked. "I'm not a fan of hers, and I would say this — and she probably has heard that — but, I wish a lot of luck to Harry, because he's going to need it," Trump replied. In the interview, Morgan asked Trump if he'd remove Harry and Meghan's royal title if he were Queen Elizabeth II. "I would, the only thing I disagree with the queen on, probably one of the only things ever, is that I think she should have said, 'If that's your choice fine, but you no longer have titles and frankly don't come around,'" Trump said. "He has been so disrespectful to the country and I think he's an embarrassment." Trump says Prince Harry is "whipped" by Meghan Markle and queen should have stripped them of their titles
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on Apr 26, 2022 6:32:12 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 27, 2022 11:51:49 GMT -5
i am not going to prognosticate about Trump on this thread. i will say that i HOPE he is in jail in 2024, but i am not sure that will keep him from running.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on Apr 27, 2022 12:44:10 GMT -5
He’s picking people to endorse based on how well they parrot his outrage over 2020, not on how good they are as politicians. Just because Trump endorses them is not going to guarantee they win. Look at JD Vance, Dr Oz, Perdue.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 27, 2022 17:19:23 GMT -5
it looks like Democrats hit their nadir about a week ago, doubling the low they hit in Feb, of 1:2 odds of winning the House. they are now up a few percent, and about where they averaged the year. NOTE: Democrats have not been over a 2:5 longshot during this election cycle. in other words, the GOP has been favored to win the House since 2021, and is still favored to win. it would take roughly six weeks for Democats to close the gap at the rate they have gained in the last week. but don't count on it. edit: although it is only a small move, it changes how the website tracking this categorizes the overall race to win the House. it has gone from "Tilt Republican" to "Tossup". the Senate race has been "Tossup" all year. Democrats have not been higher than 58% odds of winning and the GOP, not higher than 53%. it could come down to something last minute for either side.
|
|
gacpa
Familiar Member
Joined: Nov 19, 2013 16:08:06 GMT -5
Posts: 735
|
Post by gacpa on Apr 27, 2022 18:03:44 GMT -5
It is BEYOND disgusting to see Trump's ads here in GA supporting his "pick" for the governor, David Perdue. Both of them spout some of the most bold faced lies I have ever seen on TV. I hear Perdue is trailing badly and it is no wonder why. There is no discussion of issues, just whining about how the election was stolen from Trump and how voters cannot let it happen again. The rhetoric is just bad political theater, and I started hitting the mute button whenever they come on TV. If these two jokers are the best Republicans can do, they are doomed.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 27, 2022 18:39:52 GMT -5
just to clarify for those not watching closely, Perdue is running in a primary right? who are his opponents? and if he wins, who does he face?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,190
|
Post by tallguy on Apr 27, 2022 18:54:25 GMT -5
just to clarify for those not watching closely, Perdue is running in a primary right? who are his opponents? and if he wins, who does he face? Yes, it is the GOP primary for governor. Kemp is leading, apparently by quite a bit. Winner faces Abrams. Not sure if anyone else is even in the race for Democrats.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on Apr 27, 2022 18:58:29 GMT -5
just to clarify for those not watching closely, Perdue is running in a primary right? who are his opponents? and if he wins, who does he face? His biggest primary opponent is Kemp, the current governor and arch nemesis of Trump. Trump recruited Perdue specifically to defeat Kemp. And yes their ads are disgusting sacks of lies. Whoever wins faces Stacy Abrams, who is terrific at getting out the vote. I know Perdue is trailing Kemp but I haven’t seen any polls with Abrams yet. I’m hoping the death match between Kemp and Perdue will improve Abrams chances of defeating whoever wins the gop primary.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 27, 2022 19:14:53 GMT -5
ultimately, it won't matter much, so long as the maps get more balanced. NOTE: i have read the article, and many others like it. this is my opinion, perhaps not supported by fact. But if New York's gerrymander gets policed, and Florida goes wild, the equilibrium disappears. link New York's highest court blocked the state's Democratic-drawn congressional map Wednesday, concluding that the new boundaries represented a partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution. New York's highest court blocks Democratic-drawn congressional map over gerrymandering
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 27, 2022 19:31:42 GMT -5
i get your point, bills.
hear mine:
gerrymandering doesn't help you much unless you have an outright majority vote in a state. i realize that ON PAPER it helps in Florida. that is how it looks on paper right now. but in reality, it makes those gerrymandered districts fairly close. the idea is to create as many uncompetitive districts that you can, preferably ones that lean Republican. but this can backfire if you cut it close, and you have a bad year.
listen, i am the guy who was screaming and yelling about Project Red Map. i am fully aware of the case you are making. you don't need to bludgeon me about it. but i am not convinced it is going to work out for the GOP this year. of the 20 most competitive races, the GOP is hoping to flip four and Democrats one. that means that they are within 2% in TWENTY races, well over half of which are Republican seats. if Democrats could garner another 2% nationally, they would keep the House. how hard is that? i haven't the foggiest.
the number of variables makes me way less certain than you or the Times that Democrats actually have a problem this time. but it might be the case that they do. candidly, i am probably not going to even be around to vote in this one, and certainly not the next one, so i am losing interest in it. unfortunately for you, i am not sure anyone else is as interested as i am (and you are) currently. but you won't be getting much more debate out of me.
my conclusion is that i am no longer following it as closely as i once was, but i still don't think that Democrats have as much of a problem as do you and the NYT. i will add that i have been more or less correct about the Senate, particularly, in the last two cycles. but Gerrymandering doesn't really impact Senate races.
the House is currently too close to call, but it is swinging in the direction of Democrats, currently. i will have much stronger feelings in a couple of months how that will play out.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on Apr 27, 2022 20:42:14 GMT -5
i get your point, bills. hear mine: gerrymandering doesn't help you much unless you have an outright majority vote in a state. i realize that ON PAPER it helps in Florida. that is how it looks on paper right now. but in reality, it makes those gerrymandered districts fairly close. ; the idea is to create as many competitive districts that you can, preferably ones that lean Republican. but this can backfire if you cut it close, and you have a bad year. listen, i am the guy who was screaming and yelling about Project Red Map. i am fully aware of the case you are making. you don't need to bludgeon me about it. but i am not convinced it is going to work out for the GOP this year. of the 20 most competitive races, the GOP is hoping to flip four and Democrats one. that means that they are within 2% in TWENTY races, well over half of which are Republican seats. if Democrats could garner another 2% nationally, they would keep the House. how hard is that? i haven't the foggiest. the number of variables makes me way less certain than you or the Times that Democrats actually have a problem this time. but it might be the case that they do. candidly, i am probably not going to even be around to vote in this one, and certainly not the next one, so i am losing interest in it. unfortunately for you, i am not sure anyone else is as interested as i am (and you are) currently. but you won't be getting much more debate out of me. my conclusion is that i am no longer following it as closely as i once was, but i still don't think that Democrats have as much of a problem as do you and the NYT. i will add that i have been more or less correct about the Senate, particularly, in the last two cycles. but Gerrymandering doesn't really impact Senate races. the House is currently too close to call, but it is swinging in the direction of Democrats, currently. i will have much stronger feelings in a couple of months how that will play out. re: the bolded. That is not the actual goal of gerrymandering. The goal is to maximize the number of safe districts for the in group/minimize seats likely to be won by the out group. A state with approximately a fifty/fifty split can be gerrymandered into a seventy/ thirty advantage. This is done by concentrating out group voters into a small number of districts and a safe majority of in group voters in all the others.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Apr 28, 2022 11:54:48 GMT -5
i get your point, bills. hear mine: gerrymandering doesn't help you much unless you have an outright majority vote in a state. i realize that ON PAPER it helps in Florida. that is how it looks on paper right now. but in reality, it makes those gerrymandered districts fairly close. ; the idea is to create as many competitive districts that you can, preferably ones that lean Republican. but this can backfire if you cut it close, and you have a bad year. listen, i am the guy who was screaming and yelling about Project Red Map. i am fully aware of the case you are making. you don't need to bludgeon me about it. but i am not convinced it is going to work out for the GOP this year. of the 20 most competitive races, the GOP is hoping to flip four and Democrats one. that means that they are within 2% in TWENTY races, well over half of which are Republican seats. if Democrats could garner another 2% nationally, they would keep the House. how hard is that? i haven't the foggiest. the number of variables makes me way less certain than you or the Times that Democrats actually have a problem this time. but it might be the case that they do. candidly, i am probably not going to even be around to vote in this one, and certainly not the next one, so i am losing interest in it. unfortunately for you, i am not sure anyone else is as interested as i am (and you are) currently. but you won't be getting much more debate out of me. my conclusion is that i am no longer following it as closely as i once was, but i still don't think that Democrats have as much of a problem as do you and the NYT. i will add that i have been more or less correct about the Senate, particularly, in the last two cycles. but Gerrymandering doesn't really impact Senate races. the House is currently too close to call, but it is swinging in the direction of Democrats, currently. i will have much stronger feelings in a couple of months how that will play out. re: the bolded. i meant to say uncompetitive. my apologies. and the "preferably.." comment was a joke. apparently a bad one. what i am trying to say is that it doesn't really benefit you to try and get 100% GOP vote in a single district if you are trying to get GOP seats. rather, it behooves you to get as many 55% GOP districts as possible. but that can backfire if you lose by more than 5% in the GE.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on Apr 29, 2022 7:02:26 GMT -5
As of today, Trumps pick for GA Governor, Perdue, is running 25 points behind Trumps nemesis (the man he claims lost him the 2020 election in GA) Kemp.
Trump is a loser who picks losers.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 1, 2022 11:57:13 GMT -5
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 1, 2022 12:16:48 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on May 1, 2022 12:29:32 GMT -5
I just don't get your emotion based posting. How does this fact based report reflect the emotion felt by the presenter of the report?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on May 1, 2022 15:53:00 GMT -5
MTG was on a local PBS today in a debate with five other GOP hopefuls for the Georgia primary. Greene was loud, obnoxious and when one of the other candidates questioned why she was spending so much time traveling around to different states to rallies for candidates in those states (rather than working on issues that impact our district) she condescendingly lectured him about how the money she used to travel to different states wasn’t taxpayer dollars (She didn’t address how much of her time she wasted on it though). Predictably, she was the only person who tried to start a fight and the only person who got threatened with shutting off her microphone when she wouldn’t stop bitching. I have a little more hope for the GOP though. WHen the six candidates were asked if they believed Biden won the 2020 election, HALF said he won. Only two of the six (Greene of course, and one other guy) asserted Trump won and was cheated. Of the three who said Biden one, two of them said very plainly, there was no giant fraud, Biden is president, we need to get over 2020 and look at what we need to do in 2022 2024. That made me feel a little better. Greene was especially going after the other female candidate (She must be polling highest in the pack) and got pretty nasty with her, but the other lady didn’t lose her composure, and said she wasn’t running for office, she was running against the current office holder, Ms. Greene (that was when Greene almost got her microphone cut off, if I remember right). So I looked at the current polling numbers - Greene is at 60 % and the female candidate (Jennifer Strahan) was at 30, but when the poll listed some of the things Green has done, like being anti-Semitic, Greene’s number went to 41%. So if Strahan gets out more commercials and fliers listing what a jerk Greene is, she might have a shot. Fingers crossed. jewishinsider.com/2022/01/marjorie-taylor-greene-jennifer-strahan-poll-georgia-congress/
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,510
|
Post by tbop77 on May 2, 2022 6:36:22 GMT -5
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 2, 2022 12:17:40 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 2, 2022 15:33:34 GMT -5
i think it is hilarious when people report on Democrats losing either the black or jewish vote.
when was the last time that blacks voted in plurality for Republicans? 1960 or something?
when was the last time Jews did it? 1860 or something?
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 2, 2022 22:07:28 GMT -5
i think it is hilarious when people report on Democrats losing either the black or jewish vote. when was the last time that blacks voted in plurality for Republicans? 1960 or something? when was the last time Jews did it? 1860 or something? 1860.....what was the Jewish population back then? You do not have to lose the black vote. you only have to lose maybe 20% of it to swing the Presidency towards the Republican Presidential winner. Even Trump sllightly increased his black vote total from 2016, and democrats were shocked. Now democrats are losing some of the Spanish surname faction. Turns out both voting blocks have a block of voters more conservative in nature than the present Democratic Party, especially the older generations which tend to vote regularly every two years, and want safe neighborhoods, strong educational schoold for the children, a strong economy, and low inflation. The Spanish surname group even favors a somewhat stable border with proper immigration entrance to the states.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,771
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 2, 2022 22:12:59 GMT -5
Given what the Supreme Court appears poised to do, they may have just guaranteed higher than average Dem turnout.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 2, 2022 22:17:58 GMT -5
Given what the Supreme Court appears poised to do, they may have just guaranteed higher than average Dem turnout. Agree 100%
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,771
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 2, 2022 22:21:44 GMT -5
i think it is hilarious when people report on Democrats losing either the black or jewish vote. when was the last time that blacks voted in plurality for Republicans? 1960 or something? when was the last time Jews did it? 1860 or something? 1860.....what was the Jewish population back then? You do not have to lose the black vote. you only have to lose maybe 20% of it to swing the Presidency towards the Republican Presidential winner. Even Trump sllightly increased his black vote total from 2016, and democrats were shocked. Now democrats are losing some of the Spanish surname faction. Turns out both voting blocks have a block of voters more conservative in nature than the present Democratic Party, especially the older generations which tend to vote regularly every two years, and want safe neighborhoods, strong educational schoold for the children, a strong economy, and low inflation. The Spanish surname group even favors a somewhat stable border with proper immigration entrance to the states. Interesting thing to note looking at these stats. Biden only lost 3% of the black male vote but Trump picked up more than that. Part of that difference was fewer blacks chose to vote for a candidate other than the two main party ones. Scroll down quite a bit in the article to find the racial demographic bar graphs. www.businessinsider.com/2016-2020-electoral-maps-exit-polls-compared-2020-11#black-women-overwhelmingly-voted-for-the-democratic-nominee-in-both-elections-as-did-other-voters-of-color-but-trump-captured-the-majority-of-both-white-women-and-white-men-7
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,925
|
Post by happyhoix on May 3, 2022 10:21:58 GMT -5
Given what the Supreme Court appears poised to do, they may have just guaranteed higher than average Dem turnout. Yep. Lot of furious younger voters who may not have bothered to vote before may now find the motivation.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,225
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 3, 2022 12:29:05 GMT -5
i think it is hilarious when people report on Democrats losing either the black or jewish vote. when was the last time that blacks voted in plurality for Republicans? 1960 or something? when was the last time Jews did it? 1860 or something? You do not have to lose the black vote. you only have to lose maybe 20% of it to swing the Presidency towards the Republican Presidential winner. Even Trump sllightly increased his black vote total from 2016, and democrats were shocked. Now democrats are losing some of the Spanish surname faction. Turns out both voting blocks have a block of voters more conservative in nature than the present Democratic Party, especially the older generations which tend to vote regularly every two years, and want safe neighborhoods, strong educational schoold for the children, a strong economy, and low inflation. The Spanish surname group even favors a somewhat stable border with proper immigration entrance to the states. i'd be more concerned about gaining 2% of the white vote, which seems far more likely to me, than losing 20% of the black vote. i would be more concerned about the fact that older white Republican voters were the highest mortality of covid, and that boomers are losing their place on the voting mantle to millenials. but i probably should not even be engaging in this topic though. candidly, i care very little about what happens in 2024 for my own sake. speaking of Spain, is Biden responsible for Spanish inflation?
|
|