Donald Trump has a habit of talking about women as objects that he's just certain is appealing to them, even when he's trying to...
It took Republicans and their need to please Trump to invent the term “electoral college landslide” to describe one of the closest elections in American history, one in which Trump came in second with respect to total votes. I find it critical to remember how narrowly Trump won, because it is easy to forget. He governs like he was unanimously elected, and anyone arguing otherwise is citing “fake news.” Thus it is, that when AP has a report that Trump is in major trouble in Iowa, a state he won comfortably, it is extremely significant. Per Rawstory: In 2016 Trump easily defeated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Iowa, wrapping up 93 of Iowa’s 99 counties, but times have changed. According to former Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsak, “They’ve gone too far to the right and there is the slow movement back. This is an actual correction.” Umm, only if you view “too far right” as synonymous with “insane” and “tariff-crazed.” Iowa has perhaps suffered the greatest damage under Trump’s “easy to win” tariff war with China, and I suspect they don’t appreciate it. But the damage is not coming from the agricultural communities so much as from the suburbs and exurbs. “Iowa’s metropolitan areas, some of the fastest growing in the country over the past two decades, have given birth to a new political front where Democrats saw gains in 2018. The once-GOP-leaning suburbs and exurbs, especially to the north and west of Des Moines and the corridor linking Cedar Rapids and the University of Iowa in Iowa City, swelled with college-educated adults in the past decade, giving rise to a new class of rising Democratic leaders.” The consensus is that “Iowa is in play.” Iowa has only six electoral votes, and will likely not swing the election on its own. But the lesson is in the emerging importance of those darn suburbs, with those college-educated people who aren’t as racist, watch the news and don’t particularly like Trump. Iowa has growing suburbs and it is giving Trump’s campaign problems. Wanna know another state with lots of suburbs and soccer moms that aren’t racist? Texas. Yes, Texas. It has become increasingly purple, and though no Democrat has won Texas since LBJ, the 2020 Democratic nominee has a chance at winning Texas for the same reason that Iowa may be in play. Simply put, Texas swung way to the left in 2018, and may be poised to go further in 2020. The state’s increasing competitiveness is due in part to its diversifying population, since people of color are more likely to support Democrats. The Census Bureau data put the state’s Hispanic population at nearly 40 percent. Trump is also struggling to win over higher-educated and wealthier voters in the suburbs. Immigration will likely continue to be a top issue for voters in the border state. When you put Hispanic immigrant children in cages, and then campaign in a state that is 40% Hispanic, you are going to have – deservedly so – huge problems. And here’s the good part, if Texas goes Democratic, forget Republican presidents for a long time. Texas has 38 electoral votes, second only to California. The reliably Republican nature of Texas has almost offset the advantage that Democrats have in California. If Republicans now lose Texas, […]
I never seen such a thing! Moe Howard Politics has a lot of old sayings and old traditions, mainly because it’s so old. And one of the most universally understood and accepted traditions is that there’s just something about presidential elections. Never mind that congress actually does the heavy lifting, having that name at the top of the ticket makes all the difference in the world. In fact, wide swaths of voters in both parties simply sit at home and skip the midterm elections for the simple reason that there’s no president on the ballot. Because of that fact, a great deal of care goes into selecting the presidential candidate. And not just in hopes of winning the presidency. The old adage is that a strong, popular candidate at the top of the ticket can bring out voters who might not show up otherwise, and that effect will help all of the candidates in that party down ballot. That actually makes a lot of sense, and that’s probably why it’s pretty well accepted. But because I’m so closely involved in observing this glorious combat on a daily basis, I pick things up. And after the results of last nights off year elections in Virginia and Kentucky, I noticed something, a pattern. So I stepped back and looked at it through a wider lens, over a longer period of time. And I’m seeing a pattern that I think may show that the outcome of the 2020 presidential election may be unlike anything we’ve ever seen before in terms of the ultimate decider. In 2016, with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on the ballot, nationwide the Democrats beat the GOP in the popular vote by almost 3 million votes. But the very next year, in 2017, with no presidential candidate on the ballot, the Democrats in Virginia out polled the GOP statewide by more than 200,000 votes, literally coming within a random name draw of tying the House of Delegates. In 2018, with no presidential name on the ballot, the Democrats flipped 40 seats, and more than doubled their nationwide vote domination over the GOP. And last night, in Virginia and Kentucky, once again with no presidential name on the ballot, the Democrats completed the statewide sweep of Virginia government, and flipped a governor’s seat in a state that Trump won by 30+ points in 2016. You all know my old saying, once is an accident, twice is a habit, and three times is a fetish. How in the hell did the Democrats manage to maintain that momentum, to keep driving large numbers of voters out to the polls year after year, with no presidential candidate to drive enthusiasm? Well, they did it the old fashioned way, with qualified, personable candidates, and good old fashioned sweat equity. They built their campaigns from the ground up, with grassroots support, and maintained their independence in the minds of voters. They talked to anybody, any time, anywhere. And they knocked on doors. Lordy, did they knock on doors. One woman running for a delegates seat in Virginia literally dropped 15 lbs from the simple effort of knocking on as many doors every day as her legs and knuckles would tolerate. Oh, and my personal favorite, the woman who went viral and got fired from her job for flipping […]
According to a new story in the Washington Post, of the Republican congresscritters in office on the day that Donald Trump was sworn-in, 40% are gone, either voluntarily, or beaten in an election. Only the White House can outdo that kind of turnover. Congressional turnover like this is unprecedented, and it continues. A total of 18 Republicans, so far, have announced they are leaving office prior to the 2020 election. The number includes Paul Mitchell, a Michigan Republican who told the Post that he cannot deal with Trump’s antics any longer. Mitchell even attempted to meet with Trump to express his “concerns,” but: It never happened. And 10 days after the Trump tweet, Mitchell — a two-term lawmaker who thought he’d be in Congress for years to come — announced his retirement. “We’re here for a purpose — and it’s not this petty, childish b——t,” Mitchell, 62, said in an interview inearly September. Pence’s office declined to comment. It appears that no one is fooling anyone among the Republican party. After all, this man knew “bullshit” when he saw it. Then Pence’s office refused to set up a meeting between Congressman Mitchell and Trump, proving Pence’s office knew what would result, Trump hearing the truth. No, no one fooled anyone. Speaking of not fooling anyone, the Post notes that most Republicans cite “family” as the reason for stepping down, however: But behind the scenes Republicans say the trend highlights a greater pessimism about the direction of the party under Trump — and their ability to win back the House next year. The president has doubled down on an all-base strategy for his reelection campaign, making some Republicans ask whether Trump has put his own political future ahead of the long-term viability of the party of Abraham Lincoln. Trump only knows division. He has never united anything in his life. Perhaps Trump will continue to divide the Republican party into oblivion, making it a regional minority party. “Unless we figure out exactly how we’re going to win back suburban voters, we’re going to be in the minority for a while,” said a GOP leadership aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk frankly. The aide said such knowledge has been driving many of the recent retirements: “I think a lot of members are pretty nervous that Trump doesn’t win reelection. And then we’re in the minority and we have a Democrat in the White House. . . . We’re in the wilderness right now, but if you lose the White House, then that is the extreme wilderness.” “Extreme Wilderness?” Well, that’s when you rely on your friends. I am sure Trump will be more than happy to help everyone out. Trump’s always been about keeping people together, never letting anyone fall behind, all for a greater cause, right? Trump being “for other people” is uproariously funny, except for the fact that “we” are supposed to be among the people he cares about, “we Americans.” Unlike Republicans in Congress, we cannot retire. **** Peace, y’all Jason firstname.lastname@example.org
As Donald Trump pulls out every nationalistic xenophobic trick in his political playbook, House Republicans in suburban swing districts are taking a beating this...
Back in 2016, just before the election, there were rumors about a server in Trump Tower possibly connecting to...