OKAY you folks just aren't trying at all- Page 2

[javero]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 8:17am

My dream ticket in 2020 would be former Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm/Tim Ryan bu it's my understanding that she's ineligible due to some born in Canada rule that didn't apply to Ted Cruz.  I'd love to see them take the fight to the GOP in the Rust Belt.  Hopefully, the next Democratic potus will nominate Granholm to serve as her or his Secretary of State.  I cringe every time I hear Rex Tillerson utter some more nonsense.

[Miss American]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 9:04am

sabrelady said: "Miss American said: "OKAY lady you are just an idiot thank you"

Hey there MISS-y that's SABRElady to you  (& yes I can use one!)

Go stand in a corner and WORK on your repartee cos right now it's up there w President Caligula ( and to be clear- that ain't a compliment)

 

Hush now. You can't say a jump from 20 points to 4 points in a district that's been Republican for nearly half a century means "folks just aren't trying at all."  Well, I guess you CAN, but it's a scorchingly hot take from someme who doesn't seem to have the firmest grasp on how the American political system works.

 

And I don't understand what using a saber has to do with anything, unless you're making a threat?

 

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 10:03am

Trump didn't win this district by 20+ points last fall; he won it by barely over a point. Handel increased that Republican victory margin. 

[South Florida]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 10:28am

He decreased the gap in the congressional race Concierge.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 10:36am

What? You mean compared to Price's reelection last year? Well, duh. I'm saying that some people believe that Trump handily took the district in the presidential race last year (which would suggest that Democrats have gained traction there over the past eight months). And that isn't true. 

[Miss American]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 10:39am

Thank you, South Florida.  One would have thought between the discussion in the thread and the fact I mentioned the district, it would have been enough to make people understand what I was saying, but I should remember that some people have to have things spelled out.  That's assuming they aren't just being disingenuous in the first place, which, sadly, has often been my expeirence with GOP defenders like Broadway Concierge.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 10:41am

My mistake for misreading the race you were discussing. The incorrect comparisons to last year's presidential election isn't something I made up, though: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/jun/21/joy-reid/joy-ann-reid-mistakes-size-trump-victory-georgia-d/

[adamgreer]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 12:23pm

So, BC, you supported the candidacy of Miss Handel, I take it? Despite that fact that she states unequivocally that she didn't believe in a living wage? Or the fact that she stated flatly that she doesn't believe in gay adoption?

[kdogg36]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 12:41pm

Miss American said: "Thank you, South Florida.  One would have thought between the discussion in the thread and the fact I mentioned the district, it would have been enough to make people understand what I was saying, but I should remember that some people have to have things spelled out.  That's assuming they aren't just being disingenuous in the first place, which, sadly, has often been my expeirence with GOP defenders like Broadway Concierge."

GOP hater here. The point of comparing Trump's margin to Handel's margin is that the Democrats aren't doing a very good job putting up an effective opposition to Trump. In an off-year election like this, I'd normally expect the opposition party to outperform their party's previous presidential candidate.

It makes little sense to compare this election to the previous regular election in that district, because at that time the GOP was the opposition party, and I'd expect them to do better than average.

 

Updated On: 6/22/17 at 12:41 PM

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 12:47pm

I didn't join this conversation to discuss policy stances, especially from virtue signallers such as yourself, adamgreer. But good try.

[Miss American]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 1:02pm

So you joined it to carry water for the GOP but not for their policies? Hmm. 

kdogg, they overperforned in a seat that was put in play because the GOP specifically thought it would a cakewalk.  I don't understand how this race or any other since 2016 can suggest that 6 months into his term that the Democrats aren't putting up effective opposition, when you consider they are contending with gerrymandering and voter suppression, not to mention a seat in the South that was all but impossible to win.  

 

[kdogg36]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 1:13pm

Well, I also say it as someone who is not a Democrat or traditionally a Democratic voter, but someone who is very open to persuasion in the era of Trump. Offer me a real alternative to the authoritarianism of Trump by advocating vocally for freer immigration, less warfare, and an end to the war on drugs, and they'll have my vote, despite many differences in other areas.

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 1:23pm

kdogg36 said: GOP hater here. The point of comparing Trump's margin to Handel's margin is that the Democrats aren't doing a very good job putting up an effective opposition to Trump. In an off-year election like this, I'd normally expect the opposition party to outperform their party's previous presidential candidate.

It makes little sense to compare this election to the previous regular election in that district, because at that time the GOP was the opposition party, and I'd expect them to do better than average."

 

In 2009, Democrats won all 5 special elections. We all know how 2010 turned out for them. 

[adamgreer]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 1:50pm

BroadwayConcierge said: "I didn't join this conversation to discuss policy stances, especially from virtue signallers such as yourself, adamgreer. But good try.

 

Typical. Their positions are indefensible so you continue to avoid the questions you don't want to answer. So continue with your s h i t stirring. 

Updated On: 6/22/17 at 01:50 PM

[adamgreer]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 1:52pm

Miss American said: "So you joined it to carry water for the GOP but not for their policies? Hmmm..
 

 

That's what he always does. He knows there's no defending these people so he tries to speak in generalities. When you attempt to nail him down to a position and ask him to defend his previous GOP, he takes on his holier than thou attitude. 

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 3:19pm

UncleCharlie said: "javero said: "ETA: Yes, Pelosi is the elephant in the room.  You Dems will have to deal with her sooner or later.  It defies all logic that Congressman Tim Ryan of OH was not bumped up to the leadership position to make him a prime running mate for the Dem's nominee in 2020."

As I said in a previous thread on Pelosi, after the 2016 generals, she should have acknowledged the defeat, owned it and stepped aside but she's too focused on maintaining power. She is clearly a liability at this point. They need to push her aside for the good of the party but no one has the guts."

 

This "Pelosi is a liability" crap reminds that if conservatives demonize and tear down a successful woman enough, self-proclaimed liberals/progressives will eventually join in.

[kdogg36]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 4:38pm

LYLS3637 said: "This "Pelosi is a liability" crap reminds that if conservatives demonize and tear down a successful woman enough, self-proclaimed liberals/progressives will eventually join in."

I know it's the other chamber, but I'd love to see Elizabeth Warren - who really does try to offer a full-throated alternative to Trump's nonsense - become the public leader of the party. 

I realize there's rampant sexism, especially in politics, but that doesn't hold water here. Pelosi is not offering exciting ideas, and I don't think she has the temperament to make people excited about them anyhow. That's not because of her sex.

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 4:48pm

LYLS3637 said: "UncleCharlie said: "javero said: "ETA: Yes, Pelosi is the elephant in the room.  You Dems will have to deal with her sooner or later.  It defies all logic that Congressman Tim Ryan of OH was not bumped up to the leadership position to make him a prime running mate for the Dem's nominee in 2020."

As I said in a previous thread on Pelosi, after the 2016 generals, she should have acknowledged the defeat, owned it and stepped aside but she's too focused on maintaining power. She is clearly a liability at this point. They need to push her aside for the good of the party but no one has the guts."

 

This "Pelosi is a liability" crap reminds that if conservatives demonize and tear down a successful woman enough, self-proclaimed liberals/progressives will eventually join in.

 

You think this is about demonizing a successful woman? Jesus, can you be more clueless? Let me try to help you out.

She inherited a huge democratic majority in the house and has led it to a huge deficit. She's the House's party leader. Tell me how she doesn't own some responsibility for that. Worse, after last November, when midwest blue collar voters who almost always voted Democratic abandoned the party en masse and sent as loud and as strong a message as you can send that they felt the party wasn't working for them, does she do a mea culpa and talk extensively and publicly about what the party is going to do to win them back? No, just tough election but things will be fine if we just keep doing what we are doing. I can't imagine a more tone deaf response. And regardless of her gender, she's a rich, west coast elite which is exactly what the right can exploit to feed the narrative of "the Democrats can't relate to you and don't hear you".

I thought a lot of her. Was excited when she became speaker, looked forward to great things. But the bottom line is she failed. We have a huge deficit in the house and she's not shown a willingness to acknowledge what caused it much less implement strategies to fix it. The party is in disarray, a clear set of next generation House Democratic leaders has not been developed and now today, this pathetic twitter campaign to desperately hold on to power. Is all of this on her? No, but a lot of it is and she's worked hard to develop so much power, people within the party don't want to challenge her so they go along and nothing changes even though it desperately needs to. So yeah, it's time for a change because I want to see sanity and decency restored to the house and that means regaining control. But I don't see how it happens on her watch. So I want to see someone new. But if a bunch of simpletons want to believe it must be because people don't like a strong woman and that's really what this is about, they're certainly entitled to their view.

[South Florida]

Posted: 6/22/17 at 6:22pm

Uncle Charlie has it right Lyl.  She is a tumor just like Hillary.

 

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 6/23/17 at 9:37am

South Florida said: "Uncle Charlie has it right Lyl.  She is a tumor just like Hillary."

 

So then Obama is a tumor, Biden is a tumor, John Lewis is a tumor, Chris Von Hollen is a tumor, Jim Clyburn is a tumor, Steve Israel is a tumor. The entire DCCC leadership is a tumor. 

You're placing the blame entirely on the women. 2010 didn't happen because of Nancy Pelosi. If anything, the person that bears the most blame for the 2010 slaughter is Barack Obama, and yet he remains on the pedestal while the battle tested women are told to go away and shut the f&ck up.

Use Pelosi as the scapegoat if you want to, but if the Dems screw up 2018, it will not be because of her.

Updated On: 6/23/17 at 09:37 AM

[madbrian]

Posted: 6/23/17 at 1:22pm

As Speaker, Nancy Pelosi was very good at getting the votes.  She encountered none of the embarrassments of her successors.  Obama would not have been able to accomplish as much as he did without her.  That said, she has become the target for the neocons, and she will continue to be that through the midterms.  If the Dems took the House back, she could still be effective at getting the votes, but she is jeopardizing that outcome by remaining the face of that House majority.

[South Florida]

Posted: 6/23/17 at 1:48pm

I would hate it if I'm a misogynist.  I think kdogg has it right, it dosen't matter if she can do a good job or has done a good job.  She brings out the vote for the other side, just like Clinton, and I think Bill is a liability now also.  The fact that the person probably most responsible for the failure of the Democrats remains in Congress, and that's what the Dems are serving in this district.  Biden/Warren 2020.

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 6/23/17 at 2:09pm

LYLS3637 said: "South Florida said: "Uncle Charlie has it right Lyl.  She is a tumor just like Hillary."

 

So then Obama is a tumor, Biden is a tumor, John Lewis is a tumor, Chris Von Hollen is a tumor, Jim Clyburn is a tumor, Steve Israel is a tumor. The entire DCCC leadership is a tumor. 

You're placing the blame entirely on the women. 2010 didn't happen because of Nancy Pelosi. If anything, the person that bears the most blame for the 2010 slaughter is Barack Obama, and yet he remains on the pedestal while the battle tested women are told to go away and shut the f&ck up.

Use Pelosi as the scapegoat if you want to, but if the Dems screw up 2018, it will not be because of her.

 

I'm certainly not placing Obama on a pedestal. He had some major successes domestically but his foreign policy had some major shortcomings. though he was intelligent, compassionate and wanted to do the right thing for the country so compared to what we have now, he really does look like the second coming.

I know it's easier to just whine about how we hate strong women but let's looks at the facts. 2010 was bad across the board but in 2012, Obama got re-elected by 5 million votes and 126 electoral votes, bigger margins than Trump yet the Dems were only able to regain 8 of the 63 seats they lost in the house in 2010 despite a major win at the top of the ticket. That's really not good. In 2014, they not only lost those 8 seats but 6 more, and lost another 13 in 2016. It's great to be battle tested but if you are the party's leader in the House and the Dems have lost almost every single battle under your leadership (and I would argue only gaining back 8 seats in 2012 could easily be viewed as a loss as well), a reasonable person would think it's time for a change though I'm sure you believe she owns no responsibility for that and is just a scapegoat. She may have skills at wrangling votes but if you can't get your people elected in the first place, you don't have anyone to wrangle.

But you keep pushing your "it's because she's a strong woman narrative". With your desperately clutching to a false, unproven narrative and ignoring the facts right in front of your face, you'd actually make a perfect Trump supporter. Maybe you are, since his supporters would love nothing more than Pelosi to stay in power.

Updated On: 6/23/17 at 02:09 PM

[madbrian]

Posted: 6/23/17 at 2:35pm

It's important to remember that, because of gerrymandering, the 2012 House was always going to be a tough win for the Dems, irrespective of the top of the ticket.  Same holds true for 2018.  2020 is really the critical election, but 2018 looms large because of Trump.  The Dems need to take a way Pelosi as the foil that offsets him.

[LYLS3637]

Posted: 6/23/17 at 2:36pm

UncleCharlie said: "I'm certainly not placing Obama on a pedestal. He had some major successes domestically but his foreign policy had some major shortcomings. though he was intelligent, compassionate and wanted to do the right thing for the country so compared to what we have now, he really does look like the second coming.

I know it's easier to just whine about how we hate strong women but let's looks at the facts. 2010 was bad across the board but in 2012, Obama got re-elected by 5 million votes and 126 electoral votes, bigger margins than Trump yet the Dems were only able to regain 8 of the 63 seats they lost in the house in 2010 despite a major win at the top of the ticket. That's really not good. In 2014, they not only lost those 8 seats but 6 more, and lost another 13 in 2016. It's great to be battle tested but if you are the party's leader in the House and the Dems have lost almost every single battle under your leadership (and I would argue only gaining back 8 seats in 2012 could easily be viewed as a loss as well), a reasonable person would think it's time for a change though I'm sure you believe she owns no responsibility for that and is just a scapegoat. She may have skills at wrangling votes but if you can't get your people elected in the first place, you don't have anyone to wrangle.

But you keep pushing your "it's because she's a strong woman narrative". With your desperately clutching to a false, unproven narrative and ignoring the facts right in front of your face, you'd actually make a perfect Trump supporter. Maybe you are, since his supporters would love nothing more than Pelosi to stay in power."

The fact right in front of your face is that while more Democrats than Republicans voted in 2012 (securing Obama's 2nd term and 23 of out of a possible 33 Democratic Senate seats), the party faced new, harshly gerrymandered Congressional districts. Which brings me back to 2010 when Barack Obama and the Democratic Party made a colossal strategic error leading to a Tea Party wave across Congress and state legislatures (who drew the new Congressional lines). You didn't hear me say Pelosi is blameless. But she's just one cook in the kitchen and not even "mostly" responsible for why the Democratic Party is where it is. 

The narrative you push isn't used on Chuck Schumer. It's not used on Jim Clyburn. It's not used on Barrack Obama. It's not used on Joe Biden. Hell, the Left didn't spout that kind of contempt at Harry Reid. But when it comes to Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, the blame just pours. I'm not "desperately clutching" at anything, but you certainly are.