Election 2017 Thread

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

Looks like the VA House of Delegates is tied at 50-50, assuming any recounts don't change things.

[nonniey]

4 hours ago, Predicto said:

 

 

The current GOP, created by Newt Gingrich and his scorched earth tactics, and FoxNews, and the Heritage Foundation, and the NRA - yes, it is the devil. 

 

I want the normal "lower taxes - be cautious - the national debt actually matters" GOP back, even though I don't agree with them most of the time. 

That is why I wanted Gillespie to win.  Trumpers (Talk Radio)are already claiming reason he lost was because he wasn't a Trumpster.

[Larry]

1 hour ago, nonniey said:

That is why I wanted Gillespie to win.  Trumpers (Talk Radio)are already claiming reason he lost was because he wasn't a Trumpster.

 

"Y'know, Egon, this reminds me of that time you tried to drill a hole through your head."

 

"That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me."

[Burgold]

4 hours ago, nonniey said:

That is why I wanted Gillespie to win.  Trumpers (Talk Radio)are already claiming reason he lost was because he wasn't a Trumpster.

Silly, If he won they'd call it was a Republican victory and validation of Trump.

[DogofWar1]

15 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Silly, If he won they'd call it was a Republican victory and validation of Trump.

It'd be both (but mostly validation of Trump because all Trump does is seek self-validation).

 

Gillespie tried to run Corey Stewart's campaign in the rural parts of VA, while trying that "son of an immigrant" stuff in NoVa.  So technically he tried to be a Trumpster and not a Trumpster at the same time.

 

Now, Trumpsters were always going to claim he wasn't Trumpy enough if he lost, because that's what they ALWAYS do.

 

Like, 90% of the time a GOP candidate loses, their pundits pull out the "no true Scotsman" routine.  McCain wasn't a true conservative.  Romney wasn't.  Etc. etc.  It's just that within the last year they've substituted "conservative" with "Trumpy."

 

Mind you, the left does it left but has started doing it more within the past year with the Bernie wing.  Hillary wasn't "progressive" enough.  However, this string of victories will likely curtail some of that no true Scotsmanning for a bit.

[PeterMP]

So here's a question.  How much of this is Russia/corruption related and how much of it is specific to Trump policies?

 

If you had a somebody advocating Trump's policies without the extra stuff, do you still see the same result?  Is Bannon wrong or did he just pick the wrong horse to back?

 

Of course, without Russian support and the fake news does Trump even get elected?

[Springfield]

I think it’s more a backlash of Trump himself and things like Charlottesville.  People realizing, “man, I really ****ed up last time.”

[No Excuses]

25 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Of course, without Russian support and the fake news does Trump even get elected?

 

I have this same question. He needed the support of a massive foreign intelligence operation to barely squeak out a small win.

 

Also the effects of gerrymandering are on full display in VA. Northam carries the state by a 10 pt margin, yet we end up with a local state house result that is split 50-50. 

 

 

6 hours ago, nonniey said:

That is why I wanted Gillespie to win.  Trumpers (Talk Radio)are already claiming reason he lost was because he wasn't a Trumpster.

 

If he had won, Trumpsters would claim it was because he went Trump-like in the last two months. 

 

Bannon was already patting himself on the back before last night.

 

There really isn't a brand of Republican politics at the moment that is disconnected from Trump.

[Corcaigh]

34 minutes ago, Springfield said:

I think it’s more a backlash of Trump himself and things like Charlottesville.  People realizing, “man, I really ****ed up last time.”

 

Still less than 50% turnout of registered voters. There's a very significant portion of the population who have no interest in who their political leaders are

[tshile]

52 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

So here's a question.  How much of this is Russia/corruption related and how much of it is specific to Trump policies?

 

If you had a somebody advocating Trump's policies without the extra stuff, do you still see the same result?  Is Bannon wrong or did he just pick the wrong horse to back?

 

Of course, without Russian support and the fake news does Trump even get elected?

 

In NOVA 37% of exit polling showed healthcare was the most important topic.

The next most important topic was Gun Control at 17%

 

Voter turnout among younger people was incredibly high (i think) and they overwhelmingly went against the Republicans. 

 

if I had to bet - the recent tax bill stuff had more of an impact than Russia. I don't know how well people that are not political junkies are actually digesting the Russia stuff right now.

40 minutes ago, Springfield said:

I think it’s more a backlash of Trump himself and things like Charlottesville.  People realizing, “man, I really ****ed up last time.”

Woke up to a text this morning basically saying he felt bad for voting trump, so voted D across the board.

 

I think there are a group of people who have no real party affiliation (though typically vote for one or the other) that voted for Trump because they were anti-politician and (generally speaking) are low information voters (although not stupid, they may be smart just don't pay attention to politics) and thought Trump was an excellent businessman and that's what "the country needs". Over the last year it's been impossible to avoid what the Trump administration was doing, and are now realizing he's a disaster, and never really had any loyalty to him to begin with.

 

I don't know how large that group is or geographically how it is represented across the country, but I definitely have found some people that fall into that group over the last 6-8 months.

[No Excuses]

Ed Gillespie won Loudoun County by 500 votes in 2014 against Mark Warner.

 

Last night he lost LC by 24,000 votes.

[LD0506]

1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said:

Mind you, the left does it left but has started doing it more within the past year with the Bernie wing.  Hillary wasn't "progressive" enough.  However, this string of victories will likely curtail some of that no true Scotsmanning for a bit.

 

From your lips to Gods ears..............

 

The turnout was disheartening, I just don't know what it would take short of some cataclysmic event to get people off their asses. But right now, I am going to look at the bright side. In Delawhere nothing much changed but at the very least we won't have to see/hear/acknowledge the existence of that puling pusbag Christie right across the river.

[@DCGoldPants]

 

[tshile]

I was waiting for the investigation or something trump says/does to be a turning point for the GOP to bail on him.

 

It seems as though last night should be the turning point. They sold their soul in 2016 to win the whitehouse after the primaries, and last night was just the start of the price for that. 

 

Problem is, I don't think the RNC/GOP has the honesty to see that; and if they did, I don't think they have the spine to act on it.

 

I've thought a lot of different things about the RNC/GOP over the last 15 years of my life. Since the primaries ended, i've become convinced they're gutless cowards.

 

[@DCGoldPants]

1 minute ago, tshile said:

I was waiting for the investigation or something trump says/does to be a turning point for the GOP to bail on him.

 

It seems as though last night should be the turning point. They sold their soul in 2016 to win the whitehouse after the primaries, and last night was just the start of the price for that. 

 

Problem is, I don't think the RNC/GOP has the honesty to see that; and if they did, I don't think they have the spine to act on it.

 

I've thought a lot of different things about the RNC/GOP over the last 15 years of my life. Since the primaries ended, i've become convinced they're gutless cowards.

 

 

Nah. I think what we see if that only Trump and Trump. Anybody else who wants to be like that needs to be running at the same time he is. Otherwise, you're just another Gillespie. 

[Burgold]

41 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said:

 

Nah. I think what we see if that only Trump and Trump. Anybody else who wants to be like that needs to be running at the same time he is. Otherwise, you're just another Gillespie. 

Besides, they're profiting too much under the Trump corruption plan. Money in their pockets is what it's all about. Who cares about national security, safe drinking water, our kids education, etc.

[PleaseBlitz]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

 

 

 

I think there are a group of people who have no real party affiliation (though typically vote for one or the other) that voted for Trump because they were anti-politician and (generally speaking) are low information voters (although not stupid, they may be smart just don't pay attention to politics) and thought Trump was an excellent businessman and that's what "the country needs". Over the last year it's been impossible to avoid what the Trump administration was doing, and are now realizing he's a disaster, and never really had any loyalty to him to begin with.

 

I don't know how large that group is or geographically how it is represented across the country, but I definitely have found some people that fall into that group over the last 6-8 months.

 

I think it is about 9% of voters.  Trump won 46% of the vote last year.  His approval rating has been hovering around 37-38% since May.  Those 37% are the folks that will never leave him, who love him despite any political agenda success or failures, they just like him because he is an asshole to their perceived enemies (liberals and "them").   The delta is the people that voted for him hoping for the best given his lack of record, but have now seen him in action as the actual POTUS and don't like it.  

[Corcaigh]

1 hour ago, No Excuses said:

Ed Gillespie won Loudoun County by 500 votes in 2014 against Mark Warner.

 

Last night he lost LC by 24,000 votes.

 

All those damn brown people with advanced degrees. 

[PleaseBlitz]

1 hour ago, Corcaigh said:

 

Still less than 50% turnout of registered voters. There's a very significant portion of the population who have no interest in who their political leaders are

 

Still significantly up from 2013 (43.0%).  All on one side. 

[twa]

A state that voted for Hillary voted for democrats is surprising?

 

 

 

[PeterMP]

38 minutes ago, tshile said:

I was waiting for the investigation or something trump says/does to be a turning point for the GOP to bail on him.

 

It seems as though last night should be the turning point. They sold their soul in 2016 to win the whitehouse after the primaries, and last night was just the start of the price for that. 

 

Problem is, I don't think the RNC/GOP has the honesty to see that; and if they did, I don't think they have the spine to act on it.

 

I've thought a lot of different things about the RNC/GOP over the last 15 years of my life. Since the primaries ended, i've become convinced they're gutless cowards.

 

 

I don't think they know how to without there being a significant challenge that they'll lose in the primaries.  It isn't Trump so much as that their base listens to Limbaugh, Hannity, etc (Bannon, I think it is actually a different beast.  I think he actually cares and thinks he's right.  I think Limbauch and his ilk are just in it for the fame, money, and power) more than them and those people have no real interest in winning elections.  If they've go nothing to complain about, they've got no show.  And the politicians have no way of taking power back from those people.

 

Obama was really the leader of the Democratic party.  George Bush was never really the leader of the Republican party.

 

The real leaders of the Republican party have no real interest in winning elections or even really seeing problems solved (or telling the truth as  it is clear that people will continue to watch/listen to them if they lie repeatedly).

[Burgold]

1 minute ago, twa said:

A state that voted for Hillary voted for democrats is surprising?

 

 

 

Historic overturn in the House of Delegates counts as surprising. Biggest change in seats since the 1800's.

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, twa said:

A state that voted for Hillary voted for democrats is surprising?

 

 

 

You can pretend whatever you want about what this means.

 

Everyone that's interested in being honest sees it for what it is.

 

[twa]

Just now, tshile said:

You can pretend whatever you want about what this means.

 

Everyone that's interested in being honest sees it for what it is.

 

 

and that is turnout was better for the Dems

[tshile]

@PeterMP

your thought is definitely compelling and unfortunately you might be right.

 

if voters start to care more about the state of their area and their healthcare that may force the issue.. if young people become reliable voters in terms of turnout ()... then things could change.

 

i'm expecting this to be like the obama midterms - goes the other way and that side declares victory and thumps their chest but in the grand scheme of things nothing of significance actually changes.

 

I am a little concerned at democrat control of my state... guess we'll see how the last 5 races break down...