Could Dems. Regain Control Of The Senate Next Year?

Tags: 
up
5 users have voted.

Comments

SnappleBC's picture

Sure they could. Honestly, I think the movements of the panicked herd from Republican to Democratic are semi-chaotic. The Republicans have, of course, bungled everything. So if people get scared or angry enough, they will go do Democrats. Every time that cycle repeats, I think more and more voters start to understand reality and the populist movement advances.

That all being said, I fully expect the Democrats to run on the same bat-shit crazy stuff they have before without addressing any of the voters actual concerns so their odds of pulling of a win they themselves admit is a long-shot seem... improbable.

A Better Deal

That's their slogan? The slogan itself is ridiculous and there's no substance underneath it that I'm aware of. I am currently discounting the Dems single payer efforts. We've seen that before from this same cast of characters. I'll have a hard time believing they have any interest in actual health care reform until it's a new set of players.

up
17 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

Pluto's Republic's picture

@SnappleBC

…were moderate Republicans and Independents voting against Clinton. I followed that campaign and that's what I saw.

Trump's campaign was composed of a series of rallies attended in the large by the Tea Party/Nascar/Prepper types. Trump and Sanders were both out there doing large-scale rallies before and during the Primaries, closing the deal with the voters. None of the other candidates had the political capital to pull that off. Essentially, the people had made their own choices before the conventions. They were going strictly with the two Outsiders. But in November, there was only one Outsider on the ballot.

In his speeches, Trump took positions just to the Left of Clinton. His word choices were carefully calibrated and people heard what they wanted to hear. Trump's campaign worked with an AI and big-data technology firm to position Trump to walk and talk the ideological razor's edge — especially on issues like health care and foreign policy. But the fact remains that mainstream Republican voters preferred the mainstream candidates. It was Clinton who brought them out to vote, just as political analysts had predicted.

In the Politico article, the editors are not factoring in the very likely possibility that Trump will have already declared victory and resigned — and President Pense will be at the helm during the 2018 elections. In my view, they should.

Any idea how that will affect the outcome?

up
6 users have voted.
SnappleBC's picture

@Pluto's Republic

Whether a Republican or a Democrat wins doesn't really change my problem, does it? What matters more to me is how many we can educate each cycle as the disillusionment sets in. That's why I think of my plan as a long-game. There is no win this election or next. All we can do is try to find ourselves, group together, and organize until we have become a voting bloc to be reckoned with. Right now we are just lambs to the slaughter.

up
10 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

Wink's picture

@SnappleBC

up
4 users have voted.

the little things you can do often are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. All about building progressive media. (-1.9) On Twitter @winkradio.

@Pluto's Republic It is my opinion that Charles Schumer believes that Hillary lost because Dem. voters stayed home in large numbers. Because of that, he is trying to keep these people engaged so that they will turn out next time. So far, he has not said anything disparaging about the left wing of the party, not that I know of. What he will do if he becomes majority leader, I don't know.

up
2 users have voted.

An ideologue is someone who has stopped thinking.

snoopydawg's picture

@SnappleBC

This surely beats "more taste, less filling" or something.
Didn't they run on this in 2006? "Vote for us because we aren't as blood thirsty as the republicans"
This is what they told us right before they voted to continue funding Bush's "I have to invade Iraq because Saddam tried to kill my daddy."

Hillary told her friends that breaking up the banks wouldn't end racism, sexism or misogynisism which apparently is on everyone's minds and they think it's one of the biggest problems that they have to deal with daily. Or something. I've never been able to understand what they wanted from her.

Right now we are just lambs for the slaughter.

This is better than being thought of as their soylent greens for when their food supplies run out, I guess.

up
6 users have voted.

a longtime oligarch eugenics plan is already well underway

earth is the insane asylum for the universe

Pluto's Republic's picture

@snoopydawg

…of the minds of the American people. If we let that pass, the nation is lost. It will demonstrate for future historians that the People have been pulled under and drowned in a Stockholm Syndrome dystopia. I will never let it go.

Moon of Alabama did a takedown today. Did you see it?

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/10/russia-interfered-by-purchasing-ant...

up
9 users have voted.

@Pluto's Republic Yeah. There is *no* evidence other than maybe (surprise!), some Russians might have bought some ads for click-bait purposes.

And, if you have an argument with the last paragraph, you might be a neoliberal.

Clinton lost because people on all sides had learned to dislike her policies throughout the years. She was unelectable. Her party was and is acting against the interest of the common people. No claim of anything "Russian" can change those facts.

Thanks SD

up
7 users have voted.

@peachcreek

if the Dems wanted to campaign for the NEXT election rather than the LAST one, they could try opposing Trump on an actual issue... but I don't see Clinton doing squat for Puerto Rico, EPA standards, Black Lives, health care, Yemen, education, etc. The truth is, she and her party don't oppose Trump on anything except who won the last election and which country to threaten next.
up
11 users have voted.

@Pluto's Republic

Hah, Putin clearly used reverse psychology by buying an anti-Trump ad on FB under an assumed name in order to promote Hillary, knowing full well that too many Americans couldn't bear to hold their noses - as was freely advised by those supporting Her - to vote for the Mad Bomber Fracking Queen and that he could hack the Electoral College anyway!

Have I missed anything?

up
1 user has voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Pluto's Republic's picture

@Ellen North

up
0 users have voted.
Lily O Lady's picture

up
9 users have voted.

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

dkmich's picture

up
11 users have voted.

*donate *follow us on Twitter *like us on Facebook *dump Google

@dkmich

They want to turn mercenaries loose on schoolkids? This is an attempt at genocide...

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

zoebear's picture

@dkmich

Was rabidly anti Trump, in a kind of DKos way where each article featured on the right has a hyper-partisan Fire! Fire! Fire! Feature to it. Which isn't to say that the information in the article about a "for profit" police force doesn't have at least a kernel of truth to it. But it also fails to provide any citations to support the claim and really isn't very detailed.

up
1 user has voted.