House Special Elections Tonight

[Moralgy]

Demanding that your neighbors subsidize the fantasy that you should be able to permanently inhabit a non-management job in QSR and still live a middle-class lifestyle isn't as popular an idea as you might imagine, and that is all the intentionally-unquantifiable "living wage" means.

A job should pay enough to afford the basic living necessities at the very least, right? Food, water, a roof above your head with electricity(since food does need a refrigerator), and travel to said job as a few examples. That is what a living wage has always meant in my eyes.

[Draco-Onis]

This isn't true. If they were on opposite sides, how exactly was Bernie running as a democrat? Nader had similar relationship with democrats, which caused him to run as an independent.

Further more... 4 times? How about this... when was the last time a Republican won the popular vote, without being a member of the previous executive branch? 1980... I was a one year old in Kiev...

The issue isn't democrats ability to get a majority of American voter support. They have done it all, but 1 time since Bush sr... that's democrats winning the popular vote 6 out of last 7 presidential elections. The issue should obviously not be the message, because that seems to get enough popular support. The issue is being better at the establishment vote. Democrats need to change from appealing to American people, to appealing to specific Americans that would garner enough electoral votes to win. Because if all they needed was to have majority of American voter support, there would have been no Bush or Trump.

Republicans have control of the government both at the state and local level, winning the popular vote doesn't count for anything. The democratic party has lost it's way and it's been going on for a long time, pro war, ACA instead of single payer the list goes on. It is way past time the democratic party goes back to its root that is the key to winning races. The democratic party has stopped being the populist party and has become the moderate party. They can't just be anti Trump they need their old message back.

[Beazy]

I just read that the democrats outspent the repubs 6 to 1 in this contest.

Dems, you need a new strat.

[Mittens]

I just read that the democrats outspent the repubs 6 to 1 in this contest.

Dems, you need a new strat.

Tbf its a solid red district.

[Beazy]

Tbf its a solid red district.

It is, and that's what makes me question why dems pumped so much money and effort into this election.

[Elegiac]

It is, and that's what makes me question why dems pumped so much money and effort into this election.

Perez, probably.

[Zoranon]

It is, and that's what makes me question why dems pumped so much money and effort into this election.

I suspect it is because Dems feel they need a "win", something to show to their increasingly angry base.

[Gestopft]

It is, and that's what makes me question why dems pumped so much money and effort into this election.

Because Trump only won the district by a couple points.

Tom Price, however, won it by over twenty points in November. In hindsight, I think Georgia's sixth doesn't care for Trump that much, but they do still really like Republicans.

[Stormspellz]

Hillary is a pure neo-lib which was shown during Obamas time.

how do you figure? she held elected office for a year? with Obama as president.

- - - Updated - - -

I just read that the democrats outspent the repubs 6 to 1 in this contest.

Dems, you need a new strat.

news flash thats the current norm for poltics, a challenger generally has to outspend. Also pacs will be pacs

[Mittens]

It is, and that's what makes me question why dems pumped so much money and effort into this election.

To sow discord?

[Theodarzna]

how do you figure? she held elected office for a year? with Obama as president.

Her ideological presentation was distinctly attempting to paint herself as "Non-Ideological" which is schtick Democrats have been trying to do since forever.

[Cthulhu 2020]

you do realize how much advertisements affect races these days right? Dems out spent republicans 6-1 and still lost.The dems are clueless. Blue Wave of 2018 aint happening, theyre all insane and stuck in this echo chamber or rejects. CNN literally argues all day even though they agree with each other. Lmao. MORONS.

It does? I thought Hillary outspent Trump. Well she still won the popular vote... but still. Money affecting the outcome nearly to the degree that you're claiming has been proven false. Deep red districts had tight races. People are pissed off at the Trump administration and the Republicans who support him, that's the truth. Don't like it? Tough shit. 2018 is going to be a fun year. If deep red districts are having neck and neck races, just imagine all those swing districts that Republicans only just barely won in 2016.

[Stormspellz]

Her ideological presentation was distinctly attempting to paint herself as "Non-Ideological" which is schtick Democrats have been trying to do since forever.

got any more substance other then a small word salad? Other then the gop witch hunt on benghazi and emails! she really didn't get campaign political during her time as Sec of state

[Felya]

Republicans have control of the government both at the state and local level, winning the popular vote doesn't count for anything.

No, it counts exactly as far as I said. It shows that their problem isn't getting popular support, but gaining that support strategically. The fact that RNC have state and district control, highlights that point, not detract from it. You can come up with any ideological point you like, but the election numbers show DNC having no problems getting Americans to vote for them, when the strategy should focus only on those Americans that will get you wins.

The democratic party has lost it's way and it's been going on for a long time, pro war, ACA instead of single payer the list goes on. It is way past time the democratic party goes back to its root that is the key to winning races. The democratic party has stopped being the populist party and has become the moderate party. They can't just be anti Trump they need their old message back.

See... you just said the popular vote doesn't count for anything, then claim they need more populist party. How can they be more populist, when they have no trouble winning the popular vote? That doesn't doesn't make any sense. As Trump and RNC is showing, the key isn't just populist vote, but strategic support. No one gives a shit that Hillary won by 3 million votes, what matters is she was 43 short of 270. Why does populist mater again? As you quoted me saying, RNC has only won 1 popular vote since the 80s... populist isn't a winning strategy... populist strategy as Trump did in individual states, works... actual populist on the scale of the whole country does not.

[Stormspellz]

Republicans have control of the government both at the state and local level, winning the popular vote doesn't count for anything. The democratic party has lost it's way and it's been going on for a long time, pro war, ACA instead of single payer the list goes on. It is way past time the democratic party goes back to its root that is the key to winning races. The democratic party has stopped being the populist party and has become the moderate party. They can't just be anti Trump they need their old message back.

who's pro war? ACA the dems wanted single payer but it wouldn't pass so the *gasp* compromised. But I do agree, Hillary did a horrible job of spreading her message during the campaign and only reacted to the newest ridiculous thing Trump did.

[Draco-Onis]

who's pro war? ACA the dems wanted single payer but it wouldn't pass so the *gasp* compromised. But I do agree, Hillary did a horrible job of spreading her message during the campaign and only reacted to the newest ridiculous thing Trump did.

They compromised with themselves, the blue dogs who ended up losing seats anyway are one of the reasons we did not get single payer. Democrats failed when it came to single payer, wall street reform and accountability. We would not be in the pickle we are in today if when they had full control they located their spine.

Democratic foreign policy has been more hawkish for a while now, Trump in a lot of ways sounded more democrat than republican.

[Fugus]

As a registered Independent not from that state.

Let me ask this, what was his platform? Was he a business-as-usual Democrat or was he actually pushing to fix stuff? Because overall, the Democrats have turned their backs on what a huge portion of their base wants and actively refuse to offer them anything to actually get them out and vote other than chanting "We are not as bad as they are" and while that is true overall, getting someone out to vote FOR you is a lot more effective than trying to get someone to come out and vote AGAINST the other guy.

Why would someone want to go out and vote Democrat if that is just going to give them a left leaning Republican?

Edit: And how many of these seats nationally are lost due to gerrymandering of their districts? Since 2010, the seats are setup to screw the will of the voters in many of them? I say this as a resident of North Carolina.

[Stormspellz]

They compromised with themselves, the blue dogs who ended up losing seats anyway are one of the reasons we did not get single payer. Democrats failed when it came to single payer, wall street reform and accountability. We would not be in the pickle we are in today if when they had full control they located their spine.

Democratic foreign policy has been more hawkish for a while now, Trump in a lot of ways sounded more democrat than republican.

The ACA had more then 170 amendments from the GOP and for hawkish? really remember that "red line" if Obama and the dems where hawkish they would of done more then political pressure to get chemical weapons to be turned over, sure drones use was increased for its pros/cons, but for the most part Obama activily avoided putting more troops in harms way, thats not very "hawk" like. Furthermore unlike the GOP, nearly the same amount of dems polled have the same stance of military action in Syria under Obama and Trump's recent "for show" attack on the Syrian airfield.

But sure I'll play. What actions, legislation, ect makes you believe the Dems are more "hawkish" then the gop?

[Draco-Onis]

The ACA had more then 170 amendments from the GOP

And when it was clear they would zero republican votes for it they kept them and didn't change course that's not even going into the fact that the ACA is a modified republican plan.

But sure I'll play. What actions, legislation, ect makes you believe the Dems are more "hawkish" then the gop?

Democrats have become more hawkish but not more than the GOP, to combat the narrative that democrats are weak on foreign policy many faux pas have been made. From past actions in the middle east to Clinton's stance on foreign policy but Obama was not a hawk I will give you that much even though members of his cabinet were.

[Thepersona]

Na its still a win.

You're talking with a poster that doesnt get the concept of nuance.
It was a win, nevertheless. The dems must movilize their forces and focus on demovilizing the repubs