TheCid

2018 Elections

267 posts in this topic

Women's March 2018 Isn't About Trump—It's About Upending the Entire Political System

"..... this year's Women's March isn't in the Silver State simply to highlight voting rights; it's also about closer-to-home issues. Las Vegas, after all, was the site of the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history last year. And a congressman from the state, Democratic Representative Ruben Kihuen, isn't running for re-election after sexual misconduct accusations came out against him, one of many men whose behavior has helped fuel the women's movement.

As in 2017, hundreds of other sister marches will occur in the U.S. and abroad....

.... “I don’t think there’s any way someone could deny the direct connection between the Women’s March’s leadership and what we see with women running for office and speaking out against sexual abuse and assault,” Tamika Mallory, national Women’s March co-chair, told Newsweek. “We were able to do that because women took control.” ....

http://www.newsweek.com/womens-march-2018-isnt-about-trump-its-about-upending-entire-political-system-784944?utm_campaign=NewsweekTwitter&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

David AxelrodVerified account @davidaxelrod 8h8 hours ago

 
 

Watching the sea of humanity descending on downtown Chicago today, it occurred to me that one undeniable achievement of @realDonaldTrump is that he has ignited a determined movement that is likely to be the political story of 2018.

DUAVbTNX4AALcVa.jpg

I've never seen anything like this downtown in the Loop in my life. It's simply unbelievable!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mr6666 said:

David AxelrodVerified account @davidaxelrod 8h8 hours ago

 
 

Watching the sea of humanity descending on downtown Chicago today, it occurred to me that one undeniable achievement of @realDonaldTrump is that he has ignited a determined movement that is likely to be the political story of 2018.

DUAVbTNX4AALcVa.jpg

Let us hope that this movement and the ones by African-Americans, Hispanics, immigrants and others can combine with traditional Democrats to take back counties, states and the federal government.  However, they will need to insure that they do not offend the people that changed from Dem to GOP over the past 30 years and bring those people back.  Especially those who normally vote Dem, but voted for Trump this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time magazines latest issue is all focused on the women's movement and especially ensuring women are elected to all levels of government.    There was a good amount of focus on the Dem primaries.    I can see the plans of focusing on women candidates by the Dem blowing up in their face for these reasons:

In a Dem primary a woman is running against a man.     If the man wins,  will Dem women support the Dem man?  If the basic POV by women is that only women can truly represent them (this was stated by women leaders during the latest march),   how many Dem women will decide to sit out the general since their women candidate is no longer in play?     AND if the GOP runs a woman against this male Dem candidate,   what is a Dem woman to do????

If the woman does win the primary,   how will male Dems respond in the general?   If the woman candidate marginalized men to rally women support to win the primary that could alienate men in the general. 

I also wonder how ugly these Dem primary races will be.    If very ugly that could provide fuel to the GOP candidate in the general.

This is the core issue with identity politics and it will play out between 'people of color' and whites, like it will with gender.    Of course traditional party politics says to vote for the candidate you believe is best qualified in the primary but support your parties candidate in the general (period).   

In 2008 Obama ran a good campaign that was able to retain most Clinton supporters (while many were bitter, most went out and voted for Obama).    But for many of these women Dem candidates are novices with little, if any,  political experience.            

(and of course 'independent' voters also impacted if the identity politics card is overplayed).   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Time magazines latest issue is all focused on the women's movement and especially ensuring women are elected to all levels of government.    There was a good amount of focus on the Dem primaries.    I can see the plans of focusing on women candidates by the Dem blowing up in their face for these reasons:

In a Dem primary a woman is running against a man.     If the man wins,  will Dem women support the Dem man?  If the basic POV by women is that only women can truly represent them (this was stated by women leaders during the latest march),   how many Dem women will decide to sit out the general since their women candidate is no longer in play?     AND if the GOP runs a woman against this male Dem candidate,   what is a Dem woman to do????

If the woman does win the primary,   how will male Dems respond in the general?   If the woman candidate marginalized men to rally women support to win the primary that could alienate men in the general. 

I also wonder how ugly these Dem primary races will be.    If very ugly that could provide fuel to the GOP candidate in the general.

This is the core issue with identity politics and it will play out between 'people of color' and whites, like it will with gender.    Of course traditional party politics says to vote for the candidate you believe is best qualified in the primary but support your parties candidate in the general (period).   

In 2008 Obama ran a good campaign that was able to retain most Clinton supporters (while many were bitter, most went out and voted for Obama).    But for many of these women Dem candidates are novices with little, if any,  political experience.            

(and of course 'independent' voters also impacted if the identity politics card is overplayed).   

I read the extensive article.  One issue I have with it is that it focused almost exclusively on Dem. women. What about all the Republican women, especially those who either hold office or are running for office.  Many of them are among the most extreme conservatives in the party.  Not to mention the many, many women who vote Republican.

We have had well qualified women Dem candidates run for the House district which I am in.  They always lose, but then so do the Dem men.  So, some of these women will lose simply because a Dem can't.  However, this may the beginning of getting enough moderate and left of center people to actually get out and vote.  It will be incremental and take years and multiple elections if these women and other moderate and left of center people win elections.

One encouraging item from the article was that there are now national organizations that will assist these new women candidates (and maybe even males).  Combine this with new technology and their lack of experience may not hurt as badly.

Biggest problem I see is that they MUST appeal to more than just "progressive" women.  If that is all they do, they will lose.  They will seldom have the Republican or conservative or right of center women's vote.

As you alluded, it is critical for moderates, progressives and Dems. for these newly encouraged women to vote in the elections even if they have to vote for a man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheCid said:

What about all the Republican women, especially those who either hold office or are running for office. 

I noticed that as well,   but I just assumed GOP women are viewed as auntie-Sues by media outlets like Time (well currently they are left-leaning but might change under new ownership).

Note that many of these women centric activist groups will ONLY assist left-leaning women because that is why they were formed.   This is one of the potential mistakes the Dems might be making.   Take US House races; Say there is a 'toss up' district where a male Dem candidate has a chance to beat the GOP candidate,   but there is another district where a women Dem candidate (or any Dem candidate), has little chance to win.    It would be better (as it relates to winning the most House seats) for these activist groups to assist that male Dem,  then to spend dollars and energy on that women candidate.   

 

    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

    It would be better (as it relates to winning the most House seats) for these activist groups to assist that male Dem,  then to spend dollars and energy on that women candidate.   

 

    

Unfortunately that is why I don't contribute to Dem candidates running in my county, state and federal elections. Also why I vote in Republican primaries. At this point in time, they have no chance of winning in general.  

Hopefully the groups will do as you suggest and focus on elections where a more amenable male can be elected rather than wasting time and money supporting a woman who cannot win.

Incidentally, this applies to elections at all levels.  One thing is that many males and even women who hold office now started off at a lower level.  Learn what it takes to win an election and then use that knowledge to move to higher office.  One thing Trump may have done is to lessen the attractiveness of the inexperienced outsider for some voters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Unfortunately that is why I don't contribute to Dem candidates running in my county, state and federal elections. Also why I vote in Republican primaries. At this point in time, they have no chance of winning in general.  

Hopefully the groups will do as you suggest and focus on elections where a more amenable male can be elected rather than wasting time and money supporting a woman who cannot win.

Incidentally, this applies to elections at all levels.  One thing is that many males and even women who hold office now started off at a lower level.  Learn what it takes to win an election and then use that knowledge to move to higher office.  One thing Trump may have done is to lessen the attractiveness of the inexperienced outsider for some voters.

We agree here;   Like I said the trick with this elect women strategy is how does one motivate a woman to vote in the general election for a male Dem candidate when the primary motive for that woman for getting involved in politics and voting in the primary,  was electing a woman.     

I do agree that 'experience' is less important to voters due to Trump (Obama to a degree and even the talk about Oprah),  but I mentioned experience as it relates to a candidate's campaign experience;  how to give a speech that rallies a crowd,  debate experience,  general ground game experience etc...     I assume that generally the GOP candidates will have more campaign experience (since they will have more incumbents or those in lower offices running for a higher office).     Time implied that many of these Dem women have never held any political position.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per a scroll on CNN, 36 Republican representatives have decided to retire rather than run for re-election.  If accurate, that is a lot of open seats.

Interesting question is whether they are leaving because they think they might not win against a Dem or a more extremist GOPer or leaving because they cannot stand the House that Trump and the GOPers have created.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Seth AbramsonVerified account @SethAbramson 1d1 day ago

Trump's handpicked CIA Director Mike Pompeo says there's no doubt Russia will interfere in the 2018 elections. One presumes the interference will again be pro-GOP, so Trump has announced there'll be no sanctions on Russia.

So how can we have any faith in our election process now?

 

"We won't be certain if there has been interference until the ballots are counted. If the Democrats win, we will know that diabolical, insidious forces have subverted our most precious electoral process. If the Republicans win, that will be proof of no interference." - any Trump offical

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trey Gowdy (you know the hair) (R) is retiring from Congress this year.  But not to fear, a Republican will replace him in the primarily Greenville-Spartanburg SC district.  It is a hard core GOP district.  He is chairman of the committee that continued the Benghazi investigation of Hillary Clinton.

He hasn't said anything, but add this to the other 36 GOP reps to leave and there is something wrong in DC.  Some are leaving because they may lose to Dems.  I think some are leaving because they cannot stand the bitter divide that exists.  Then add in the instability of the Trump administration and Trump's inability to take a stand on an issue.

Has the party in control of the government ever had this many representatives to just leave?  And it is only January.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheCid said:

He hasn't said anything, but add this to the other 36 GOP reps to leave and there is something wrong in DC.  Some are leaving because they may lose to Dems.  I think some are leaving because they cannot stand the bitter divide that exists.  Then add in the instability of the Trump administration and Trump's inability to take a stand on an issue.

The recklessness of Trump and his government not to mention fear of the collusion story being correct probably have something to do with it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the exact number, but some are resigning from the House

to run for a Senate seat. Even taking that into account, it's an unusually

large number of GOPers abandoning the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US Supreme Court declined to hear a case from Republicans in PA re: redrawing the state's districts before the election.  The PA court had ruled that it had to be done due to political gerrymandering of districts.  This means the PA court decision stands.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheCid said:

The US Supreme Court declined to hear a case from Republicans in PA re: redrawing the state's districts before the election.  The PA court had ruled that it had to be done due to political gerrymandering of districts.  This means the PA court decision stands.

The Supreme Court declining to hear the PA case is likely to be bad news, overall,  as it relates to undoing GOP lead gerrymandering.  

State court rulings will stand and in most GOP gerrymandered states the State count has a GOP majority.   (PA had a Dem majority).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC NewsVerified account @NBCNews

 
 
 
 

BREAKING: U.S. official in charge of protecting American elections from hacking tells NBC News that Russians successfully penetrated voter registration rolls of several U.S. states prior to 2016 presidential election. http://nbcnews.to/2GZjVKi 

----------------------------------------------

NBC NewsVerified account @NBCNews Feb 7

 
 

NEW: @NBCNews poll: More than half of Americans think Russia will interfere again in 2018 elections. http://nbcnews.to/2BiGKbw  Meanwhile, 64% said that they think it's likely that a foreign government — not necessarily Russia — will try to interfere in the 2018 elections.

DVeFk5kVoAEMQ9l.jpg
DVeFlpbVoAA89hE.jpg
DVeFs4bVQAAg7lY.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the Dems might really mess up their chances to make gains in the US Congress in 2018 due to their inept handling of trying to legalize the 'dreamers'.     Regardless of whether one believes the Congressional Dems' shutdown the US government to legalize the 'dreamers',    pro-illegal-immigration groups and activist clearly believe that is what the Dems were doing (and should have done and should do again).

But Chuck Schumer calls off the shutdown after a few days.   Then he goes and makes a budget deal that removes a shutdown as a way to force the GOP to pass a 'clean',  dreamers-only, bill.    Pelosi gives an 8 hour speech about 'dreamers' after Chuck tells her he is making a budget deal.   Pelosi did this because she knew the Dems had lost the little political power they had to pass a dreamer-only bill,   but pro-illegal-immigration groups and activist see through her stunt.  

These groups and activist are now saying they will try to defeat those Dems in the primaries that didn't hold-the-line by voting for the budget deal.     This may lead to a more left-leaning Dem being the Dem candidate in a purple district \ state.      Take the 5 CA House districts, currently held by the GOP, that are listed as winnable for the Dems.  For a Dem candidate to win in these districts they have to be a moderate.   

Note that the Tea party has made the same mistake in prior elections;  outing in the GOP primary incumbents they believed were RINOs with a far-right candidate, only to have this fringe candidate lose in the General.           

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Breaking: PA Supreme Court adopts new congressional map, and with few exceptions it's Democrats' dream come true. GOP not going to like this at all.

This post implies that the Dems are cooking the books, just like the GOP did.   A congressional map shouldn't make either parties' dreams come true.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the dems can have some of the whipped cream topping but we keep the delicious chocolate/graham cracker crust.

:)

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us