mtutiger

You'll be shocked to learn that he's a podcaster.... retweeting another podcaster.

It's again worth noting that Harris did upwards of 3.5% better in the battleground states than she did nationally.... which suggests that campaign financing / how they spent their money wasn't the issue here.

lol

Probably worth noting one of the few regions to shift left in the Presidential election this cycle was... Western North Carolina

Two pages on, this observation holds up well

I need to start looking that direction as well...

The California races mentioned (Whitesides, Min, Tran) are all breaking in the correct direction and with relatively favorable partisan breakdowns for remaining ballots... Engel and Peltola are a little shakier. My guess is either 220-215 or 221-214 for Rs, a 1-2 seat gain for Ds over the last Congress. But a lot more to count

https://x.com/LisaDNews/status/1855010313495564397 The AP really blew it here... If there are 110k ballots left in PA, the Senate race shouldn't have been called.

I mean, I'm trying not to be mean about it, but by any objective measure, both attempts got a ton of attention. The pages in this thread dedicated to both stand as evidence as far as I'm concerned. I'm just surprised that, even in victory, the whining crying and grievance never ends.

I look forward to the day when performative whining, crying and grievances aren't a main feature of American political discourse. Who am I kidding, an asteroid will probably get us before that happens... lol

Why are you asking me? I don't know, nor do I really care. I was responding this: Pretty vividly remember both of Trump's assassination attempts being treated like very big deals. Not sure what the argument is here. Did the American public just not act viscerally enough to them or something?

Pretty vividly remember both of Trump's assassination attempts being treated like very big deals. Not sure what the argument is here. Did the American public just not act viscerally enough to them or something?

I think there's interesting stuff to unpack and learn about what happened here, but the real substance is going to take time. At this stage, the stuff we get is a mix of emotional catastrophizing from the losing side, gloating from the winning side (or those who are more sympathetic to winning side anyway) and members of the mainsteam media, pundits and strategists coming up with many reasons why the result was what it was (which in a lot of cases center around whatever pet issue interests the media member/pundit/strategist making the argument is most interested in). So I don't blame you for checking out.... I guess I'm too much of a sicko to completely let go and check out, but there's really nothing to be learned or gained from this immediate period of time in terms of engagement.

Doesn't matter the issue, but picked this up from a number of people down the stretch... the idea that Trump wasn't going to do a lot of what he was actually campaigning to do. Regardless of the issue. Took it mostly as a rationalization, but who knows... if he were smart, he wouldn't go full on maximalist on things like immigration or abortion, but I've seen this movie before.

Hell, I have people in my own life who believe, as a country, "we're full".... which, when you look at the demographic cliff we are sitting on (ie. boomers getting older/retiring/dying, being replaced by a smaller amount of people in productive positions), is just a bonkers take.

I mean, they're going to all sorts of stuff.... rounding up illegals, hitting border crossings harder, all of that. We know this already because he campaigned on it. But that isn't really a "reform" of immigration.... that doesn't clean up the asylum process, that doesn't reduce the bureaucratic mess that legal immigration entails, etc. I understand that the punitive stuff is what sends a thrill up everyone's leg, but these are things that need to be addressed. We *should* it easier to adjudicate legit asylum claims and *should* make it easier for people to legally migrate to our country. And my point is that, in an incoming administration that contains Stephen Miller in Trump's ear, there isn't really consensus on whether there is even a need for immigration reform in the first place.

One of the biggest impediments to success in reforming immigration is that there isn't complete and total agreement on what the problem is in the first place, particularly within the GOP. For some, the problem that we have too much illegal immigration, but we need to open up more ability for people to legally immigrate here. For others (ie. the Stephen Miller set), the problem is that we have *too* much immigration period and we need to continue to reduce both illegal *and* legal immigration.

We can all hold competing thoughts in our head at one time: Harris was not the greatest candidate Harris was left with a pretty crummy hand and probably played it about as well as she could Had she not been elevated to the top of the ticket, it would have been a wipeout downballot

Message is important, but I almost feel like it goes beyond that. But real commitments and real listening. Assuming he holds on against Kari Lake in Arizona (it hasn't been called yet but seems pretty likely), it would also help if Ruben Gallego became a more prominent figure within the party. His background (Male, Second Generation, military service record) is the exact kind of voter this party is struggling with the most.

Agreed, that's why I commented that my post above shouldn't be perceived as "optimistic." Particularly the longer term implications. My only point is that in the short term, he's not immune to the forces that afflict elected Presidents.... and his first term is Exhibit A

I'd be surprised if anything related to abortion got out of the House, tbh....

I'm not anymore optimistic than you are, to be honest.... but I'm also not going to pretend that trends that have existed in every single election cycle (ie. President gets elected, starts to implement agenda, public sours on them) don't actually exist. And that it didn't already happen to Trump once lol

A couple of things: Latino voters aren't a monolith - not only do they come from different places, but at this point in time in the Latino experience, many of them are pretty far separated from the immigrant experience. We have more second and third generation Latinos, and the things that appeal to recent migrants =/= to those who have assimilated into the American experience. Latino voters are more acutely impacted by economics than just about every demographic group I do think the Democrats have an opportunity to win some of this support back; Trump benefitted from the overall environment and his standing as a successful businessman, and I question whether this was about an affinity for the GOP itself. But the work needs to happen immediately, and it starts by not taking these groups for granted and not falling into the same old traps of punching down at those who may have switched their vote in this election (I trust the actual party to do this, fwiw, but the supporter base needs to wake up here)

I've seen many different theories about why this election went the way that it did, but I do think governance in blue states is a huge huge factor. Especially at the mayoral level in various cities. States like NY, NJ, IL saw pretty significant turnout drops. Cannot help but think that Brandon Johnson being way out of his depth is a big reason why IL swung even further to the right than the country as a whole did this time around, for instance...

Reagan also had to work with the Democrats more (ie. perpetual D House at the time), which is a differentiator.... Having said that, Trump's margin in the house very well could be smaller than what the Rs had in this past Congress.... which is going to cause a lot of headaches and (probably) limits a lot of what he's going to legislatively. Maybe will have some success on tax policy, but things like ACA repeal or an abortion ban are off the table most likely. And the other thing feature that people forget about American politics is thermostatic reaction: Presidents are inaugurated, start to implement what they campaigned on, and public opinion often time flips on these very same issues. Trump himself isn't immune to it, it happened to him in Round 1 (which led a 40 seat loss in the House that time). Nobody should be surprised if it happens again.