Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
True, but many of them are also immigrants who had to strive and work for everything. Legal immigrants who pay their own way frown greatly on illegals who are welcomed with open arms.
And professionals are generally higher earners who would feel the impact of higher taxes and “pay your fair share” rhetoric.
What it may do is focus future candidates towards their own electorate vs a state-wide or country-wide party line. This would be a good thing.
As to McBath’s gun safety stance, ok, but what else has she got? I look forward to seeing how she votes and which legislation she sponsors.
Fear of illegal immigration is not high on the list of concerns of Georgia's 6th.
Fear of illegal immigration is not high on the list of concerns of Georgia's 6th.
This is a good point.
When the Georgia 6th Congressional District was controlled and dominated by conservative voters, illegal immigration was an issue that politicians could get much more mileage out of in elections in the district, particularly with the more conservative white voters that have traditionally dominated the electoral demographics of the district.
But with the changing demographics of the district and with the district appearing to be dominated more and more by a younger and more diverse demographic (younger, racially/ethnically diverse voters with school-aged children, Millennial-aged voters in Tech jobs, etc), the issue of illegal immigration more than likely is not at the forefront of issues that voters in a diversifying closer-in suburban district like the 6th District may be most concerned about.
Plus, during the current era with Donald Trump as president, many voters (particularly the college-educated female voters that are a dominant demographic in the district) may tend to interpret too much talk about the issue of illegal immigration as race-baiting demagoguery.
Voters in a diversifying closer-in suburban district like the 6th want reasonable controls on immigration and a fair immigration system and think that border security is a vitally important issue, but they do not like it when politicians get into the realm of using the illegal immigration issue as a not-so thinly-veiled cover and as a vehicle to demonize immigrants and people of color as part of a white nationalist agenda.
With the rash of gun massacres (including mass school shootings), one issue that appears to have gained in importance in a district like the Georgia 6th (where the public schools are some of the most highly-regarded in the nation and are the pride and a centerpiece of the community) is school safety... An issue which (whether intentionally or unintentionally) Democrat Lucy McBath's fervent gun control advocacy appears to have tapped directly into and connected with a majority of Georgia 6th District voters on during the 2018 election cycle.
When the Georgia 6th Congressional District was controlled and dominated by conservative voters, illegal immigration was an issue that politicians could get much more mileage out of in elections in the district, particularly with the more conservative white voters that have traditionally dominated the electoral demographics of the district.
But with the changing demographics of the district and with the district appearing to be dominated more and more by a younger and more diverse demographic (younger, racially/ethnically diverse voters with school-aged children, Millennial-aged voters in Tech jobs, etc), the issue of illegal immigration more than likely is not at the forefront of issues that voters in a diversifying closer-in suburban district like the 6th District may be most concerned about.
Plus, during the current era with Donald Trump as president, many voters (particularly the college-educated female voters that are a dominant demographic in the district) may tend to interpret too much talk about the issue of illegal immigration as race-baiting demagoguery.
Voters in a diversifying closer-in suburban district like the 6th want reasonable controls on immigration and a fair immigration system and think that border security is a vitally important issue, but they do not like it when politicians get into the realm of using the illegal immigration issue as a not-so thinly-veiled cover and as a vehicle to demonize immigrants and people of color as part of a white nationalist agenda.
With the rash of gun massacres (including mass school shootings), one issue that appears to have gained in importance in a district like the Georgia 6th (where the public schools are some of the most highly-regarded in the nation and are the pride and a centerpiece of the community) is school safety... An issue which (whether intentionally or unintentionally) Democrat Lucy McBath's fervent gun control advocacy appears to have tapped directly into and connected with a majority of Georgia 6th District voters on during the 2018 election cycle.
Not sure if you live and work in the district, or if some of the other posters do as well. I happen to, and have kids in local schools and of course speak with other parents in a variety of settings. Many of these parents are immigrants, in tech, and either millennials or are young Gen X.
While there is a lot of eye rolling about Trump, I haven’t heard much about gun control fears or the desire for a laundry list of “progressive” items. Any discussion about immigration shows sympathy but also that we can’t have people overstaying visas or jumping the border. Remember, ALL of these immigrants followed the rules in an often expensive and complex process.
Most of the people pretty much like what they’ve got now, and want to keep it the same (except maybe for Trump).
I don’t see a massive blue wave coming next year. But maybe I’m not speaking with the right people. I CAN see Trump getting defeated in GA but that doesn’t mean a blanket win for Democrats.
Not sure if you live and work in the district, or if some of the other posters do as well. I happen to, and have kids in local schools and of course speak with other parents in a variety of settings. Many of these parents are immigrants, in tech, and either millennials or are young Gen X.
While there is a lot of eye rolling about Trump, I haven’t heard much about gun control fears or the desire for a laundry list of “progressive” items. Any discussion about immigration shows sympathy but also that we can’t have people overstaying visas or jumping the border. Remember, ALL of these immigrants followed the rules in an often expensive and complex process.
Most of the people pretty much like what they’ve got now, and want to keep it the same (except maybe for Trump).
I don’t see a massive blue wave coming next year. But maybe I’m not speaking with the right people. I CAN see Trump getting defeated in GA but that doesn’t mean a blanket win for Democrats.
If Trump loses Georgia it will have been a shellacking for Republicans nationally, and could mean keeping house and winning senate as well.
Many people downplayed the 2018 blue wave, even up until election night, yet Democrats won the largest vote margin in history and flipped even a gerrymander map. Don't underestimate people's distate for a party that literally does nothing but enrich themselves and try to create a bogeyman out of everyone else (immigrants, LGBT, etc) to distract the lower intelligence voters while they do it.
You're describing a good chunk of the Democratic Party, not "America."
I don't think its clear whether the mass of the Democratic Party will move well left. The deep blue districts are moving well to the left. But the less blue and purple districts have elected a lot of people like veterans (as well as some way to the left).
Typically both parties tack to the center. They usually get creamed when they move to one extreme in presidential or statewide races.
Disagree, both Party are moving further to left or right respectfully. And moderate Candidate has less a change of winning.
Hilary Clinton WAS the moderate candidate, she was moderate on welfare and criminal justice. She was late in accepting gay marriage, she has a moderate back ground of the environmental issues. She for the Iraq war when most Democrat at the time didn't. Her being an actual moderate did not change conservatives to give her a second look. Conservatives ate her alive regardless it completely made no difference.
Sanders the liberal candidate did far better than anyone expected the man wasn't even actual democrat.
If you look at history Since 2002 every moderate Democrat Candidate lost in a much wider marge than Stacy did, Stacy who ran as unapologetic progressive only lost Georgia by 1%. Stacy just prove something that Democrats have a far better change at winning being actual liberal than being moderate because conservative are not going support a moderrate Democrat any more than Liberial Democrat, mean while running being an actual liberal has gotten candidates to nail biting range.
Meanwhile Trump is to far far far to right of both Bush and Reagan. His view migration is literal 180 to Reagan. Trump with 90% has among highest approve with in Republican party in history, while at same time the lowest national average at 30-40%. But Do Republican care he not moderate? are Republicans caring that he only paying to the interest of only half the country? No.....
10 years ago I would agree with you but now no, Unusually there candidates that leans left or right but as much they lean left or right they care or at least try to bring the country together. This not what happening in the era of Trump basically he only care about his republican base and basically spits on the other half of the country. The thing that Republicans don't realize Democrat are taking notes. While candidates like Trump might feel good the Republicans now it's only opening door for further from center candidates on both sides.
If Trump loses Georgia it will have been a shellacking for Republicans nationally, and could mean keeping house and winning senate as well.
Many people downplayed the 2018 blue wave, even up until election night, yet Democrats won the largest vote margin in history and flipped even a gerrymander map. Don't underestimate people's distate for a party that literally does nothing but enrich themselves and try to create a bogeyman out of everyone else (immigrants, LGBT, etc) to distract the lower intelligence voters while they do it.
I don’t think your stereotypes are helpful. It’s not like the Democrats are all sweetness and light.
Disagree, both Party are moving further to left or right respectfully. And moderate Candidate has less a change of winning.
Hilary Clinton WAS the moderate candidate, she was moderate on welfare and criminal justice. She was late in accepting gay marriage, she has a moderate back ground of the environmental issues. She for the Iraq war when most Democrat at the time didn't. Her being an actual moderate did not change conservatives to give her a second look. Conservatives ate her alive regardless it completely made no difference.
Sanders the liberal candidate did far better than anyone expected the man wasn't even actual democrat.
If you look at history Since 2002 every moderate Democrat Candidate lost in a much wider marge than Stacy did, Stacy who ran as unapologetic progressive only lost Georgia by 1%. Stacy just prove something that Democrats have a far better change at winning being actual liberal than being moderate because conservative are not going support a moderrate Democrat any more than Liberial Democrat, mean while running being an actual liberal has gotten candidates to nail biting range.
Meanwhile Trump is to far far far to right of both Bush and Reagan. His view migration is literal 180 to Reagan. Trump with 90% has among highest approve with in Republican party in history, while at same time the lowest national average at 30-40%. But Do Republican care he not moderate? are Republicans caring that he only paying to the interest of only half the country? No.....
10 years ago I would agree with you but now no, Unusually there candidates that leans left or right but as much they lean left or right they care or at least try to bring the country together. This not what happening in the era of Trump basically he only care about his republican base and basically spits on the other half of the country. The thing that Republicans don't realize Democrat are taking notes. While candidates like Trump might feel good the Republicans now it's only opening door for further from center candidates on both sides.
Hillary was an exceptionally flawed candidate, with a checkered past and a sense of self-entitlement. She advertised herself as Obama II and Bill II and of course, the glass ceiling breaker but when it came down to it she appeared to be someone with no charisma nor empathy. She could have and should have won - I believe had she actually visited states like Michigan instead of sending out “surrogates” like her daughter she would have taken those electoral votes.
Trump personally isn’t far right at all. He just parrots lines that the deep Conservative base likes.
If Biden runs with a good VP candidate I would consider voting for him. But if it’s a very left candidate walking out of the convention I will hold my nose and vote for Trump again.
Disagree, both Party are moving further to left or right respectfully. And moderate Candidate has less a change of winning.
Hilary Clinton WAS the moderate candidate, she was moderate on welfare and criminal justice. She was late in accepting gay marriage, she has a moderate back ground of the environmental issues. She for the Iraq war when most Democrat at the time didn't. Her being an actual moderate did not change conservatives to give her a second look. Conservatives ate her alive regardless it completely made no difference.
Sanders the liberal candidate did far better than anyone expected the man wasn't even actual democrat.
If you look at history Since 2002 every moderate Democrat Candidate lost in a much wider marge than Stacy did, Stacy who ran as unapologetic progressive only lost Georgia by 1%. Stacy just prove something that Democrats have a far better change at winning being actual liberal than being moderate because conservative are not going support a moderrate Democrat any more than Liberial Democrat, mean while running being an actual liberal has gotten candidates to nail biting range.
Meanwhile Trump is to far far far to right of both Bush and Reagan. His view migration is literal 180 to Reagan. Trump with 90% has among highest approve with in Republican party in history, while at same time the lowest national average at 30-40%. But Do Republican care he not moderate? are Republicans caring that he only paying to the interest of only half the country? No.....
10 years ago I would agree with you but now no, Unusually there candidates that leans left or right but as much they lean left or right they care or at least try to bring the country together. This not what happening in the era of Trump basically he only care about his republican base and basically spits on the other half of the country. The thing that Republicans don't realize Democrat are taking notes. While candidates like Trump might feel good the Republicans now it's only opening door for further from center candidates on both sides.
The Georgia electorate is generally more accepting of progressives—but, I don’t think that being a progressive helped, and she really didn’t run as one in the general election. I believe that she did well because the candidate that she was running against was pretty bad and wasn’t an incumbent, additionally the whole Republican primary damaged the Republican brand (they were all pretty awful)—combine this with changing demographics—and that for the most part she ran a good (not perfect) race—the next Democrat to run will have some of the same advantages, and quite possibly a worse economy—but will be battling an incumbent—if Kemp doesn’t do anything too silly, it will still be tough for a Democrat to win.
Disagree, both Party are moving further to left or right respectfully. And moderate Candidate has less a change of winning.
Hilary Clinton WAS the moderate candidate, she was moderate on welfare and criminal justice. She was late in accepting gay marriage, she has a moderate back ground of the environmental issues. She for the Iraq war when most Democrat at the time didn't. Her being an actual moderate did not change conservatives to give her a second look. Conservatives ate her alive regardless it completely made no difference.
Sanders the liberal candidate did far better than anyone expected the man wasn't even actual democrat.
If you look at history Since 2002 every moderate Democrat Candidate lost in a much wider marge than Stacy did, Stacy who ran as unapologetic progressive only lost Georgia by 1%. Stacy just prove something that Democrats have a far better change at winning being actual liberal than being moderate because conservative are not going support a moderrate Democrat any more than Liberial Democrat, mean while running being an actual liberal has gotten candidates to nail biting range.
Meanwhile Trump is to far far far to right of both Bush and Reagan. His view migration is literal 180 to Reagan. Trump with 90% has among highest approve with in Republican party in history, while at same time the lowest national average at 30-40%. But Do Republican care he not moderate? are Republicans caring that he only paying to the interest of only half the country? No.....
10 years ago I would agree with you but now no, Unusually there candidates that leans left or right but as much they lean left or right they care or at least try to bring the country together. This not what happening in the era of Trump basically he only care about his republican base and basically spits on the other half of the country. The thing that Republicans don't realize Democrat are taking notes. While candidates like Trump might feel good the Republicans now it's only opening door for further from center candidates on both sides.
You are correct about Abrams. She ran a very good campaign. But I wonder if it is can be replicated.
Clinton was the more moderate candidate and won the Democratic primary. Among the Republicans, the more conservative candidate hasn't won since Reagan (who did pretty well). Before that, Goldwater. In state elections, the Republicans have often lost winnable Senate elections by going far to the right. See Alabama this year.
President Trump is a populist, but is not far right. The media is all left and doesn't understand the distinction. Cruz and Carson were the candidates on the right in the Republican primary. Trump is not ideological at all.
Reading Born 2 Rolls insights are better than any newspaper columnist out there. And we get him on CD. I'm still in awe of the depth of insight and totally non partisan viewpoint. His posts ought to be standard fare for any Journalism student. I can smell an agenda and bias from almost everyone else out there. I can't pin him down. What a good journalist should be but is rarer and rarer these days.
OK, carry on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
