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.
Yes, I well remember all the ridiculous predictions from the left about how the Democrats would retake the Senate in 2014. Some were even under the delusion that the Democrats would take the House of Representatives back.
Democrats just don't get how unpopular they and their policies have become with voters. They still don't.
Neither was a majority opinion by any stretch, especially with regards to retaking the House.
I never understand this theory of discussion. We had one person making an argument but the you don't argue the point with this one person, you have to argue it like every single person of your contrived group holds the same positions.
IMO very few in the GOP have any desire to see the electoral college thrown out so why try to throw them all in with the argument of one person here?
The finger pointing on these forums must be contagious. Maybe I should have worded that better, but on City-Data I've been called an idiot, clueless and a ******* because I support some ideas that are proposed by Democrats. I rarely, if ever, use insulting, derogatory words when a member has a point of view. I've even been called a liar and a racist when offering alternative theories to recent police shootings. People often put those who do not agree with them into boxes, which is one reason Washington is in trouble. Congress has been in gridlock for a long time because of its "all or nothing" and "my way of the highway" attitude.
In this case, I guess I could have written
"why is it that so many Republicans complain...."
There are rarely times when all Democrats or all Republicans agree on every issue.
The finger pointing on these forums must be contagious. Maybe I should have worded that better, but on City-Data I've been called an idiot, clueless and a ******* because I support some ideas that are proposed by Democrats.
The name calling is pretty stupid.
Quote:
I rarely, if ever, use insulting, derogatory words when a member has a point of view. I've even been called a liar and a racist when offering alternative theories to recent police shootings. People often put those who do not agree with them into boxes, which is one reason Washington is in trouble. Congress has been in gridlock for a long time because of its "all or nothing" and "my way of the highway" attitude.
Absolutely.
Quote:
In this case, I guess I could have written
"why is it that so many Republicans complain...."
There are rarely times when all Democrats or all Republicans agree on every issue.
Something that shows the middle class is abandoning the Democrats. Something in the line of a survey maybe or something beyond just an opinion source.
Oh I can provide you endless links, news stories, articles, etc that show this. The Obama Administration and DNC's own internal polling shows this. They recently changed their message on income inequality (as in dropped it) because they know they are in trouble with the middle class and they need a better message that registers with people.
I'm sure that if I post any of them, you will automatically dismiss the source. But I will give you two sources. First from the very liberal Mother Jones. The only thing they got wrong with this article is they decided to inject race into it. Race doesn't matter unless you are African American.
It's going to be a landslide loss for the Democrats if the GOP doesn't screw it up like they did when they nominated the idiot Mitt Romney. That much is clear. King Hillary comes in with huge negatives, she isn't even supported by vast numbers of her own party as Bernie Sanders shows, and she has the Obama Administration's record around her neck. This is a woman who simply doesn't have it in her to demonstrate that she is above all of this.
But I will give you two sources. First from the very liberal Mother Jones.
Good article, but it depends how you define "middle class." Yes, I agree that most of us wish there were a better way to weed out welfare fraud, but I disagree that the white middle class supports most of the GOP issues especially on minimum wage, equal pay, gay marriage and Medicare. Also, although many Republicans feel that Carly Fiorina represents women's rights, most women I know disagree. Even those of us who are not "pro-abortion" (if there is such a thing) don't want the government telling us what to do with our own bodies. In addition, most people I know, even people who go to church every Sunday, do not want to live in a theocracy where its leaders use the Bible as the law of the land instead of the Constitution.
As the BTO song says, "You ain't seen nothing yet."
Oh I can provide you endless links, news stories, articles, etc that show this. The Obama Administration and DNC's own internal polling shows this. They recently changed their message on income inequality (as in dropped it) because they know they are in trouble with the middle class and they need a better message that registers with people.
I'm sure that if I post any of them, you will automatically dismiss the source. But I will give you two sources. First from the very liberal Mother Jones. The only thing they got wrong with this article is they decided to inject race into it. Race doesn't matter unless you are African American.
It's going to be a landslide loss for the Democrats if the GOP doesn't screw it up like they did when they nominated the idiot Mitt Romney. That much is clear. King Hillary comes in with huge negatives, she isn't even supported by vast numbers of her own party as Bernie Sanders shows, and she has the Obama Administration's record around her neck. This is a woman who simply doesn't have it in her to demonstrate that she is above all of this.
The first link was a good article, your own topic link was nothing more than an opinion piece with no evidence.
In 2012, Romney won the white working class by a good margin, but as we all know how much weight the white working class has on elections these days, as I am sure President Romney can tell you.....oh wait, that's right he lost in 2012 even though he won the white working class by a large margin.
It's going to be a landslide loss for the Democrats if the GOP doesn't screw it up like they did when they nominated the idiot Mitt Romney.
In theory, you are correct. Even Reuters printed an article that gives reasons why the GOP should win. However, if you visit other threads, you'll find numerous posts and links insisting the Democrats have a huge advantage. Most of them are only opinions. From now until next November, nobody will really know. I think it will be very close, even closer than 2012, although I think a Democrat will win with a very strong voter turnout. (I can only hope & pray!)
FYI, here's the blog from Reuters that supports part of what you wrote.
[url=http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/10/14/forget-what-you-saw-last-night-two-simple-reasons-a-republican-is-likely-to-win-in-2016/]Forget the debate: Two simple reasons a Republican will likely win in 2016[/url]
"The most important finding from our model is the power of incumbency: if you already hold the office you seek, you are far more likely than not to retain it. Our model showed that incumbents have a threefold greater chance of beating their opponent. When no incumbent is running, successor candidates (in this case, Democrats) are three times less likely to win."
Oh I can provide you endless links, news stories, articles, etc that show this. The Obama Administration and DNC's own internal polling shows this. They recently changed their message on income inequality (as in dropped it) because they know they are in trouble with the middle class and they need a better message that registers with people.
I'm sure that if I post any of them, you will automatically dismiss the source. But I will give you two sources. First from the very liberal Mother Jones. The only thing they got wrong with this article is they decided to inject race into it. Race doesn't matter unless you are African American.
It's going to be a landslide loss for the Democrats if the GOP doesn't screw it up like they did when they nominated the idiot Mitt Romney. That much is clear. King Hillary comes in with huge negatives, she isn't even supported by vast numbers of her own party as Bernie Sanders shows, and she has the Obama Administration's record around her neck. This is a woman who simply doesn't have it in her to demonstrate that she is above all of this.
First of all, it is not likely that there will be landslide for either side in the 2016 Presidential Election. We're simply too polarized and relatively few voters are movable. Hillary may have huge negatives, but you don't have to be loved to be elected. You only have to be viewed as less repugnant than the alternative.
In the decades following the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, white non-college grad support for the Democratic Party in the South fell by nearly 20%. Outside of the South, support dropped by about 1%. In the election of 2012, Mitt captured 59% of the white vote nationally, but in the old Confederacy, his support ranged from 89% in Mississippi to 61% in Virginia. The Democrats working class problem is overwhelmingly a Southern and deep red state problem. In blue or purple states thus far it's been far less of a problem. Race and the 2012 Election | American Renaissance
Also keep in mind that if you define "working middle class" as primarily non-college whites, they are the oldest demographic and are disappearing at a rate of over 3% a year. 2016 will be the first election where white college grad voters outnumber white non-college voters.
When the other poster was asking you for something other than opinion pieces, which you were appallingly incapable of providing, he was probably thinking of a source like this, the annual Pew Survey by voter ID.
This survey, which was gathered in late 2014 (25,000 respondents) and released in April shows that most of the GOP's strongest groups are the ones that are losing voting share with each election.
None of this rules out the possibility that 2016 will be one of those rare game changer elections. It could be, and, yes even Donald Trump could be elected. But it's much more likely that this will be another election that's closely contested and won or lost nationally by no more than 5 or 6%.
Last edited by Bureaucat; 11-12-2015 at 03:23 PM..
None of this rules out the possibility that 2016 will be one of those rare game changer elections. It could be, and, yes even Donald Trump could be elected. But it's much more likely that this will be another election that's closely contested and won or lost nationally by no more than 5 or 6%.
It's already a game changer.
First time in decades that a political party has deemed a candidate the nominee, DNC/King Hillary, before any votes are thrown. She will be the new Walter Mondale or if you rather John McCain.
Population has turned against the "establishment" and MSM and the candidates they try to choose for us. Bernie Sanders & Trump fill arenas, while everyone else can barely fill a room.
Middle Class is angry & mad and when that happens, it's always a game changing election. Think 1968, 1984, 1992.
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.
