U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2017, 05:04 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
72,014 posts, read 83,688,530 times
Reputation: 41810

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
The California delegation has nothing to do with Pelosi retaining the leadership(the 39 Democrats from Cal isnt enough to elect a leader)(she won 134-63), it has to do with House Dems not bowing to the will of Republicans and Berniecrats.

all the BS attacks on Pelosi about losing seats and right's opinion of her make no sense.

Pelosi was leader back when Dems had a similar number of seats after the 2004 election. Somehow even with her being the leader, Dems were able to capture 257 seats in 2008.
Of course it has something to do with her retaining her position. Though 39 votes isn't the whole thing, it certainly is a nice number.

Of course you are going to defend her, but she is having her problems, isn't a popular as she was, has gone way to the left, not that she has not always been to the left and she looks like death warmed over. I am not making that comment because I am trying to pick on her, but anyone who takes a really good look at her would have to see how tired she looks. Like a few on the right, she isn't helping her party, she needs to hang it up and retire.

 
Old 06-18-2017, 09:31 AM
 
5,721 posts, read 5,470,053 times
Reputation: 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
The California delegation has nothing to do with Pelosi retaining the leadership(the 39 Democrats from Cal isnt enough to elect a leader)(she won 134-63), it has to do with House Dems not bowing to the will of Republicans and Berniecrats.

all the BS attacks on Pelosi about losing seats and right's opinion of her make no sense.

Pelosi was leader back when Dems had a similar number of seats after the 2004 election. Somehow even with her being the leader, Dems were able to capture 257 seats in 2008.
2008 is ancient history in politics. This is the House Democratic situation after the 2016 election :

I see huge portions of the country with nothing but red. Pelosi owns that. We saw the Republicans completely rebrand their party after their huge losses in 2008, and they went on to be very successful in 2010 as a result. The Dems need to do the same, and they cannot rebrand if it's the same people running it.

You also cannot speak about Berniecrats as if they are some tiny, insignificant share of the electorate. The party must do something to appease them, and I don't mean throwing them a bone, but actually listening to them and including them.
 
Old 06-18-2017, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,304 posts, read 11,547,111 times
Reputation: 4317
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita View Post
Of course it has something to do with her retaining her position. Though 39 votes isn't the whole thing, it certainly is a nice number.
If she had won by exactly 39 votes, then you would have a point, but she had 2/3rd of the entire Democratic Caucus. And the last vote before that, she won 185-3,

Quote:
Of course you are going to defend her, but she is having her problems, isn't a popular as she was, has gone way to the left, not that she has not always been to the left and she looks like death warmed over. I am not making that comment because I am trying to pick on her, but anyone who takes a really good look at her would have to see how tired she looks. Like a few on the right, she isn't helping her party, she needs to hang it up and retire.
Im arguing data and numbers, not my personal opinion. She won in a land slide, and she picked the people who ran the DCCC and got all those Dems elected in the first place.

The attacks on her come from the right and the far left. Thats a fact, backed up by who voted for her
 
Old 06-18-2017, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,304 posts, read 11,547,111 times
Reputation: 4317
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
2008 is ancient history in politics. This is the House Democratic situation after the 2016 election :
I see huge portions of the country with nothing but red. Pelosi owns that.....
Political maps are worthless in the discussion we are having.


Here is the Cook PVI

http://cookpolitical.com/file/Cook_P...ter_Index_.pdf

Democrats could win the House and the map would basically look the same.

Red or blue, districts are not divided by georgraphical area but by population, there are just as many people in a tiny district in New York as there is in the entire state of Montana.



Quote:
We saw the Republicans completely rebrand their party after their huge losses in 2008, and they went on to be very successful in 2010 as a result. The Dems need to do the same, and they cannot rebrand if it's the same people running it.
2 problems here.

1. The Republicans never changed leadership. Hastert left because of ethic and because he raped teenage boys, not because he "aw the party needed a change"

and even then everyone simply moved up a spot behind him.

Even when Boehner left and Canter lost, the same thing happened,everyone moved up one spot with the exception of Paul Ryan was the VP pick the last time around.

2. Rebranding isnt what Gave republicans those wins. 1 and 2 term incumbents in districts that were rapidly changing, as well as mid term turnout are why those people won those districts.

There were Democrats who won districts that were +15 Republican in 2008, of course they were not going to hold on to those seats.

as the PVI shows, Democrats hold more of their seats now, than Republicans hold of theirs. That means any win is an uphill battle for Dems.

Quote:
You also cannot speak about Berniecrats as if they are some tiny, insignificant share of the electorate. The party must do something to appease them, and I don't mean throwing them a bone, but actually listening to them and including them.
Berniecrats = anti Hillary Democrats

so when I say Berniecrats, im talking about the people who say they would never vote for any Democrat other than him or his followers, that faction is tiny. a million or 2 at best.

We dont have to appease them. We can ignore them.
 
Old 06-19-2017, 08:30 AM
 
9,880 posts, read 10,128,649 times
Reputation: 5293
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
Red or blue, districts are not divided by geographical area but by population, there are just as many people in a tiny district in New York as there is in the entire state of Montana.
The overwhelming population growth in the USA has been urban since rural population slipped below urban in 1930.

Even leaving Alaska out of the calculation, the urban population lives on 3.6% of the land area of the country. So obviously you can't see that small a percentage of land area on a map.
rural - year - urban population in millions
59.5 2010 249.3
59.1 2000 222.4
61.7 1990 187.1
59.5 1980 167.1
53.6 1970 149.6
54.1 1960 125.3
54.5 1950 96.8
57.5 1940 74.7
54.0 1930 69.2
51.8 1920 54.3
50.2 1910 42.1
46.0 1900 30.2

Some maps are deceptive because of political boundaries. For example, San Bernardino county is geographically a vast desert of over 20 thousand square miles , but it shows up as urban on many maps because the over 2 million population lives in one corner of the county.
 
Old 06-20-2017, 05:57 AM
 
3,388 posts, read 4,341,465 times
Reputation: 2231
I think that map makes a tempting graphic however you have to remember the issue of density others broght up and the fact that the Rs leveraged their 2010 wins greatly during resdistricting. Dems can win the majority of votes cast for representatives nationwide and still come up well short because of how districts were drawn. My state is usually 55-45 R to D. But our congressional districts are drawn with 6 favoring Republicans and one meandering across portions of half the state as a Dem sinkhole to achieve those 6 R districts.


The one thing that has to be acknowledged about Pelosi is that she knows how to wrangle cats like few others in recent years. You cannot simultaneously move further to the center and appease Bernie voters in the base. The centrist, third way, DLC type Democrats are the very people Bernies supporters railed against for making the Party Republican lite.
 
Old 06-20-2017, 11:39 AM
 
5,444 posts, read 1,548,736 times
Reputation: 2281
Hopefully Pelosi will run for office and win the primary.
President Trump would defeat Pelosi by the biggest margin in election history.
But of course Pelosi has no chance of winning the primary.
 
Old 06-20-2017, 03:34 PM
 
7,126 posts, read 2,525,011 times
Reputation: 3607
Quote:
Originally Posted by swayalot View Post
Hopefully Pelosi will run for office and win the primary.
President Trump would defeat Pelosi by the biggest margin in election history.
But of course Pelosi has no chance of winning the primary.
President Trump couldn't win by the largest margin in election history even of the Democrats nominated Satan.
 
Old 06-20-2017, 08:30 PM
 
5,721 posts, read 5,470,053 times
Reputation: 3606
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
Political maps are worthless in the discussion we are having.


Here is the Cook PVI

http://cookpolitical.com/file/Cook_P...ter_Index_.pdf

Democrats could win the House and the map would basically look the same.

Red or blue, districts are not divided by georgraphical area but by population, there are just as many people in a tiny district in New York as there is in the entire state of Montana.
So what we end up with is skewed in favor of rural districts. If Democrats want a majority, they need to be able to compete in those rural districts. You speak of PVI as if it is something static that Democrats cannot influence or change but have to overcome.

Quote:
so when I say Berniecrats, im talking about the people who say they would never vote for any Democrat other than him or his followers, that faction is tiny. a million or 2 at best.

We dont have to appease them. We can ignore them.
Seeing as how Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million but lost the electoral college by less than 100,000 votes I disagree that that faction of voters can be ignored. We also do not know how many Berniecrats didn't vote at all.

Karen Handel just won with very high turnout in GA-6. All her campaign had to do was air TV advertisements with Nancy Pelosi's face to turn out Republican voters. Getting outspent by Ossoff didn't even matter because Pelosi's brand (and thus the Democratic brand) has become toxic in huge parts of the country.
 
Old 06-20-2017, 08:40 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
1,171 posts, read 798,295 times
Reputation: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by swayalot View Post
Hopefully Pelosi will run for office and win the primary.
President Trump would defeat Pelosi by the biggest margin in election history.
But of course Pelosi has no chance of winning the primary.
Whoever it is, Dems needs to run genuine primary election and let their voters decide. That will help them in winning actual election.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top