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)
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,097 posts, read 13,487,812 times
Reputation: 5777

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Lamb only had a chance because he's pro-gun. Too many Dem politicians aren't.

Plus, doesn't the term for this seat and the PA 18th district as is, end with the 2018 midterms?
Many Democrats and liberals are gun owners. Despite the rhetoric, most of them only support sensible gun control, not 2nd bans like many conservatives believe. Facts still matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Denver CO
21,177 posts, read 11,785,778 times
Reputation: 32185
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Again, not backing Pelosi also helped.
He didn't say he disagreed with Pelosi on policy, just that he thinks it's time for someone new - on both sides.

And polling is showing that Paul Ryan is just about as toxic as Pelosi.

Quote:
Democrats, meanwhile, hope to turn House Speaker Paul Ryan into a bogeyman for GOP congressional candidates. Ryan (R-Wis.) is a stronger surrogate than McConnell, but the percentage of voters who say his support would make them less likely to vote for a candidate (36 percent) is still greater than those it would make more likely (25 percent).

Republicans express confidence, despite national headwinds, that voters will reject candidates supported by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. But the poll shows Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Ryan would be a wash: 26 percent say a Pelosi endorsement would make them more likely to vote for a candidate, while 34 percent say it would make them less likely.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...idterms-310146
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:30 AM
 
2,684 posts, read 1,047,628 times
Reputation: 3333
I would like to hear from just one Trump supporter of why they thought, when they voted for Trump, that Trump gave a damn about America or Americans. There isn't even an inkling of him ever caring, throughout his whole life, about anyone but himself. Even a half-hearted effort at informing oneself on Trump's history would reveal that. He comes roaring out of reality TV with his jingoistic, megalomaniacal, racist, misogynistic nonsense at his campaign rallies, and the Trump supporters just can't get enough of it. I think it's pretty clear why they voted for him, and it has nothing to do with any evidence that he was qualified for the job. Instead, he made all the powerless white men and women who voted for him, feel powerful, and all the sociopaths who align themselves with his lack of graciousness and generosity and dignity, feel vindicated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:31 AM
 
15,353 posts, read 17,616,116 times
Reputation: 13483
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
It's time for Republicans to admit you have a serious problem in your president.
Let them stay over confident by thinking Trump voters are going to vote R every time Trump backs a candidate.

Last edited by sware2cod; 03-14-2018 at 11:48 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:34 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,097 posts, read 13,487,812 times
Reputation: 5777
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Again, not backing Pelosi also helped.
Hardly a conservative position. I think most general Democrats and liberals would prefer her gone at this point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,462 posts, read 20,105,085 times
Reputation: 8377
Quote:
Originally Posted by sware2cod View Post
All Democrats are pro-worker and pro-second amendment except a few far left fringe.

They can still be pro-second amendment when they support reasonable protections such as background checks. Even the GOP has been tweaking gun laws - even Trump himself supports restrictions on bump stocks, and the FL GOP added new restrictions.


ROTFFLMFAO!!!


Since when?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3ooMrgXido


Democrats are pro-worker as long as the worker is in Mexico or China.

As for the Second Amendment, Democrats have a long history of saying one thing and doing another.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...rticle/2593416

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...mocrats-214219
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,097 posts, read 13,487,812 times
Reputation: 5777
Another factor in this election... Democrats turned out at least 20 points higher than Republicans did vs. their 2016 or 2012 turnout. Republicans didn't show up. That suggests a lack of enthusiasm, and I would think it wasn't just about Saccone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:44 AM
 
15,366 posts, read 5,715,057 times
Reputation: 11512
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Another factor in this election... Democrats turned out at least 20 points higher than Republicans did vs. their 2016 or 2012 turnout. Republicans didn't show up. That suggests a lack of enthusiasm, and I would think it wasn't just about Saccone.
And this brings up another difference in this election. Democrats are notorious for not turning out for elections in non-presidential years. But the fact that they turned out in such high numbers for a special election bodes well for a November turnout. I think Trump has energized the Democratic party like nothing has in years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 11:57 AM
Status: "Trump: Inept, Incompetent, Insecure" (set 5 days ago)
 
10,519 posts, read 6,205,999 times
Reputation: 7244
I think this was a very interesting race to watch. Of course, as noted, it was in many ways an oddball: two men fighting to represent a district that will cease to exist as of November 2018. Some have noted that, after PA-18 is divided into four new districts, that both Saccone and Lamb will be running again, I assume in whatever district they happen to live in (or move to).


As such, many viewed this as a 'bell-weather' election, to show which way the political wind is blowing.


One may try to portray Mr. Lamb as an 'almost Republican' all one desires; the fact remains, the Republican party believed this to be a very important race to 'win', especially since it is in the heart of 'Trump Country'.


Not only did President Trump visit Pittsburg twice, to beat the drum for Mr. Saccone, but the denizens of that area also enjoyed visits by: VP Mike Pence, Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump Kushner, Kellyanne Conway, and even Ryan Zinke, the Secretary of the Interior. Say what you will, the Republicans threw their top talent (well, perhaps not Mr. Zinke) to support Mr. Saccone.


In addition, as has been mentioned numerous times, the Republicans spent at least 10.7 million dollars on political ads for this race. The Republican Party may have 'deep pockets', but not deep enough to do the same for the races upcoming in November.


This morning, Speaker Ryan drew upon the Party 'explanation' for the (apparent) loss: portraying Mr. Lamb as 'all but Republican'.


In his remarks, Mr. Ryan seemed to imply that without the support cited above (speakers), Mr. Saccone would have lost by a lot more. From CNN:


"Ryan argued that Trump helped make the race as close as it is. 'I think the President helped close this race,' he said, a reference to the campaigning Trump did in the district over the previous weekend. 'I think you saw the public polling. The public polling wasn't looking so good and the President came in and helped close this race and got it to where it is right now, which is within a few hundred votes.'


https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/14/polit...ion/index.html


Of course, Mr. Saccone, in theory, entered the race with one clear advantage: he had a "R" next to his name, while Mr. Lamb had a "D" next to his. Yet, if not for Trump et al, his loss would have been, according to Mr. Ryan, very bad indeed.


One article notes that the Republicans at first hammered home the Tax Reforms these people enjoyed due to Republicans, with Mr. Lamb disagreeing with the tax cuts. As the article notes, when this approach did not 'move the needle' (for Saccone's support), it was abandoned.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.652ff3b35569


From the WP opinion article:


“For the weeks of Feb. 4 and Feb. 11, roughly two-thirds of the broadcast television ads from Saccone’s campaign, the Congressional Leadership Fund super PAC and the National Republican Congressional Committee mentioned taxes … For the week of Feb. 18, that dropped to 36 percent, and to 14 percent the week after. … Since the beginning of March, tax ads have been essentially nonexistent.”


THAT will give the Republicans pause. I had noted before that the tax cuts would have been more beneficial to Republicans if enacted more closely to the November 2018 election.


I guess, by now, many voters have seen what the actual increase is in their paychecks, and compared them to the increases the Wealthy and Corporations got, and perhaps even read that said tax cuts, for them (not for corporations) have a sunset provision. Some may have read about Mr. Ryan's promise to 'look into' Medicare and Social Security, with the obvious implications.


Perhaps some of the more thoughtful have even read about the National Debt going up, Mr. Ben Carson's $31,000 dining room set, and those $139,000 doors concerning Mr. Zinke (did he mention those doors at his appearance? I bet not).


Perhaps some of these voters have read about the tariffs, and began to think that maybe these tariffs will not be so good for them, since it is widely expected that, for instance, the oil industry (prevalent in PA-18) may be adversely affected.


See:


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/05/trum...ign-steel.html


Finally, perhaps the firing of Mr. Tillerson was not advantageous. It does give the appearance, in light of the prior firings, security concerns, etc., that Mr. Trump, and by implication the Republicans, are not controlling things very well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2018, 12:06 PM
 
3,565 posts, read 1,875,228 times
Reputation: 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
The problem was, the (D)'s weren't lock step with "everything else". They said the right things but did not do them. Lamb's positions are with the people, not so much with Wall Street. That the (D)'s were with Wall Street is why they lost Pennsylvania.

Yes, this can be seen as those same people saying "listen to us" here also. Run another Wall Street stooge and those who backed Lamb are not going to automatically back that candidate.
This is ridiculous. The Republican President and his Republican Congress literally gave trillions of dollars to Wall Street and other elites at the expense of the federal budget and (eventually) working taxpayers. If what Trump says is true, then he and Republicans gave his children hundreds of millions--if not billions--of dollars in tax breaks when he dies. Democrats opposed in lockstep. The parties are not the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Trump has enormous Wall Street ties. His administration has been able to only really accomplish one thing- allowing a free-for-all for corporate interests. You really need to look in the mirror, because a 5-year-old could've seen that one coming.

The point is that Lamb is not a conservative. His most conservative position is on abortion, and yet he doesn't want to legislate choice. That's not all that unusual for Democrats. He's pro-LGBT, pro-Union, pro-social safety nets, not a climate change denier... etc. The fact is that he's a pretty typical Democrat. And he *likely* won in a very conservative Trump district against a Republican who did everything he could to compare himself directly to Trump himself. It's time for Republicans to admit you have a serious problem in your president.
To be clear: Lamb opposes abortion restrictions as government policy (like the Republicans' 20 week abortion ban), even as he self-describes as pro-life. He supports policy that preserves choice. He also supports Obamacare and opposes the Republican tax cut for the wealthy. Trump himself came to town to try to get people to vote for the Republican (crazy for a special election in a district that will disappear in November).

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Another factor in this election... Democrats turned out at least 20 points higher than Republicans did vs. their 2016 or 2012 turnout. Republicans didn't show up. That suggests a lack of enthusiasm, and I would think it wasn't just about Saccone.
It also must be about Trump, who held a rally in the district last week for Saccone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
And this brings up another difference in this election. Democrats are notorious for not turning out for elections in non-presidential years. But the fact that they turned out in such high numbers for a special election bodes well for a November turnout. I think Trump has energized the Democratic party like nothing has in years.
This is so very true. It is reminiscent of what happened in Alabama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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
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