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.
Things have changed. If the election were held today, it’s not clear who would hold the chamber.
This can't be true, the Democrats have honed their message:
Democrats(2016): Trump is bad, vote for us!
Democrats(2018): Trump is really bad, vote for us!
After the #SchumerShutdown, the only one in danger of a blue wave is the Ty D Bol man... millennials and DREAMers are going to sit this one out in droves.
What we are likely going to see come Nov 2018 is that the House result will parallel the 2016 presidential election:
Democratic votes for the House collectively will be about 2% higher than Republican votes for the House, yet Republicans will still hold the house due to gerrymandering. And the system will fail yet again. The minority will continue to rule the country.
If Perez was not the Chairman of the DNC his endorsement would be worth diddly. You can argue that everyone else is wrong except you if you want. In the end it really matters not. The damage has been done.
He's actually a former Cabinet member so his influence would be on par with someone like Ben Carson or Betsy DeVos.
You seem to be confused about which races the DNC controls and which they don't. All your state level races (Governor, Senator, HoR, etc) are handled by the states SOC. Events leading up to that are handled by the state parties. The Presidential primary is really the only race in which the DNC (or RNC) head should be obligated to remain neutral. He doesn't exert any control over the lesser races.
He's actually a former Cabinet member so his influence would be on par with someone like Ben Carson or Betsy DeVos.
No, you mean his influence would be on par with Margaret Spellings. Who? Right.
Quote:
You seem to be confused about which races the DNC controls and which they don't. All your state level races (Governor, Senator, HoR, etc) are handled by the states SOC. Events leading up to that are handled by the state parties. The Presidential primary is really the only race in which the DNC (or RNC) head should be obligated to remain neutral. He doesn't exert any control over the lesser races.
He said it would be wrong for him to take sides in the Georgia gubernatorial Democratic primary when asked to.
What we are likely going to see come Nov 2018 is that the House result will parallel the 2016 presidential election:
Democratic votes for the House collectively will be about 2% higher than Republican votes for the House, yet Republicans will still hold the house due to gerrymandering. And the system will fail yet again. The minority will continue to rule the country.
Certainly possible, although RCP currently has Democrats 4% ahead on the generic ballot. But it is difficult to add up the collective House votes by party if incumbents run unopposed, or if some districts have a D vs D or R vs R race which could happen with the top-two primary system in CA, WA and LA. If the status quo in the House is going to change, this will require a significant number of Trump voters to either sit out the midterms or cross party lines.
Long term, maybe liberals are going to need to start making relocation decisions to infiltrate purple and light red areas more. No need to go to the "Freedom Caucus" dark red districts that they won't win regardless. That would help address their geographic problems .
This is what the Democrats offer: Return to Government Accountability, respect for the Constitution and rule of law, fiscal sanity, environmental protections, and a check on a rogue White House.
This is just a few benefits.
What do you get with Republicans?
More corruption, More swamp, More insanity, More debt, More environmental degradation, More Constitutional crisis.
sorry but except for offering a check on Trump, the rest of this is delusional
Compare the number of those in poverty in Calhoun County to those in poverty in Atlanta.
Calhoun County: 44,000
Atlanta: 113,400
See the difference? Which costs more in public assistance? All of Calhoun County? Or just the city of Atlanta?
There are 54 Georgia counties with poverty rates above the city of Atlanta(24.5), there are 119 Georgia counties with higher poverty rates than Fulton County(17.6 where the majority of Atlanta is), 110 with higher poverty rates than DeKalb,( 19% where the rest of Atlanta is)
You think those 54 counties, or 119 counties, or 110 counties are going to add up to less than 113,400
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.
Things have changed. If the election were held today, it’s not clear who would hold the chamber.
.
