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.
They now know the force they have after November, 2016.
pretty sure Ohio and Pennsylvania have both been swing states on the Presidential level for decades, and Both are actually republican on the State level, with the Democrats last having functional control of Pennsylvania in 1993,and Ohio was 1983.
Again, its always interesting that the states with the biggest backlash against Democrats are always governed by Republicans.
pretty sure Ohio and Pennsylvania have both been swing states on the Presidential level for decades, and Both are actually republican on the State level, with the Democrats last having functional control of Pennsylvania in 1993,and Ohio was 1983.
Again, its always interesting that the states with the biggest backlash against Democrats are always governed by Republicans.
2016 wwcs came out, and they will not be leaving their new home, the GOP.
DNC needs to court the anti trade, populism of the era, or repeat 2016 again and again.
Assuming all other states vote the same as they did in 2016, that would give the Democratic candidate 273 electoral votes.
The Democrat would need to win at least one more state in addition to Michigan and Wisconsin, which have 16 and 10 electoral votes respectively. Clinton received 232 (ignoring the handful of faithless electors), so she was short of a majority by 38. Pennsylvania is the next obvious state based on its similarly low percentage margin, and would contribute another 20 votes to the winner.
The state contests are strongly correlated with each other, since a candidate who appeals to one state is likely to be a good fit for others with a similar demographic and economic profile - like these three. So the chances are pretty good that Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania will all vote for the same candidate unless the margins are very small.
Regarding some of the other posts, if a party is going to prioritize catering to the preferences of one specific group too much, it could backfire by causing other groups to defect when they feel neglected by the party. This is true whether it applies to Republicans focusing heavily on working class white voters, or Democrats on young urbanites and minorities. The current administration seems to be pursuing a "base first" approach with little interest in appealing to the rest of the electorate. This strategy could work for awhile but I fully expect there is going to be an expiration date on it before too long.
The Democrat would need to win at least one more state in addition to Michigan and Wisconsin, which have 16 and 10 electoral votes respectively. Clinton received 232 (ignoring the handful of faithless electors), so she was short of a majority by 38. Pennsylvania is the next obvious state based on its similarly low percentage margin, and would contribute another 20 votes to the winner.
The state contests are strongly correlated with each other, since a candidate who appeals to one state is likely to be a good fit for others with a similar demographic and economic profile - like these three. So the chances are pretty good that Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania will all vote for the same candidate unless the margins are very small.
Regarding some of the other posts, if a party is going to prioritize catering to the preferences of one specific group too much, it could backfire by causing other groups to defect when they feel neglected by the party. This is true whether it applies to Republicans focusing heavily on working class white voters, or Democrats on young urbanites and minorities. The current administration seems to be pursuing a "base first" approach with little interest in appealing to the rest of the electorate. This strategy could work for awhile but I fully expect there is going to be an expiration date on it before too long.
Base first rocks.
Heard an interview long ago when Willie Randolph managed Mets that he said (paraphrased) : "we run until they stop us". Same concept. Run the 2016 RC/Trump model, again and again.
MAGA. Build from base out, 45. We showed the world how potent a weapon paying attention to the forgotten working class is.
The WWC is highly dominant in the Rust Belt. The Factory, union, Non-Hispanic White Voters. The coal miners, the people who aren't poor but aren't rich. After 2016, The Democrats better start paying attention to those voters in The Midwest, or they will lose again. The Midwest actually has the highest concentration of Non-Hispanic White Voters in the country.
The WWC is highly dominant in the Rust Belt. The Factory, union, Non-Hispanic White Voters. The coal miners, the people who aren't poor but aren't rich. After 2016, The Democrats better start paying attention to those voters in The Midwest, or they will lose again. The Midwest actually has the highest concentration of Non-Hispanic White Voters in the country.
and its not changing in in any meaningful way.
If the DNC wants a shot, they must convince deplorables the DNC saw the light, and is repenting and remorseful for their 2016 actions.
If the DNC wants a shot, they must convince deplorables the DNC saw the light, and is repenting and remorseful for their 2016 actions.
Nope. If the Democrats want a shot in 2020. all they have to do is follow the Republican playbook.
The GOP regained their lost voters by going straight to the base, learning the local and state issues and concerns, and finding candidates who would respond to those issues.
Once they regained their House majority, the national issues that were winners eventually emerged in 2016. With no repenting or remorse offered. Or wanted.
Expect the same thing in this election from the Democrats as the situation has turned completely on its head since the 2010 election. Now it is the Republican party that has a lot to answer for, and their playbook will still work to motivate the Democrats. Why?
Because it works like a double bladed axe. When one side gets dulled, all you have to do is flip the axe over and use the sharp edge. The Republican toadies in Congress have made the Republican side of the axe mighty dull.
Nope. If the Democrats want a shot in 2020. all they have to do is follow the Republican playbook.
The GOP regained their lost voters by going straight to the base, learning the local and state issues and concerns, and finding candidates who would respond to those issues.
Once they regained their House majority, the national issues that were winners eventually emerged in 2016. With no repenting or remorse offered. Or wanted.
Expect the same thing in this election from the Democrats as the situation has turned completely on its head since the 2010 election. Now it is the Republican party that has a lot to answer for, and their playbook will still work to motivate the Democrats. Why?
Because it works like a double bladed axe. When one side gets dulled, all you have to do is flip the axe over and use the sharp edge. The Republican toadies in Congress have made the Republican side of the axe mighty dull.
Let’s put it this way people follow the light even if they are fed an avalanche of lies
Consider that Hillary was beaten by a man who by most peoples standards is not likable and he did it with tweets and 10% of the campaign money she spent
All that smearing negative campaigning and money and she still lost
People smell a rat and that rat and it’s associates are going down and that my friend is why the greatest baseless assault in history is focused on removing Donald trump from office before that happens
Democrats have been banking on demographic change to be the ultimate long term solution to gaining power. But the 'White non Hispanic' population is at by far it's lowest point since the first European settlements took root in the 1600s and yet Democrats are at their lowest level of control in over 100 years.
Looking at the way seats have switched since the mid 1990s you would think it was Democrats facing a declining voter base, not the GOP.
What do you think are the causes and will this change? Will the demographics eventually shift enough to overcome the GOP?
Active radical GOP base turnout + Democrat demographic "sit out" in 2016 (swing states/cities, such as PA, MI, NC, WI) + Voter ID/suppression = GOP wins!
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.
