Election Night 2019-- Trump Stunk It Up For The GOP
>
Kentucky was the most important of all the races to Trump and he and Pence spent a lot of time and political capital on trying to bolster the unpopular right-wing multimillionaire governor, Matt Bevin. Every Republican in the Senate has got to be rethinking their support for Trump right now. If he can't win in Kentucky, where exactly can he win?
Yesterday, Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D) predicted that about 31% of the state's 3,451,537 million eligible voters would take part in today's election. In 2015 it was 30.7%. That's how Republicans win. The Lexington Herald-Leader reported that "Grimes, who is not seeking re-election because of term limits, said she was disappointed in the projected voter turnout. 'It’s simply not OK that only a small portion of Kentuckians will possibly elect our next constitutional officers,' she said. 'Our democracy depends on people showing up to the polls to make their voices heard. I challenge all registered voters to get up, get out and get loud and exercise their right to vote on Tuesday.' Grimes tracks absentee ballot totals as an indicator of final voter turnout. As of Monday, nearly 19,318 voters had voted in person on machines in county clerks’ offices or were sent absentee ballots, she said. About 8,169 of the 13,967 mail-in absentee ballots that have been issued had been returned."
Bevin could have never expected to be reelected on his own record. It was clear he was going to make it only on the basis of his adhesion to Trump. But it turned out not be be enough. If Trump couldn't save Bevin, who is he going to be able to save-- and we're talking about KENTUCKY! Last night Trump was in Lexington's Rupp Arena, ostensibly rallying the true believers for Bevin but, of course, talking about the only thing he ever talks about: himself... a stand-up routine that lasted an hour and twenty minutes. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul was there as well, defending Trump more than Bevin. "Trump," reported Politico this morning, "did tout Gov. Matt Bevin of Kentucky ahead of his reelection bid Tuesday, but he also offered a post-impeachment playbook for his own reelection bid 365 days away."
A few minutes ago, the count in the Mississippi gubernatorial race was up to 87% of precincts counted, with Republican Tate Reeves leading right-wing quasi-Democrat Jim Hood 390,544 (52.79%) to 339,897 (45.94%), closer than it should have been and closer than anyone thought it would be. At least Trump can run around claiming responsibility for winning that one. But members of Congress will all know what the loss for Bevin means and understand the scope of the catastrophe-- for their party-- in Virginia.
The Democrats maintained the majority in the New Jersey Assembly, although losing some seats. The special Senate election for the seat Jeff Van Drew gave up when he went to Congress to pretend to be a Democrat while voting with the GOP, pitted a pathetic Van Drew clone, ultra-conservative Bob Andrzejczak, against Republican Mike Testa. Testa beat the fake Democrat 27,163 (53.47%) to 23,636 (46.53%). Do you think it will teach the Democratic Party to run real Democrats with real Democratic values instead of shlubs from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party? I don't.
Meanwhile... back in the loony bin:
Labels: 2019 gubernatorial races, 2019 legislative races, Andy Beshear, Kentucky, Matt Bevin, Mississippi, New Jersey, toxicity of Donald Trump, Virginia
posted by DownWithTyranny @ 9:00 PM
11 comments
|
Reddit
11 Comments:
The leadership of the Democratic Party doesn't learn anything which their corporate masters don't teach them. They might as well be Republicans, because they vote like they are members of the GOP.
I was pleasantly surprised to see just how well the Dems did in Virginia in outer DC suburbs like Prince William County. The Dems have had a party advantage in presidential years for over a decade. However, for years the party advantage didn't show up in state election cycles. In 2017, Dems had a breakthrough in downballot races -- but there was always a question about whether it was due to unique factors like anti-Trump sentiment, or the fact that there were several high visibility statewide races that helped to carry candidates across the line. Usually there is a big drop-off in Dem turnout in the "off-year, off-year" cycle, when there are no statewide elections. This time though the turnout looked pretty close to 2017 cycle, which suggests that maybe there has been a more fundamental shift in the balance of power in the state. It may seem obvious after the fact, but going into this election there was still an open question about the degree and durability of the shift. The Dems had a $1 million advantage in state House races, but the GOP had a nearly a 3 to 1 advantage in cash in the state Senate races. Still lost the majority.
Here in NY there were a few races the GOP scored some upsets but otherwise a good Election Night for Team Blue welcome aboard Ranked Choice Voting.
https://elections.ap.org/dailykos/election_results/2019-11-05/state/NY
@10:06 PM
Democrats are mostly scoring on anti-Trump sentiment and even that's not as strong as one would expect: turnout remains scandalously low with a majority of American voters going with "why bother?" on election day.
@9:55 PM
No, they don't vote like they are members of today's GOP. The Republican Party of, say, 20-30 years ago (pre-Newt Gingrich) is more like it. The whole thing understandably feels like a scam to many, since a choice between a bunch of extremist loonies or a bunch of corporate-friendly, fiscally conservative, moderate social liberals completely shuts out a more strongly left-leaning ideological perspective with considerable purchase among the electorate (and to be fair, the Republican Party isn't CRAZY ENOUGH for some potential voters). If Obama had raised the minimum wage (not even up to $15.00, just a buck or two), helped mortgage-holders as well as banks and not tried to FORCE people to buy insurance and instead just changed more of the restrictions on getting Medicaid and maybe lowered the age at which Medicare kicks in to 55, Hillary Clinton would have skated into the White House on his coattails (we can have a separate argument as to the value of the things I'm advocating he could have done, but they're surely MORE than he actually did and would have inspired considerably more confidence in and affection for the Democratic Party) in 2016. So, you're basically right - They're cautious about offending their masters to the point of self-sabotage as regards elections.
low turnout means the anti-red was bigger than anti-blue, but anti-blue was still there.
if trump truly is killing them, maybe they'll finally realize that impeaching AND REMOVING their millstone might help their fortunes in 2020.
would biden poll to beat pence? prolly not.
@6:06 am
Partisanship is what remains. There should have been a massive voter re-alignment in the 90s - Liberals should have finally dropped the Democratic Party and sane conservatives should have done the same with the Republican Party. It didn't happen though. Political parties are like pro-sports teams. That majority choosing not to vote? They just don't like sports.
Unless Trump magically evaporates and takes the memory of his wretched time in office with him, Pence will be stuck with his "legacy" and lose the popular vote by a fucking landslide. He may still manage an electoral college victory, but, unchangeable as things may seem in this country, I am not sure it's good for Republicans to clock THREE popular vote losses/electoral college wins inside a twenty-year span.
@4:47 AM - re the Virginia election, typically in these off-year, off-year elections, competitive House of Delegate races have about 20,000 voters. The past two cycles participation has jumped to around 30,000. Anti-Trump sentiment is fuel, but there are clearly other factors at work. GOP turnout in a bunch of these races has also increased in some cases. But the Dem surge has been even larger. Also in 2007, the anger toward George W. Bush was arguably just as high as it is now (Bush had even lower approval numbers in 2007 than Trump has now). Demographic shifts are clearly a factor. Also, ground mobilization and organization is on a completely different level from where it was -- local party committees are also much stronger than they were a decade ago. I'm sure that the next time a Dem is in the White House that there will probably be a drop-off in Dem participation relative to this cycle, but there also have been fundamental shifts in the state. The GOP is in the position right now that the Dems were 20-30 years ago. Arguably even worse, because even back then the Dems still periodically would win statewide races. The last time the GOP won a statewide race was in the ultra-low turnout 2009 GOP off-year election cycle. That looks more like the aberration now. The GOP also is going to lose the benefit of heavily gerrymandered districts in the next decade.
@11:43 am
One can only hope. Dems may be problematically lame but having them in charge is still preferable to the deliberate chaos practiced by Republicans.
good point. with neither trump nor biden on any of the ballots, it would be up to localized anti- waves and voter interest for local issues. Since I don't live in any of those states, I can't but generalize.
You've observed a human psychological flaw -- tribalism. Among far too many of us, perceived comfort of tribe supersedes reason. saves thinking, I suppose. The definition of the dedicated Nazi and democrap voters.
Can there be any hope? pragmatically speaking, I don't think so.
@12:51 pm
The simplest explanations for illogical (or stupid, or even bad) behavior are tempting because they allow us to write off that which we disagree with, but they are rarely the WHOLE story. When I write something as flip as my "sports=politics" bit, I am not 100 percent serious. I believe it's PART of the story, but hardly ALL of it.
I sense you are an old guy. Alone, depressed by the prospect of dying, feeling impotent (in every sense of the word) and filled with a need to share the emptiness you're swimming in with others. Yet there's something almost comically ponderous in your posts. I can't decide whether you need to be tickled or euthanized.
7:15, I am older, not old. I am not depressed at the prospect of dying. We are all impotent, especially when we abdicate any potential we have by affirming mos as we elect democraps and Nazis. we are all swimming in emptiness, yet I seem to be the only one who understands this.
If your impulse would be to euthanize me rather than your party, then YOU are the symptom that defines the problem. But don't despair; you have 65 million in your tribe for comfort. feeling better?
Post a Comment
<< Home