« The Calm Before the Thynder - Open Thread | Main | So it begins... »

November 05, 2018

Comments

Having the polls open at 7 AM means poll workers need to be on-site at 6 AM. Which means I'll be getting up at 5 AM Tuesday.

Polls close at 8 PM; with luck, we'll be packed up and ready to leave by 9 PM. (I'm spared the trip to take the ballots to the county seat. Those folks have an even longer day.) 15 hour day -- and if I'm calculating correctly, and ignoring questions about overtime, getting less than minimum wage. Whee!

Sometimes, it's quite simple...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/all-the-ugliness-of-the-trump-campaign-is-on-display-in-georgia/2018/11/05/5420e71e-e141-11e8-8f5f-a55347f48762_story.html
The president also said last Thursday that Ms. Abrams “is not qualified to be the governor of Georgia.” Ms. Abrams graduated from Yale Law School and worked her way up to become minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives, a position she held for six years. She is not only more qualified than her opponent to be governor, she is more qualified than Mr. Trump to be president. What absence of qualification could Mr. Trump possibly have been referring to, other than that she is not white?

She's also dickless in the plumbing and gunless for the threefer.

He was also referencing the vast absence in himself .... and within the entire infestation of the conservative movement that birthed his monstrous, beclowned, death-dealing self ... that unmapped, desertified ever-encroaching region of willful ignorance and inhumanity, that howling, diseased vacuole of repugnant indecency and hate they have been nurturing and encoding into law these many decades, that forever licked and picked over scab of the country's many original sins they are intent on ruthlessly cauterizing their way, with no taxes, plenty of bullets, and the invocations of a wrathful, never-satiated multi-jawed, unrepentant God Inc.

They would read you chapter and verse, but those pages in Atlas Shrugged were long ago stuck together during the one-handed paroxysms of their misbegotten youth.


while poor Mr Gillum is simply 'not equipped' to be governor of FL.

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2018/11/republican-party-abandoned-closing-argument-primal-scream-not-work

Actually, here is the closing argument:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-steve-king-makes-bigoted-015307162.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_08

What absence of qualification could Mr. Trump possibly have been referring to, other than that she is not white?

As the Count noted, being female is, for Trump (and a lot of his worshipers), also an automatic disqualification.

I'm not so sure Trump would regard "gunless" as a disqualification. A great cudgel to attack her with, certainly, but probably not a reason to say "not qualified."

A prediction for Georgia (because why not): Abrams squeezes part 50% by a few hundred votes. Her opponent doesn't demand a recount (in the hopes of forcing a recount; he's too far behind for one to put him in the lead). Instead he just used his position as Secretary of State to just initiate one.

I'm founding a new school of journalism with endowed chairs at every university and college in the land.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/hannity-campaigns-with-trump-at-missouri-rally-after-insisting-he-wouldnt?via=newsletter&source=CSAMedition

The School of Vigilante Journalism

Masthead of every broadcast, print, and internet outlet:

"Shoot First, Ask Questions Later"

The president also said last Thursday that Ms. Abrams “is not qualified to be the governor of Georgia.”

The relationship of things Trump says to the truth is at best co-incidental.

He intends neither to be truthful, or to lie. He intends to have an effect.

His supporters are, likewise, not interested in the truth or falsity of what he says. His words are a flag around which they will rally.

His words are best ignored. His actions are best resisted.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/border-patrol-conduct-crowd-control-exercise-election-day/

I've seen this up close before in fascist third world countries.

Democrats once let the dead vote.

Republican vermin elect 'em.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/dispatch/the-ghost-of-dennis-hof-haunts-the-nevada-midterms

The perfect embodiment of the filthy conservative bowel movement sea to rising sea.

Maybe they'll open a Kavanaugh trailer at the ranch.

Build that WALL, pigfuckers.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/foxconn-mulls-tapping-chinese-skilled-workers-for-wisconsin-plant-as-us-job-market-tightens-2018-11-06?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts

Republican vermin elect 'em.

I say, if they elect a dead guy, then they need to dig him up and send a dead guy to the statehouse.

And let him do his best to vote.

Civilization abandons the great state of Iowa.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/king-blocks-des-moines-paper-covering-election

The bloody Civil War II long desired by the vermin in the republican party started two weeks ago with the republican-White House-ordered murders of the Other around the country.

The free press' journalists should avail themselves of whatever maximum carried armed deadly force is permitted in Iowa and fight their way into every political event, including polling places, republican filth prevent them from entering and exercising their First Amendment rights in covering a fucking election.

Here's the flaw in voting: Even when republican/conservative scum like Steve King lose an election, they remain among the living and morph into even more murderous monsters.


https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2018/11/fox-news-employees-unaware-working-right-wing-propaganda-outlet

Other headlines today:

Apple employees SHOCKED their company sells smartphones.

Amazon workers go on mass strike, say company told them they'd be living on a big river in a rain forest.

General Mills cereal makers demand fainting couch after learning about the link between Cheerios and breakfast.

Worldwide Wrestling Federation referees quit; cite their integrity takes hit by lack of reality, breakaway chairs, and fake blood capsules concealed on contestants. "Something is fishy" charges one.

McDonald's customers eat Happy Meals, report little change in mood. Rioting ensues.

Graveyard diggers put down shovels, say it's as if everyone they bury is dead.

Bartenders' union walks out; complain all people want from us is alcohol.

Americans say "Ah, just fuck me", ignoring 250 years of exceptional fucking.

Nuclear weapons workers return to work, cite President's desire to use their product as soon as possible.

Elon Musk.

That's right, Elon Musk.



There’s a link between Cheerios and breakfast? I thought they were just for sex.

A friend in Bloomington IN reports that Monroe County IN is out of ballots. Or, 'out of ballots'. Don't know which, maybe slarti knows.

In recent decades, Monroe County has been (D)-leaning. Which is atypical of IN as a whole.

And hairshirt, friends don't let friends sleep with breakfast cereals.

And up in the northwest corner of IN...

There’s a link between Cheerios and breakfast? I thought they were just for sex.

Lowercase, singular is for parting after breakfast or sex.

Out of ballots?

On election day?

Many of the all-you-can-eat buffet restaurants in Monroe County are changing their menu today to read: "A Few Odds and Ends to Nibble, Probably Nothing You Could Stomach"

Saturday is the county's fishless fish fry.

Come One, Come .... go away.


Can I say I hate vote by mail? I like going in to vote. Of course, my local spot is right across from my office. But it doesn't quite feel like voting to me to put it in the mail. Plus I don't get a sticker.

@bc, do you live in a high growth-rate state? My state has been growing at insane rates for 30 years. The voting sites kept changing, sometimes from year to year. The lines were long, then longer. As soon as no-excuse permanent absentee voting was available, a large percentage of the voters jumped on it. Then once it hit a certain percentage, it just made no sense to spend a ton of money keeping precinct-sized voting around to make a small part of the electorate happy.

Michael Cain: I live in California, but rural. I get that it makes sense in many places. It's just a personal thing.

Things went pretty much as advertised here in the Great Wet North-of-the-city. Turnout seemed brisk, but not appreciably busier than 2016. Was tempted to write in Vermin Supreme for the uncontested(R) county clerk spot.

Taking back the House is imperative and I started getting that sinking feeling when it didn't look good early on. But I'm not gonna say I'm thrilled with the Blue... I dunno... Step-In-The-Right-Direction-Kinda?

It might take me a while to figure out if it's just the sting of the dawning realization that I do not share a common reality with an alarming number of fellow citizens or if my faith in legitimate elections has been permanently and irreparably shaken. I expect a certain amount of shenanigans, but I feel like we're halfway across the Rubicon and damn the torpedos.

Of course, Trump will tout the Senate gains as mandate.

Et tu, New England Gubernatorial contests?

Trump will tout the Senate gains as mandate.

We'll fix that in 2020.

Florida re-enfranchised ex felons.
That is very good news (& might also be of significance in 2020).

It’s the fall of Rome

I certainly feel the attraction of having a civic event, where the people in the community come to the polls.

Plus, it gives the senior citizens something to keep them off the streets and out of trouble, also, too.

Civilization abandons the great state of Iowa.

Ebbing, maybe.

Three of Iowa's four US Representatives are now Democrats - R incumbents Blum and Young both lost to Dem women. And King's NW IA district has 170k registered Rs and 120 registered Ds, and skews evangelical, so it was always going to be a very heavy lift.

I'm disappointed about Reynolds, who is a mean, narrow person.

But my north-central IA hometown will return its excellent Democratic women to the state Legislature and Senate. Unfortunately, right next door, the odious ALEC-owned Linda Upmeyer cruised in unopposed.

I say, if they elect a dead guy, then they need to dig him up and send a dead guy to the statehouse.

This reminds me of a Missouri Senate race years ago. Mel Carnahan, the Democratic governor, was the odds-on favorite to win, but he was killed in a plane crash a month before the election. He was elected anyway, and his widow, Jean Carnahan, was appointed in his place. (She lost the special election two years later.)

Quite a few firsts in the elections.

"The midterms saw an unprecedented number of female candidates, first-time candidates and LGBT candidates for office. At least 244 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender candidates ran for office on all levels of government this year, including 21 candidates for Congress and four for governor.

A record one-third of the candidates running for the House were women of color, and a record number of women overall were running for office in 2018, according to Emily’s List, a Democratic-leaning nonprofit that supports women in politics. Some 234 women won House and Senate primaries in 2018. Women have never held more than 20% of congressional seats."
How the midterms made history: Numerous firsts emerge from Election Night results : U.S. elects its first Muslim congresswomen and its first gay governor

BC - Orange County sends out I Voted stickers with their mail-in ballots. You need to get on your local election board to up their game.

I think those stickers should be scratch-and-sniff and smell like petrichor to combat the scent of cordite and inchoate rage in the public imaginary.

"Florida re-enfranchised ex felons.
That is very good news (& might also be of significance in 2020)."

Given the number of soon-to-be-felons republicans just re-elected nationwide and will run in 2020, I'm not sure this is a plus for the Democratic Party.

I'm warming to the death penalty for crimes while in office.

Plus it will be racist disgusting Willie Horton ads all the way down in Florida in 2020 given the criminal filth that state just elected.

The fascist, racist, subhuman republican scum King and Cruz, among others, re-elected. I expect Hitler would re-evaluate his decision to not hold elections from 1933 thru 1945 given that kind of goosestepping to the polls in exceptional America.

He could have campaigned at Madison Square Garden.

"U.S. elects its first Muslim congresswomen and its first openly gay governor"

IIRC, a decade or so ago it turned out that NJ had elected a closeted gay governor, who resigned when it was revealed.

By the standards of NJ corruption, it was small potatoes. Why, it's not as if he put out traffic cones to close a major bridge or anything.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-yells-at-jim-acosta

Fuck you ya motherfucking republicans. Fuck you.

You should get down on your knees and thank your fake gods, which are mere scarecrows stuffed with dollar bills, that the American people allow any of you to vote, let alone allow you to run the vermin you vote for, let alone entertain ourselves by free expression instead of kicking all of your fucking asses physically, all without gunfire from us every two years, unlike the constant murderous gunfire you louts aim our way.

Orange County sends out I Voted stickers with their mail-in ballots.

Here in Northern California, my county doesn't send them with mail-in ballots. But does hand them out to those who drop off their "mail-in" ballots at the polls. Which, at the precinct I was working, looked to be about as many folks who were voting in person.

We ran out of stickers an hour before closing. Partly because of the number given to kids accompanying their parents. It occured to me that anyone devoted to the fantasy of voter fraud could stand outside looking at the number of kids with "I voted!" stickers and decide he had solid evidence. (For the record, none of the kids got a ballot. I was the guy handing them to the voters, so I know.)

So far, the stock market doesn't seem to mind that the terrible, awful Democrats took the House. Perhaps they're betting on gridlock, which I guess is a form of stability.

Piggy-backing on CharlesWT's post, this is cool:

2018 Election: Continuing Coverage And Results Nov. 6 By FiveThirtyEight

Sarah Frostenson1:11 PM

With 22 women winning seats in the Nevada Assembly, the state has scored a female majority in the chamber — a historic first for the state. And according to New York Times reporting from June, when the new legislative class is sworn in, Nevada will be first state legislature in U.S. history to have more women than men serving.

Perhaps they're betting on gridlock, which I guess is a form of stability.

Yeah, at least for a couple of years, no tax hikes, no tax cuts, continuing resolutions for the budget so the size of government spending is known, lots of cash sloshing around because of the deficit. Trump plus Senate translates into ongoing regulatory roll-backs. What's not to like from their view?

Michael, you left out ever larger numbers of reactionary Federal judges being appointed. Who will still be around long after Trump and McConnell are gone.

Michael, you left out ever larger numbers of reactionary Federal judges being appointed.

From Wall Street's perspective, that's part of the regulatory roll-back. With too much snark, Wall Street doesn't care about state-level voter suppression, abortion restrictions, etc, because the Wall Street folks aren't ever going to live in "those states."

Just like Amazon's HQ2 -- I've said all along that Atlanta and Austin (to name two examples) were out of the running because Bezos wasn't going to pick a blue city in a red state.

"The second outcome is even more important: the House of Representatives is now the most pro-immigrant that it has been since the 19th century. Current House Democrats would not only pass the broadest legalization in the history of the United States—they also would greatly expand legal immigration. No elected House Democrat is opposed to legalization, even if they would want it paired with some enforcement measures."
The Most Pro-Immigration House of Representatives in Over a Century

the House of Representatives is now the most pro-immigrant that it has been since the 19th century. Current House Democrats would not only pass the broadest legalization in the history of the United States—they also would greatly expand legal immigration.

Of course, the question is: Can they get it thru the Senate once they pass it? I'd bet on no. Not because I think that a majority of voters in the states of a majority of Senators would oppose it. But because I suspect that McConnell would simply not bring it to a vote; maybe even not bother to refer it to a committee for hearings.

Is there any reason to believe otherwise?

Trump's massacre has begun.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jeff-sessions-resigns-today-2018-11-07-live-updates/

Why would he conduct a massacre after such a winning night (according to him)?

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/donald-trump-jr-expecting-to-be-indicted-by-mueller-soon.html

I'm so worried!

Meet the new boss, better than the recused boss.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/06/opinions/rosenstein-should-curb-mueller-whittaker-opinion/index.html

Can't wait to read Kavanaugh's opinion for the majority.

Meet the new boss, better than the recused boss.

The Whom? always has such great lyrics.

"We won't get screwed aga-"

Ah, who are we kidding? Buckle up for the Constitutional Crisis!

Sessions forced to resign? Can’t we have one week off? Or even one day?!?

Nope.

https://pando.com/2014/11/20/the-war-nerd-why-sherman-was-right-to-burn-atlanta/

First two years of Trump Presidency: Awww yeah, we did some crazy a$$ sh1t, amirite?

Second two years of Trump Presidency: Hold my beer.

"So far, the stock market doesn't seem to mind that the terrible, awful Democrats took the House. Perhaps they're betting on gridlock, which I guess is a form of stability."

The stock market hates only one thing: Uncertainty.

If an asteroid was headed for Earth and it was absolutely certain that it would destroy ALL life IF it collided with our planet, but there was some uncertainty in the calculations about WHETHER it might hit us, the markets would have a gigantic nervous breakdown.

If it passed nearby and didn't harm, markets would soar. The bulls would be all over the place yelling "Told you so!"

If it hit us square, in the last few nanoseconds of human existence, markets would soar. The bulls would be all over the place yelling "Tol .....................

The last human utterance would be made by Larry Kudlow, standing on the White House lawn, his suit coat turning into molten flames as he spoke, intoning: "At least now we can plan for the future. Buy shares! Federal revenues will rise because of this ast................"

Then, radio silence from humanity for eternity.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/oregon-counties-pass-militia-backed-measures-sheriff-authority-gun-rights

Decent liberal Oregonians need to hit the gun merchants like crazed Black Friday housewives stampeding a WalMart sale and purchase every weapon and every piece of ammo available.

Get ready.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a24795336/president-trump-fires-jeff-sessions-attorney-general-matt-whitaker/

215 years of jurisprudence and precedent down the fucking vermin republican conservative shitter.

Anyone wanna try and humor me?

Pitchers and catchers report on February 13th?

Not bad.

Will I have sex before then, too?

If so, the savage breast is soothed.

Wasn't that what we were talking about? :-)

Great dirty minds run is similar channels.

"in" (and out)

Wasn't that what we were talking about? :-)

What else could be implied when someone says "We're going to get screwed!"???

So the Mob Boss has whacked one of his capos for not acting enough like a consiglieri.

Can the Democrats, having won the powers of the purse, of oversight, and of subpoena, do anything about that? Should they bother?

As to "can they?", the answer is "not by any moderate means". But if they finally grok that they are up against the Trump Mob and not the genteel GOP of old, they will not confine themselves to "moderate" means. They will ignore SCOTUS burglar McConnell's advice and "harass" the hell out of He, Trump. There is no danger of hardening His support; the Mob has already taken a blood oath to the Boss.

As to "should they bother?" the answer is "yes, in spades". By taking every possible legislative and investigative step to advertise how self-dealing and power-hungry the lying liar Mob Boss is, Democrats stand a chance to convince "independents" that the Mob is a Fuhrer Cult and not a Businessmen's Benevolent Association.

If "independents" side with the Mob in the end, the consequences for the US (and the world) will hardly be distinguishable from the consequences of Democrats "working together" with the Mob to "get things done" while shying away from going to the mattresses.

--TP

This goes in here, I'm a fan of TPM, but I tend to side with this reader of TPM who has a less optimistic take than josh Marshall and I think goes to Tony's question.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/its-a-start-and-a-critical-one

I’m going to start this morning with an email from TPM Reader JF. It’s a deeply pessimistic look at last night’s results. I thoroughly disagree with it. I’m publishing it partly because I like JF and like sharing a range of reader opinions but more because it’s a good statement of the view I disagree with. So it’s helpful to put out there as a clear, smart statement of the take I disagree with.

[...]

With all that, he’s JF’s more dire take …

I get looking on the bright side. Losing the house would have been a disaster, perhaps the end of our democracy. And there were some fun wins throughout the night (Walker losing). And the ballot measure results were very encouraging. We may need to have national ballot measures as the only way anything will get done in our country.

But let’s face reality. Last night was a very bad night. In past Democratic losses, there was always blame to go around (Hillary didn’t visit Wisconsin, poor turnout). This time, I think the Democrats ran an excellent campaign. The climate for the country seemed ripe for change. Turnout was great. If we can’t win now, with someone as inept as Trump as president, when can we win?

And we didn’t win. The red state senate losses were devastating. We are seeing a sorting of red states where they will only elect republican senators, no matter how good the democratic candidate (McCaskil, Tester). That means the senate is lost for generations. The Republican Coalition is now left with the worst of the worst. The takeaway for them will be that Trump’s brand of divisive / white nationalist politics works. And because of tribalism, the rural areas will be lead by these remaining republicans to embrace this racism. Our courts will be filled with republican judges reshaping our law. In Florida, a republican governor will reshape their Supreme Court. Ohio became more red than a swing state. How can the Arizona senate race even be close, let alone a likely loss? Structurally, I see little hope for our country.

So yes, they should bother, if only because what else can they do?

The red state senate losses were devastating. We are seeing a sorting of red states where they will only elect republican senators, no matter how good the democratic candidate (McCaskil, Tester).

FWIW, as far as I can tell, Tester won.

Also, again FWIW, in Maine we not only got our first female governor, a Democrat, ending our eight years of lunacy with LePage, but the Dems retained the Maine House and took back the Senate.

Jared Golden is running neck and neck with Poliquin in House District 2, and there will be a ranked choice aftermath which I believe Jared expected to win, although Poliquin has threatened to challenge ranked choice in court.

In what may be the first of many, Nevada not only has two female US Senators, and a woman as its next governor. It last may have the first state legislature with more women than men. In the long term, that may mean more than the current florishing of the Trumpian fraidy cat white men coalition.

Dear spelling "assist", when I type "also" I mean also. Not "last"

That means the senate is lost for generations.

Or, for another two years.

I woke up this morning, read the news, and was greeted with pundit think pieces explaining why the midterm results were not really a (D) victory, but were actually a triumph for Trump. My favorite was the one which announced that the (D)'s had just gained seats in the House which they were just going to have to defend in two years time.

Um... all House seats are contested every two years.

And by the middle of the day we had the dire threats from McConnell and Trump and even lesser (R) lights, telling us that if the (D)'s took this opportunity to investigate the administration, then that would be the end of bipartisanship.

Which led me to wonder... what bipartisanship?

Bollocks to the lot of them. Pound sand.

It was a good night for the (D)'s. They took the House with a decent if not overwhelming majority, and did pretty well at the state levels.

In 2020 we have a new census, which will offer opportunities to reconfigure House districts. Which will offer opportunities to reverse some amount of gerrymandering.

In 2020, 20 or 21 (R) Senate seats will be up, and only 11 or 12 (D) seats. The opposite of this year. And, one of them is Susan Collins.
And, this year, the (D)'s only lost 2, even though a handful of (D) senators were up for election in extremely red states.

Trump will no doubt run for POTUS, and maybe we'll get to see him run against somebody with the natural charisma of a Beto or a Gillum. And we'll see how that plays out.

This is a pretty damned good day.

And by all means, (R)'s, fire Mueller, and see what happens.

Also, again FWIW, in Maine we not only got our first female governor, a Democrat, ending our eight years of lunacy with LePage, but the Dems retained the Maine House and took back the Senate.

Actually, I'm pretty stoked. Probably no reason to be, but I am. Blue wave!
It did happen, despite the additional heartbreaking events.

"That means the senate is lost for generations."

People get way overdetermined about the Senate. Democrats had 60 what 10 years ago? It can change.

It is the same thinking that thought the Rust Belt was 'safe' for Clinton. Things change, especially if you ignore people long enough. So the answer is definitely not to just ignore them as if it is hopeless to get the state.

State legislatures.

Which is presented here as being kind of a disappointing result. Which, I don't get.

Before the mid-terms, 25 states with 100% (R) leadership, 17 with split leadership, and 7 with (D). And Nebraska.

After the mid-terms, 21 (probably 22) 100% (R) states, 13 split, and 14 100% (D). And Nebraska. And one of the 'split' states is MA.

That looks good to me. Could be better, but I'll take it.

While I celebrate the historical gains by women and minorities, I share JF's cynicism. But I take Marshall's point as well.

In a Senate where a simple majority rules most of the time, this hurts (from NYT Election site):

Democrats - 46
Lost 2 seats
46,070,556 votes (56.9%)

Republicans - 51
Gained 2 seats
33,559,381 votes (41.5%)

Thanks, that makes me feel a lot better. I didn't want to obsessively do election watching here, and this may have meant the more depressing things were noticed, such as the results of Republican vote manipulation (Heitkamp, Abrams, Gillum) Beto losing, not to mention Denis Hof being elected in a landslide.

I'd also like to be as sanguine about the Senate, but that relies on assuming that the Senate will follow norms in at least some vestigal way, but I really doubt that is going to be the case. A judiciary packed with Federalist society appointees, which would then forestall any meaningful legislation. I know, call me Eeyore...

And the refresh brings up Pete's comment. Gawd, that's depressing.

"not to mention Denis Hof being elected in a landslide."

And we have been lectured to stop complaining about being ruled by dead white men.

A rapist at that.

Abrams should never concede. NEVER.

I would allow Kemp to assume the Governorship, but ONLY as a corpse.

He could be the Secretary of Lying (two ways) In State for eternity.

*historic.

In 2020 we have a new census, which will offer opportunities to reconfigure House districts. Which will offer opportunities to reverse some amount of gerrymandering.

If, and only if, Democrats learn the lesson of 2010, and make sure they have a minimum of one house of the state legislature or the governorship. Otherwise, we'll just see new and improved gerrymandering. In the long run, they'd be better off losing House and Senate seats in 2010 if they can stop the gerrymandering.

this hurts

Blame the founders.

They feared democracy and were aristocrats themselves in most cases.

The Senate was the price - or, one of the prices - exacted for getting the Constitution passed at all.

More and more I wonder if the whole idea was a good one in the first place. Would the world be a worse place today if the english-speaking colonies had aggregated themselves into 3 or 4 smaller and more socially cohesive nations?

In any case, yes, the Senate is anti-democratic, by design.

Or just stayed English ?\

Would have saved having an unnecessary war...
;-)

In any case, yes, the Senate is anti-democratic, by design.

Yeah, I get why they did it that way and I don't mean to suggest that the rules need to change when my side is losing. To be fair, the House numbers pretty closely align with the electorate:

Dems
223 (~53% of seats decided)
Gained 28 seats (~7%)
51,537,798 votes (51.2%)


197 (~47% of seats decided)
Lost 28 seats (~7%)
47,368,538 votes (47.1%)

(the "~" numbers are my back-of-envelope figuring)

I was just really surprised to see a full 15% difference in the Senate numbers and still losing ground. That seems rather severe to me, even dismissing the straight partisanship of the day. But I'm no statistician so maybe that's not significantly outta whack given the design.

So, yeah, I get the Blue Wave thing, if you're a glass-half-full kinda guy. I'm a lifelong Islanders and Mets fan, so you know my optimism far outpaces any sense of reason I might otherwise enjoy.

But Tuesday still felt kinda like a gut-punch. Maybe that's just what "winning" feels like in the age of Trump.

re: Senate votes.

https://www.270towin.com/2018-senate-election/

most of the south and a good chunk of the midwest had no Senate races at all, while almost all states from VA north, plus CA and OR did have Senate races.

so, lots (nearly all!) of blue states had Senate races, and many of the red states didn't.

On the other hand Democrats (counting King and Sanders) won 23 of 33 Senate races (~70%), exceeding their vote percentage.

Fair points, and I'm gonna assume even with the [I] numbers, that wouldn't push to 70%. And the 2020 map has more Rs defending.

Maybe the picture is rosier than I've been painting it.

What makes me optimistic is that more younger people voted in this election - a mid-term, no less. Two years from now, more will be eligible to vote, and the ones that already are will be two years older, and that much more likely to vote.

The demographics that have been discussed for a good number of years, but that never seemed to be making as much of a difference as they were expected to (Obama, notwithstanding), are finally starting to bear fruit.

I haven't seen anything about turnout among people of color this election, but I would wager that turnout was up among them, too.

The nature of the candidates that Democrats were able to recruit is also a good sign, as is winning at the state level and being able to undo some gerrymandering.

The nature of the candidates that Democrats were able to recruit is also a good sign, as is winning at the state level and being able to undo some gerrymandering.

Or the Republicans get even more overt and desperate in their smash-and-grab and completely destroy what's left of-

OK, OK, I'm done playing Devil's Advocate! I yield!

Keep in mind that I was only discussing the things that make me optimistic. Not everything makes me feel that way. ;^)

so, lots (nearly all!) of blue states had Senate races, and many of the red states didn't.

what cleek said on the Senate. D's had to defend, what 26 and only had 9 to try to gain ground? That was always a steep hill. But the average is for the President's party to lose 4, and the R's gained 2.

On the house, the average is to lose 30. But it was 39 here (so far). An above average night for D's in terms of the house.

Massive turnout for a midterm.

A lot of firsts.

How all that washes out? YMMV. But no blue wave, IMHO.

Pete: the popular vote discrepancy isn't what you think. Here in California, I had the "opportunity" to vote for one of two Democrats. In California alone, there were 6.3 million D votes and zero R votes for the Senate seat. The other "top-2" states either had no senate race or had both D's and R's as the top 2. So there is that.

Add in the small/large state intentional Constitutional structure and you probably make up the rest of the difference.

Or just stayed English ?\

Would have saved having an unnecessary war...
;-)

FYI, one of the stated aims of the American Revolution, when it started, was "to secure the rights of Englishmen." It was not being treated as they (at least thought they) would have been back in England that really grated.

Yeah, I get why they did it that way and I don't mean to suggest that the rules need to change when my side is losing.

. . .

I was just really surprised to see a full 15% difference in the Senate numbers and still losing ground. That seems rather severe to me, even dismissing the straight partisanship of the day. But I'm no statistician so maybe that's not significantly outta whack given the design.

In 1790, the smallest state (Delaware) had a population of 59,000 while largest state (Virginia) had a population of 748,000. A ratio of just under 13 to 1. Today (2010 census), California has a population of 39,145,000 while Wyoming has a population of 586,000. A ratio of about 600 to 1. A few orders of magnitude increase there.

There's no way an amendment gets past 3/4 of the states to change that. But it also seems likely that the same big state / small state compromise that worked initially would get made today. Probably a better chance for Democrats to decide to retire to some of those small population states and skew the demographics their way.

The demographics that have been discussed for a good number of years, but that never seemed to be making as much of a difference as they were expected to (Obama, notwithstanding), are finally starting to bear fruit.

Both sides can see the writing on the wall. That's why McConnell et al. are so desperate to pack the courts: their window of opportunity is closing and they know it. But this way, they may manage to preserve their power for their lifetimes anyway.

bc- How all that washes out? YMMV. But no blue wave, IMHO.

I've been thinking a lot about this article in The Economist from last summer:

In 2016 Democrats who beat Republican opponents won an average of 67.4% of the two-party vote in their districts, whereas Republicans who defeated Democrats received an average of 63.8%. This imbalance is partly due to deliberate attempts to create districts that provide such results, and partly just down to the fact that Democrats tend to live more tightly bunched together in cities. Together, these two factors put up quite an obstacle. According to our model, the Democrats need to win 53.5% of all votes cast for the two major parties just to have a 50/50 chance of winning a majority in the House.

It's hard to judge waves when one side has a structural advantage that amplifies the effects of their own votes and clips the tops off of the other side's waves.

This is not sustainable. Something has to give.

Democrats won the popular vote in Michigan by 7 percentage points,
in Wisconsin by 8 points, in Pennsylvania by 10 points, and in Minnesota by 11 points. In other parts of the country, they won Nevada and Colorado by 6 points each, New Hampshire by 12, Virginia by 15 and New Mexico by 19.
On the less optimistic outlook, as David Frum observed: If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy,
https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-sum-of-their-fears-by-bloggersrus.html:

Since this is, at least nominally, the current open thread, I'd like to ask why when an immigrant does something terrible, it reflects on all immigrants, but when ... hmmm ... let's just suppose for argument's sake, a military veteran (or a white guy, or a natural-born American, or maybe a Christian) does something terrible, it doesn't reflect on all military veterans (or white guys, or natural-born Americans, or Christians)?

It's odd.

Stopped by, post election.

About a normal midterm outcome, Senate is a little off but the numbers made that happen.

The longer term question is how does the Democratic party leverage the demographic shift if you take immigration off the table.

The Hispanics I know and grew up with are very conservative, the one exception being immigration. I think that any meaningful immigration reform changes that voting block substantially.

Other than that, kids grow up, get older. Typically more conservative. I see the opportunity for Democrats in 2020, maybe still in 2024 but that opportunity is reduced dramatically if there is immigration reform.

Otherwise mostly ssdd.

The Hispanics I know and grew up with are very conservative, the one exception being immigration. I think that any meaningful immigration reform changes that voting block substantially.

They definitely are cultural conservatives. (As are a substantial number of blacks -- far, far more than vote Republican these days.)

But while immigration reform would definitely help, overt racism from the top would still keep both groups away. Their cultural conservatism has been a huge wasted opportunity for Republicans ever since Nixon launched the Southern Strategy and embraced the Dixiecrats. But I'm not seeing any signs suggesting that the GOP might be considering heeding its own post 2008 analysis and changing.

But I'm not seeing any signs suggesting that the GOP might be considering heeding its own post 2008 analysis and changing.

Trumpism is the exact opposite of that - the embrace of White Nationalism.

Please keep in mind that there is no "Republican" party at the national level any more. There's the Trump Mob and there's the Democrats.

Please also keep in mind that the American electorate is a creature of habit. Re-elect incumbent presidents and then give the White House to the other party? Check. Vote for the out party in a new president's first mid-term? Check. Finer-grained analysis is all well and good, but habit is habit.

--TP

Finer-grained analysis is all well and good, but habit is habit.

I don't know if this is all well and good, but it's at least interesting:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-2018-map-looked-a-lot-like-2012-and-that-got-me-thinking-about-2020/

The caravan of very conservative rapist, drug dealing, terrorist hispanics approaches our southern border, itching to vote republican.

Glad you are back, Marty.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Blog powered by Typepad