-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Misc This Means WAR
- Thread starter Rain Cold
- Start date
GoDuke
Member
Lmao damn what a witch
Sandbar
Member
If they feared the voters they would (work together). If they respected the voters they would but they don't. They look at the extreme polarity of the voters and how they treat one another and that gives them all the information they need. They will throw a breadcrumb or two out there to make it look like they are working for the people but come the end of January you can kiss that goodbye
That would be shockingly unlikely. Turnout in presidential election years tends to be more evenly split. Neither party can win without independents coming to their side which lends itself to sticky majorities.
This is the largest electoral victory in Congress since the post Watergate Jimmy Carter election in 1976. That majority lasted until 1994. It's heartening to see the Democratic party investing in rural areas again. That will help them quite a bit in addition to a favorable Senate map in 2028.
Downeastnc
Member
This feels like a bit of copium...first all these states are going to redraw the district maps for sure, and the GOP has to lie in that bed they made. TX, NC and several other states that the GOP rigged ( well attempted too) by redrawing the maps pretty much control the entire state from Gov down the state supreme courts and everything in between. They certainly are not going to leave the maps the GOP made in place so even with voter turnout picking back up in 2028 for the GOP its not a guarantee at all and frankly as long as Trump and maga keep doing their thing higher GOP turnout is not even a sure thing. I have seen a few estimates that show that 10-20% of registered Rep voted blue this election....so not only did they not show up but almost a 5th of them that did voted for the dems.
Maybe in some areas but looking at election data from past years in the red states, the democrat number turnout is consistent with the past cycles while GOP is what took the nosedive. For instance in MS using 2024, votes for the Democratic Senator is very close, while the GOP nominee dropped like over 200k.
Sure, some of that could be crossover voting, but that would imply that democratic turn out actually dropped and based on nationwide data, that is very unlikely with factors at play.
Now is this true nationwide? Of course not. I agree with you about TX and NC, but those weren't the states that were being referenced. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to look at MS, SCar, IA and Kansas to see exactly what happened. It just doesnt.
And lets say you are right about Trump and Maga hurting turnout. That could be an issue. But, I'm sure seeing your own guys vote blue lock step on is gonna provide a lot of motivation on its on. That is why it is absolutely crucial for the democrats to really play the moderate if they have a chance.
Last edited:
Like I told Downeast, look at the past few election cycles in those red states. A lot of what happened there is the same thing that happened in AL when Doug Jones won the AL senate seat. The media screamed it was the state changing Blue! Us Alabama folks laughed and then ole Dougie got the mess beat out of him a few years later like we said he would.
Last edited:
When you start looking at individual state house seats, there's a lot of nutbag extremists in both parties. Also, for what it's worth, the Guilford County Democratic Party and the NC Democratic Party both withdrew their support after the comments surfaced. More than likely, most voters had no idea who she was and just voted D to punish the Rs.
This is probably true for MS Senate, for example, but it's a six-year term, whereas Jones just had ~2 years left on his term after winning the special election if I remember right? Another corollary was Scott Brown winning the special election for Senate in Massachusetts in 2010, then of course he got beaten by Elizabeth Warren in 2012 (although the election was tighter than one might've expected for the state, though Warren of course is hardly an electoral juggernaut, as history has shown).
Also, some people downplayed Republicans losing both Senate seats in Georgia in 2020/2021. Indeed, they probably win both of those if it weren't for Trump's meddling and discouraging voters to vote in the runoff election because of his voter fraud claims. But six years later and it's been all Democratic Senators for Georgia and with Ossoff's huge win on Tuesday, that doesn't look likely to change going forward. The whole state may indeed be on the verge of turning blue with the win in the gubernatorial races, too; it's certainly still close enough to be called a swing state, but with all the elections there post-2020, it's hard not to say it at least tilts blue at this point?
Sure, Mississippi will almost definitely flip back and I'm sure South Carolina will as that was mostly (lack of) candidate quality, but that may not be true for every state that flipped.
Texas could be a state that follows Georgia's lead, but it's really too early to say, I think. It may snap back next election. I think candidate quality was a major concern there because of how terrible Paxton was, but at the same time unlike in South Carolina it resulted in Dems sweeping every statewide race, which is crazy.