Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

If the Democrats take back the House in November, a lot of things will change.

eta: This seems like a really important question: Suppose that Mueller gets fired before November, and/or the investigation is ended by someone senior to him. The Democrats then retake Congress. Can congressional subpoenas obtain the fruits of Mueller's investigations, or can someone at DOJ keep the lid on? It feels to me like that is the constitutional crisis we are heading for, after the one where Mueller gets canned and a GOP Congress doesn't do anything about it.

Big question is how much has Mueller shared with some blue state AGs and DAs.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

He did kneecap her in a lot of ways. After Super-Tuesday, when he was done, he played for the Hail Mary and ground her down, piggybacked off of all the Republican attacks, so she took the same total BS from both the right and the self-described left. He did things like gutted her ability to make Trump's tax returns an issue the way Romney's had been, by refusing to release his own.

Hillary lost by little enough so that it's easy to find things done differently that might have won it. But Bernie and the third party vote that resulted from his BS are a big piece of it.

Was Hillary the Dem's best candidate? Probably not, but the only test we've got are the primary/caucus process. Interestingly, the person who has done the most to make sure that process sees no material change is Bernie, who may be the beneficiary of it's biases next time.

Don't lecture Sebby about why hil lost. Sebby is by far in a better position than any of us to know why 200000 3rd party voters in both Mi and Pa couldn't vote for her.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Do you realize the percentage of gov employees who vote D? Your #1 core value is you never spite a gov employee. You really don't know this?

Everybody here was all getting excited about DACA during the shutdown. My sister and her friends, mostly Dems but also mostly military, were posting about their paychecks.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

populism turned the Democratic blue collar vote in the Rust Belt for Trump (because those folks liked Bernie’s candor, but couldn’t vote for a “communist.”)

oh-oh, maybe I'm wrong about sebby's insight.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Don't lecture Sebby about why hil lost. Sebby is by far in a better position than any of us to know why 200000 3rd party voters in both Mi and Pa couldn't vote for her.

point taken.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

oh-oh, maybe I'm wrong about sebby's insight.

Self-awareness can be a bitch.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Trump ran on "Every 'True' American Gets a Pony."

Bernie ran on "Everybody Gets a Pony."

If it gets any simpler than that, it's spoken in grunts and clicks.

this is good

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Agree (except for Florida, which Dems should always win). But if you don't think those places are set to vote against Republicans already, you're crazy.

You actually are insane. All of the states (other than IN and NC, which each went for Obama in 2008) I named voted for a black man in the previous election cycle. If you think they're lost, you shouldn't be listened to when it comes to politics.

TM

Michigan would not have been won by hil if only we'd known Trumo was against DACA. Hell, we have the biggest Arab population outside the middle east and sizable hispanic population and the fuck won here.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Michigan would not have been won by hil if only we'd known Trumo was against DACA. Hell, we have the biggest Arab population outside the middle east and sizable hispanic population and the fuck won here.

You have to be kidding me. With his stance on immigration, anyone who thought he wouldn't go after DACA shouldn't be allowed to tie their own shoes.

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You actually are insane. All of the states (other than IN and NC, which each went for Obama in 2008) I named voted for a black man in the previous election cycle. If you think they're lost, you shouldn't be listened to when it comes to politics.

TM

I did not say those places are lost. I said the white working class there is lost.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

I did not say those places are lost. I said the white working class there is lost.

Who do you think lives in the districts there that flipped from Obama to Trump?

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Sure they can. Kennedy had those votes. Bill Clinton had those votes.

Could then, can't now. Bill's racial dog whistles don't fly anymore, and don't help in a world where the racists have sorted to the other party.

Dems cannot win by chasing... and focusing on narrow issues like the Dreamers.

Demonstrating concern for and commitment to the latinx community is not a narrow issue.

ETA: As TM noted, Obama also had those votes (though I doubt he had the truly bigoted white "they tuk ur jobs" votes Trump brought out of the weeds).

No, he didn't. He had overwhelming turnout by POC & young people.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You have to be kidding me. With his stance on immigration, anyone who thought he wouldn't go after DACA shouldn't be allowed to tie their own shoes.

TM

That is what I said. Did I have an extra negative? My point was going after DACA was a given. I assumed much worse from him. Adder is off the rails as to how most people think.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Adder is off the rails as to how most people think.

I'm not talking about how most people think. I'm talking about how you get a big wave of latinx turnout for your side, as opposed to encouraging the marginal latinx voter to stay home.

You're going to need other things for other voters, but you can't shoot yourself in the foot with any of the groups you need.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I'm not talking about how most people think. I'm talking about how you get a big wave of latinx turnout for your side, as opposed to encouraging the marginal latinx voter to stay home.

You're going to need other things for other voters, but you can't shoot yourself in the foot with any of the groups you need.

You're the Lorax for the Latinx.

But I'm not sure they're as monolithic in their voting as you assume.

I don't think we can predict as well based on the usual generalities as we could in cycles past. Class, geographic location, and industry in which one works are becoming paramount deciding factors.