sycasey said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Democrats win Senate contests 20-13 is today's great headline in the Little Big Horn Express.

---

People Who Hate Democrats, Continue to Hate Democrats

News at eleven.

---

From NPR last night: The most interesting aspect is that the majority of seats flipped went to Dems when Obama won the "gerrymandered" [my add] district, went Republican when Trump took the District, and now went back in mid-terms. Probably a referendum on Trump, but that will become clearer when he is on the ballot in 2 years. Locally, in the "gerrymandered" districts in the OC, the great blue waive sweep doesn't look to have materialized. Levin took Issa's old seat on the strength of San Diego county, Walters appears to be holding her seat, the GOP surprised in North County (Asians vote in in greater numbers than Hispanics), and Rohrbacker probably is losing. A net gain of 1 vote rather than the expected 4 (note Walters and Rohrbacker races have not been called). (I would call the Rohrbacker a shift in political view rather than tied to Trump). In any event, this looks like a fairly typical mid-term, despite all the excuse making on this Board. The predicted Great Blue Wave looks more like this:

dog-with-attitude-on-the-beach-funny-photo-gm496158583-41359322

---

I'd just like to point out what you said about Rohrabacher's chances a year ago.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/76744/replies/1423064

---

The problem with putting the thread in was I'd just like to point out what you said about Royce's seat. It works both ways. This points out the problem is that a year ago was eternity in political years, and things changed (particularly, this was an anti-Trump/Russia vote that resulted in Rohrbacker's very narrow loss, while the Royce seat problem had to do with Asians outvoting Latinos). Hard to predict without a crystal ball. Might also say that predictions on this board (and polls) saying OC was turning all blue didn't come true either, and the wave concept really didn't seem to apply.

I'm assuming I get the same number of likes, since we both blew it. .

---

I did specifically say that Rohrabacher's district was more likely to flip.

---

I concede that.

sycasey said:

---

kjkbear said:

---

Scoreboard. That's it for last night. The next election is two years away. No new districts will be carved out or redone before 2020. Yes, there were other undercurrents at play last night. I like that the Democrats elected a lot of young candidates. Other than the youth issue, which is big enough, the other issues may or may not matter in two years. For last night, it still comes down to Scoreboard. I would like to see the Democrats replace Pelosi. That could bring actual change. Old does not necessarily mean most capable or effective.

---

Looking ahead to the next generation of politics, Republicans need to be nervous about their splits with younger voters:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls

18-29 years old - +35 D
30-44 years old - +19 D

It wasn't any better for them during the Obama years. Eventually this will be the dominant generation.

---

This is true, but as you get older and pay taxes and have to deal with the government, you tend to become more conservative. And young voters are hard to get to the polls.

My impression is the Dems should have done better against Trump, met expectations for mid-terms, and everything else is just lipstick on a pig.

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

The predictions of the big blue wave on this board (complete with pictures), and the pathetic rationals and excuses for the mixed outcomes yesterday, leaving what appear to be the typical mid-terms adjustment is just so typical. My favorite cement of the night was the tweet from some air head actress: "Beto lost, oh well, he should run for President."

Checking in with reality for a minute, NPR noted that the majority of flipped congressional seats were in Districts that voted for Obama and were Democratic, and then voted for Trump and became GOP. This they said has several implications, the first being that the change in allegiances reflects dissatisfaction with whoever is the current President, which seem to be the norm with new Presidents and their first mid-terms (there are exceptions, like the mid-terms for Bush no. 2 were right after 9/11 when he had strong national support). But Trump, Obama, Clinton, and on had their Congress change on them in mid-terms. The other aspect is that there are so few districts that really determine who controls the House.

The other thing that is curious was the lack of the blue wave in the OC Districts that were supposed to flip. In Knight's old district that was supposed to go blue easily due to increased hispanic population, Assembly woman Kim upset her Hispanic Dem opponent, Walters also probably will hold on despite polls to the contrary, and Rohrbacker is in peril, thought the vote is way too close to say for sure (he is losing). If you count Isa's district which was gerrymandered [excuse alert!!!) to include the isolated liberal area of coastal San Diego, but includes a smaller portion of the OC, was turned by a Democrat. Issa and Royce, whose districts chose Hillary Clinton over Trump, had announced their retirements in time to avoid what was supposed to be daunting reelection fights.

---

Denial

---

I did enjoy the criticism of liberals for focusing on their favorable results, followed by two paragraphs of parsing exactly which districts the Democrats did and did not win.

The truth is, it was a pretty broad win in the House. Pickups in states across the board, in both Romney-Clinton districts and Obama-Trump districts. Not as massive as some had hoped, but still a comfortable win that was called early in the night (by Fox News, no less!).

Republicans have done well in the Senate, but given the map that was certainly possible even on a good Democratic night. If all the Senate seats had been up it might not have been so good for them.

---

Yes, this just in, NPR is wrong. it was false news, Minority of flipped districts means pretty broad (or maybe even perky broad, or cute broad).

I discussed the OC districts since everyone her was talking about how they all would flip, Let's get another headline, "Dems dominate in OC by gaining zero net seats" (assuming Levin's district is considered a SD seat given the majority of voters live in San Diego).

The problem with your prior expectations (and those of the Dems) is when you achieve results that only mirror the expectations for a mid-term election, you look like you lost. I do agree the Senate results are misleading given who was running.

You have a President that is a public relations mess and scary on the international front, and this is the best the Dems got?

---

I would say that Issa's seat counts as a "flip," since Republicans held it before and now do not. It was certainly the lowest-hanging fruit of the bunch.

I also agree that expectations had probably been raised too much. But returning to the priors, like what you might have expected Democrats to accomplish a year or more ago . . . this was a good result for them. Part of why expectations had been raised is that people just started assuming they were going to win the House in the final few months. That's actually an impressive thing, that it was basically a done deal by August.

Trump is unpopular, but we're still in a good economy and don't have any unpopular wars dominating the headlines. So this result in the House was about right.

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

kjkbear said:

---

Scoreboard. That's it for last night. The next election is two years away. No new districts will be carved out or redone before 2020. Yes, there were other undercurrents at play last night. I like that the Democrats elected a lot of young candidates. Other than the youth issue, which is big enough, the other issues may or may not matter in two years. For last night, it still comes down to Scoreboard. I would like to see the Democrats replace Pelosi. That could bring actual change. Old does not necessarily mean most capable or effective.

---

Looking ahead to the next generation of politics, Republicans need to be nervous about their splits with younger voters:

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls

18-29 years old - +35 D
30-44 years old - +19 D

It wasn't any better for them during the Obama years. Eventually this will be the dominant generation.

---

This is true, but as you get older and pay taxes and have to deal with the government, you tend to become more conservative. And young voters are hard to get to the polls.

My impression is the Dems should have done better against Trump, met expectations for mid-terms, and everything else is just lipstick on a pig.

---

People do become more conservative, but those margins are pretty big and will be hard to reverse entirely. The Greatest Generation kept leaning Democratic for their entire lives, thanks to FDR.

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.

I have to say I am surprised how many republicans in CA voted for republicans in the house considering the "massive tax cut" bill really just amounted to an increased subsidy from California to red states. Maybe people haven't figured it out yet or maybe they don't really care, just like they don't really care about deficits (unless the other side is running them up).

As for the strength of this economy, it's entirely unclear to me at this point how strong things really are. It appears most of the tax cuts (as predicted by many, except WIAF), ended up in the pockets of stockholders and even with all of those buybacks, the market is only about even with where it was before the tax cuts passed. Wages have begun to rise finally, but not in a big way. I read an article claiming that the reason we aren't seeing wage increases that we expected with low unemployment is due to a general erosion of market power of workers as a result of an increased concentration of employer power, reduced union influence, etc. Regardless, it does appear that corporations are doing just fine, workers are doing ok but not great and that inflation is still at bay.

Long story short, hard to imagine that in 2 years there isn't some big change in the economy whether it's high growth, a small recession or some bubble bursting. I would say it would be tough for Trump and the republicans to run away from that, but with Trump not being bounded by reality I'm confident he'll blame it on Rosie O'donnell and 90% of Republicans will nod their heads in unison while chanting "lock her up" on their way to the ballot box.

sycasey said:

---

This is not an O.C. district, but it probably has similar demographics. Democrats likely to pick it up with a Millennial woman candidate.

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Los-Angeles-County-Katie-Hill-Steve-Knight-Election-Results-Califronia-Congress-499931932.html

So . . . not a sweep, but Republican losses in former SoCal strongholds continue to mount.

---

She bought the seat (overspent Knight massively) but that is politics, and I'm sure you could say the same ting about certain GOP winners. My sense is she probably can retain the seat for some time in what is a marginally red area. She is not very liberal, and ran on a law and order platform (parents were cops). For example, she would never vote to eliminate ICE.

This brings up an interesting issue. The Democratic Party won critical red, marginally red areas or neutral Districts with moderate to conservative candidates. How vulnerable will the winners in these Districts be after 2 years of Pelosi. Where is the heart of the Democratic party under the current leadership, immersed in the populist left of say Sanders or the more centrist approaches of say Bill Clinton. The careers of people like Rohrbacker's successor or Hill probably are tied to this issue.

It will be interesting to see where the Democrats take it from here. If I were them I'd run on a populist "power to the people" platform: voting rights (up to and including D.C./Puerto Rico statehood), ending gerrymandering, early voting, automatic registration, etc. At the federal level, tie this to rooting out corruption and corporate graft in the Trump Administration.

Seems like a winning message in a variety of districts to me.

Three moderate Democrat Senators lost last night- Donnelly of Indiana, McCaskill and Nelson. They all vote with Trump 40-50% of the time. The first two ran ads showing how much they voted for Trump and how much different they were than "Democrats."

Contrast that with Sherrod Brown an old time Laborite who won big in Ohio - unlike the Dem candidate for Gov/ while only supporting Trump 28% of the time. Stand for something and serve your constituents. Nobody likes a punk *****

A lot will also ride on how deep Trump is in the pocket of the Russians. In 2 years, Russia collusion might be even bigger and that favors Ronda and others. Two years of a news cycle filled with Trump Russia, Trump corruption and women angry could help Ronda and others get over Pelosi.

My guess is the pink wave doesn't subside but gets stronger. More women will enter congressional and state races. More will get elected and the vast majority will be Democrats.

I don't like how conciliatory Pelosi is but she knows how to count votes and herd cats...basically at the same time. That's invaluable. What she should do is bring in some young lieutenants to flog the GOP...and signal she will pass the torch.

Anarchistbear said:

---

Three moderate Democrat Senators lost last night- Donnelly of Indiana, McCaskill and Nelson. They all vote with Trump 40-50% of the time. The first two ran ads showing how much they voted for Trump and how much different they were than "Democrats."

Contrast that with Sherrod Brown an old time Laborite who won big in Ohio - unlike the Dem candidate for Gov/ while only supporting Trump 28% of the time. Stand for something and serve your constituents. Nobody likes a punk *****

---

Jon Tester also votes strongly with Democrats and managed to hold on in Montana. (Though the opposite case is Joe Manchin, who votes conservatively and manages to keep winning in the reddest of red states.)

There's something to be said for cultivating personality and feeling authentic to voters.

Interesting stuff. Of the 7 congressional districts targeted by Dems to flip in CA, they lead in 4. That's over .500. While not a giant blue tsunami, still looks like a 20 footer. Also, the GOP seats held on to by Kim and Walters...notice they're both women. My guess is if GOP men ran in those district, they might not have won. That's telling on a few levels but it's also identifying a GOP weakness; not very many female candidates. Not a deep bench. Meanwhile the Dems got a record number of women elected.

sycasey said:

---

It will be interesting to see where the Democrats take it from here. If I were them I'd run on a populist "power to the people" platform: voting rights (up to and including D.C./Puerto Rico statehood), ending gerrymandering, early voting, automatic registration, etc. At the federal level, tie this to rooting out corruption and corporate graft in the Trump Administration.

Seems like a winning message in a variety of districts to me.

---

I completely agree with pushing for statehood for DC and Puerto Rico, but with regards to gerrymandering, that has to happen at the state level. I happened to read an edited interview on this today on how well the democrats did regarding this (see below).

The short version, is they took a few small steps towards achieving equality in representation, but they missed some major opportunities, and it will be at least another decade until they can hope to have a level playing field. Which pisses me off because that will mean I will have to spend two decades of my adulthood living in a minority-ruled country.

Quote:

---

Sean Illing

It's probably worth noting that these redistricting processes only happen once every 10 years, so after 2020 the Democrats will not have another crack at this until 2030.

David Daley
That's exactly right. It's why 2018 was so important, because all of these governorships were on the line this year. The Democrats made some gains, but I'm not sure that they made enough gains to ensure that they have a reasonable voice in the process.

What we know is that when one side has complete control of the process, the lines always end up more extreme. When both sides have a seat at the table, you end up with some semblance of a compromise. It's not always perfect, but the maps tend to be at least slightly more representative of the state when both sides have seats at the table.

Sean llling
In your opinion, will the Democrats ever catch up to Republicans on this front? The Republicans got the jump on Democrats in 2010, and it seems like it will be near-impossible to close the gap.

David Daley
It's a really long road back, and you began to see steps on that road in Tuesday elections. But those are small steps, like breaking super-majorities in state legislatures. The Democrats managed to break super-majorities last night in Pennsylvania, in Michigan, in North Carolina, and that's important for their future electoral prospects in those states.

The thing is, you're not going to have a 9-point generational wave every year, and when it takes a 9-point generational wave simply to break a super-majority in a swing state, that's a really serious structural advantage.

I think Democrats are going to need successive generational waves in these states if they want to have a shot at parity next time around. It's a really long road back. That said, I think they made some important inroads last night, but there's a lot of work to be done.

Sean Illing
So basically the Democrats can expect to face a comparatively unfair political map for another decade?

David Daley
Yes. Democrats have won themselves back a few small seats at the table, but they're still at the kids' table.

---

https://www.vox.com/midterm-elections/2018/11/7/18071560/2018-midterm-elections-democrats-gerrymandering

All that matters is the Dems took the House and can now apply pressure to the Mini Mushroom. Also Mueller gets cover.

Trump hasn't been able to control the news cycle regarding Mueller because Mueller doesn't respond, in fact he's gone complete radio silence. Trump can't control that and won't be able to do so moving forward. I don't think Mueller draws blood at first...but I still think it's going to hurt like a motherfccker and Trump will feel it. Mueller is said to be aiming to indict Don Jr. next and soon. I can't imagine that puts Mini Mushroom in a good mood.

beartothebone said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Looking like a huge wave election. Popular House vote about +9 for Democrats. Biggest midterm wave in my adult life (since before 1994). Bigger than 1994, bigger than 2010, bigger than 2014.

The fact the results are so disparate from the will of the people shows how broken our Democracy is.

---

Come on, man. Yammer on nonsensically about popular vote numbers in a non-presidential election all you want, but that's loser talk. Clinton lost 54 house seats and 8 senate seats in his first midterm. And Obama lost 63 house seats and 6 Senate seats in his first midterm. You're spinning furiously on this one. This election's not even close to those numbers and that's with a president y'all hate with a white hot passion and a corrupt mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN plus the dominant majority of newspapers in the country), by constantly highlighting any semi-legit bad news on Trump and GOP candidates while virtually ignoring all the negative news on Dem candidates like the Project Veritas videos, Sinema's "meth lab of democracy" and "I don't care if you go fight for the Taliban" comments or Abrams' comments about undocumented aliens being a part of the blue wave (again, on camera), etc. Also factor in youtube, facebook and twitter playing their usual games with their shadow banning, outright banning, trending manipulation, etc. The deck was stacked really high against the GOP and for the Dems from that stanpoint, so to only manage what they did in a first year presidential midterm is particularly unimpressive.

And a massive LOL to anyone who suggests gerrymandering is a GOP thing and doesn't happen with regularity on both sides of the aisle. That's how the game is played and why libs are crushed that they can't gerrymander their way to Florida and Ohio's electoral college votes in 2020 and future elections.

---

Boy, THAT guy came in hot.

Clinton lost 54 house seats and 8 senate seats in his first midterm. And Obama lost 63 house seats and 6 Senate seats in his first midterm.

- beartothebone

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Democrats win Senate contests 20-13 is today's great headline in the Little Big Horn Express.

---

People Who Hate Democrats, Continue to Hate Democrats

News at eleven.

---

From NPR last night: The most interesting aspect is that the majority of seats flipped went to Dems when Obama won the "gerrymandered" [my add] district, went Republican when Trump took the District, and now went back in mid-terms. Probably a referendum on Trump, but that will become clearer when he is on the ballot in 2 years. Locally, in the "gerrymandered" districts in the OC, the great blue waive sweep doesn't look to have materialized. Levin took Issa's old seat on the strength of San Diego county, Walters appears to be holding her seat, the GOP surprised in North County (Asians vote in in greater numbers than Hispanics), and Rohrbacker probably is losing. A net gain of 1 vote rather than the expected 4 (note Walters and Rohrbacker races have not been called). (I would call the Rohrbacker a shift in political view rather than tied to Trump). In any event, this looks like a fairly typical mid-term, despite all the excuse making on this Board. The predicted Great Blue Wave looks more like this:

dog-with-attitude-on-the-beach-funny-photo-gm496158583-41359322

---

I'd just like to point out what you said about Rohrabacher's chances a year ago.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/76744/replies/1423064

---

The problem with putting the thread in was I'd just like to point out what you said about Royce's seat. It works both ways. This points out the problem is that a year ago was eternity in political years, and things changed (particularly, this was an anti-Trump/Russia vote that resulted in Rohrbacker's very narrow loss, while the Royce seat problem had to do with Asians outvoting Latinos). Hard to predict without a crystal ball. Might also say that predictions on this board (and polls) saying OC was turning all blue didn't come true either, and the wave concept really didn't seem to apply.

I'm assuming I get the same number of likes, since we both blew it. .

---

Sooooo . . . on some of those outstanding California seats:



Per 538:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-16-races-still-too-close-to-call/

Quote:

---

• Five of the races are in California: specifically, the 10th, 39th, 45th, 48thand 49th districts. It's not unusual for close races in California to still be uncalled even a couple days after the election. That's because mail ballots in California only have to be postmarked by Election Day; they can arrive at elections offices as late as Friday and still be counted. Since so many people in California vote by mail, that means that thousands of ballots are probably still in transit. Currently, the Republican candidates have leads of between 2 and 4 percentage points in four of the five districts. However, late-arriving ballots tend to lean Democratic in California, so those GOP leads will probably shrink, if not reverse entirely. Because of this, we're guessing that Democrats might win most, if not all, of these districts when all is said and done. The Democratic candidate already leads in one of them the California 49th which has prompted the Associated Press to call it for Democrat Mike Levin already.

---

We might not know how these have turned out until next month, though it seems likely they all tilt further Democrat. That probably means Denham falls in the 10th, and the 48th is gone too. The 39th and 45th will tighten, but we don't know by how much. Could be the Republicans hold on, could be they don't.

Another Bear said:

---

All that matters is the Dems took the House and can now apply pressure to the Mini Mushroom. Also Mueller gets cover.

Trump hasn't been able to control the news cycle regarding Mueller because Mueller doesn't respond, in fact he's gone complete radio silence. Trump can't control that and won't be able to do so moving forward. I don't think Mueller draws blood at first...but I still think it's going to hurt like a motherfccker and Trump will feel it. Mueller is said to be aiming to indict Don Jr. next and soon. I can't imagine that puts Mini Mushroom in a good mood.

---

Well see, it may be a game two can play. I suspect there will be two special prosecutors now that Sessions is gone. BTW, IMO this is a perversion of the legal system, but I think its happening.

beartothebone said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Looking like a huge wave election. Popular House vote about +9 for Democrats. Biggest midterm wave in my adult life (since before 1994). Bigger than 1994, bigger than 2010, bigger than 2014.

The fact the results are so disparate from the will of the people shows how broken our Democracy is.

---

Come on, man. Yammer on nonsensically about popular vote numbers in a non-presidential election all you want, but that's loser talk. Clinton lost 54 house seats and 8 senate seats in his first midterm. And Obama lost 63 house seats and 6 Senate seats in his first midterm. You're spinning furiously on this one. This election's not even close to those numbers and that's with a president y'all hate with a white hot passion and a corrupt mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN plus the dominant majority of newspapers in the country), by constantly highlighting any semi-legit bad news on Trump and GOP candidates while virtually ignoring all the negative news on Dem candidates like the Project Veritas videos, Sinema's "meth lab of democracy" and "I don't care if you go fight for the Taliban" comments or Abrams' comments about undocumented aliens being a part of the blue wave (again, on camera), etc. Also factor in youtube, facebook and twitter playing their usual games with their shadow banning, outright banning, trending manipulation, etc. The deck was stacked really high against the GOP and for the Dems from that stanpoint, so to only manage what they did in a first year presidential midterm is particularly unimpressive.

And a massive LOL to anyone who suggests gerrymandering is a GOP thing and doesn't happen with regularity on both sides of the aisle. That's how the game is played and why libs are crushed that they can't gerrymander their way to Florida and Ohio's electoral college votes in 2020 and future elections.

---

The +9% of the American people voting for Democratic representation in the House was the NY Times estimate at the time during the night. The estimate is running about +7% now, which does downgrade it from the biggest wave in my adult life to a more standard wave about equal to 1994 and 2010, in terms of the will of the people.

And isn't the House of Representatives supposed to reflect the will of the people? In fact, it is our only Federal body that is built to reflect the will of the people. So, you go on watching Project Veritas videos - I'll stick with the Federalist Papers.

Republicans are on track to lose more seats in 2018 than they have lost since Watergate. Many of you are in denial.

In regards to gerrymandering, you show you don't even understand what it is. "gerrymander their way to Florida and Ohio's electoral college votes"? Gerrymandering has nothing to do with electoral college votes or statewide elections at all. Clearly, I'm here on a Cal website debating a fool that doesn't understand the basics of what he is talking about.

Dems are moving their states to non-partisan districting as they have in California and just voted for in Michigan (which will balance out Michigan's representation so it once again reflects the will of the people, unlike the districting that was created by Republicans after the 2010 election). So, one side is looking for fair ways to build government that strengthen the institutions of government and our constitution and your side just made the guy from the "hot tub swivel seat" marketing video the top law enforcement official in the country. The "hot tub swivel seat" company was shut down for fraud last year.

golden sloth said:

---

beartothebone said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Looking like a huge wave election. Popular House vote about +9 for Democrats. Biggest midterm wave in my adult life (since before 1994). Bigger than 1994, bigger than 2010, bigger than 2014.

The fact the results are so disparate from the will of the people shows how broken our Democracy is.

---

Come on, man. Yammer on nonsensically about popular vote numbers in a non-presidential election all you want, but that's loser talk. Clinton lost 54 house seats and 8 senate seats in his first midterm. And Obama lost 63 house seats and 6 Senate seats in his first midterm. You're spinning furiously on this one. This election's not even close to those numbers and that's with a president y'all hate with a white hot passion and a corrupt mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN plus the dominant majority of newspapers in the country), by constantly highlighting any semi-legit bad news on Trump and GOP candidates while virtually ignoring all the negative news on Dem candidates like the Project Veritas videos, Sinema's "meth lab of democracy" and "I don't care if you go fight for the Taliban" comments or Abrams' comments about undocumented aliens being a part of the blue wave (again, on camera), etc. Also factor in youtube, facebook and twitter playing their usual games with their shadow banning, outright banning, trending manipulation, etc. The deck was stacked really high against the GOP and for the Dems from that stanpoint, so to only manage what they did in a first year presidential midterm is particularly unimpressive.

And a massive LOL to anyone who suggests gerrymandering is a GOP thing and doesn't happen with regularity on both sides of the aisle. That's how the game is played and why libs are crushed that they can't gerrymander their way to Florida and Ohio's electoral college votes in 2020 and future elections.

---

The people that buy all that BS simply amaze and scare me. They amaze me for both their stupidity and their fantasy. The fantasy of just believing everything they want to hear, and the stupidity of never questioning what they hear. They are the ones supporting the destruction of American democracy, and they are the ones promoting conflict within our country.

---

Here is video of the Trump's new top law enforcement official at work 3 years ago promoting a fraud (he was a paid advisor of the company). Trump has also been found guilty of fraud, of course.

beartothebone said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Looking like a huge wave election. Popular House vote about +9 for Democrats. Biggest midterm wave in my adult life (since before 1994). Bigger than 1994, bigger than 2010, bigger than 2014.

The fact the results are so disparate from the will of the people shows how broken our Democracy is.

---

Come on, man. Yammer on nonsensically about popular vote numbers in a non-presidential election all you want, but that's loser talk. Clinton lost 54 house seats and 8 senate seats in his first midterm. And Obama lost 63 house seats and 6 Senate seats in his first midterm. You're spinning furiously on this one. This election's not even close to those numbers and that's with a president y'all hate with a white hot passion and a corrupt mainstream media (ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN plus the dominant majority of newspapers in the country), by constantly highlighting any semi-legit bad news on Trump and GOP candidates while virtually ignoring all the negative news on Dem candidates like the Project Veritas videos, Sinema's "meth lab of democracy" and "I don't care if you go fight for the Taliban" comments or Abrams' comments about undocumented aliens being a part of the blue wave (again, on camera), etc. Also factor in youtube, facebook and twitter playing their usual games with their shadow banning, outright banning, trending manipulation, etc. The deck was stacked really high against the GOP and for the Dems from that stanpoint, so to only manage what they did in a first year presidential midterm is particularly unimpressive.

And a massive LOL to anyone who suggests gerrymandering is a GOP thing and doesn't happen with regularity on both sides of the aisle. That's how the game is played and why libs are crushed that they can't gerrymander their way to Florida and Ohio's electoral college votes in 2020 and future elections.

---

The narratives you believe and the sources you trust are propaganda. Does any voice inside you realize what you've bought into and the absurdity of your accusations/conclusions? Can you be reached by reason anymore, or just ideology?

golden sloth said:

---

I don't know if there has been a point of confusion, but my comment was directed towards beartothebone, not you.

It is my belief that Beartothebone and all his brethren are one of the three pillars undermining and destroying our democracy. They are contributing to this by not only allowing but actively supporting the lies and attacks on reality. If this person didn't exist, Trump and friends would not get away with his BS and minority rule with the intent to subvert democracy to maintain and extend minority rule which is flourishing, hence we would not be moving toward an authoritarian government.

Please note, not all conservatives are like Beartothebone, he is a special kind, an unpatriotic kind, and someone who is killing democracy, American ideals and the principles of our founding fathers.

---

My bad, I'll edit

More news from the blue wave:

7 governorships were flipped to Democrats. I read that is the most in 30 years but I haven't verified that myself.

6 state legislative chambers were flipped. There was much talk during the Obama Presidency that close to 1,000 state legislative seats turned red during his Presidency. So far, in 2 years of Trump, 1/3 of those seats have flipped back. #JustGettingStarted

golden sloth said:

---

I don't know if there has been a point of confusion, but my comment was directed towards beartothebone, not you.

It is my belief that Beartothebone and all his brethren are one of the three pillars undermining and destroying our democracy. They are contributing to this by not only allowing but actively supporting the lies and attacks on reality. If this person didn't exist, Trump and friends would not get away with his BS and minority rule with the intent to subvert democracy to maintain and extend minority rule which is flourishing, hence we would not be moving toward an authoritarian government.

Please note, not all conservatives are like Beartothebone, he is a special kind, an unpatriotic kind, and someone who is killing democracy, American ideals and the principles of our founding fathers.

---

You know a large portion of the country would say the very things about you and liberals.

I don't find I have much representation these days. I face Dems who want to engage in economic warfare against me or anyone else in the private business sector, and GOP guys that want to tell me how to live my non-economic life. That didn't used to be the case, and has been lost in gerrymandering by both parties that has led to much more partisanship.

BTW, the big winner in this election was weed. Won every election. Wed was the only wave. Also the dead guy from Nevada was a big winner.

sycasey said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

sycasey said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Democrats win Senate contests 20-13 is today's great headline in the Little Big Horn Express.

---

People Who Hate Democrats, Continue to Hate Democrats

News at eleven.

---

From NPR last night: The most interesting aspect is that the majority of seats flipped went to Dems when Obama won the "gerrymandered" [my add] district, went Republican when Trump took the District, and now went back in mid-terms. Probably a referendum on Trump, but that will become clearer when he is on the ballot in 2 years. Locally, in the "gerrymandered" districts in the OC, the great blue waive sweep doesn't look to have materialized. Levin took Issa's old seat on the strength of San Diego county, Walters appears to be holding her seat, the GOP surprised in North County (Asians vote in in greater numbers than Hispanics), and Rohrbacker probably is losing. A net gain of 1 vote rather than the expected 4 (note Walters and Rohrbacker races have not been called). (I would call the Rohrbacker a shift in political view rather than tied to Trump). In any event, this looks like a fairly typical mid-term, despite all the excuse making on this Board. The predicted Great Blue Wave looks more like this:

dog-with-attitude-on-the-beach-funny-photo-gm496158583-41359322

---

I'd just like to point out what you said about Rohrabacher's chances a year ago.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/6/topics/76744/replies/1423064

---

The problem with putting the thread in was I'd just like to point out what you said about Royce's seat. It works both ways. This points out the problem is that a year ago was eternity in political years, and things changed (particularly, this was an anti-Trump/Russia vote that resulted in Rohrbacker's very narrow loss, while the Royce seat problem had to do with Asians outvoting Latinos). Hard to predict without a crystal ball. Might also say that predictions on this board (and polls) saying OC was turning all blue didn't come true either, and the wave concept really didn't seem to apply.

I'm assuming I get the same number of likes, since we both blew it. .

---

Sooooo . . . on some of those outstanding California seats:



Per 538:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-16-races-still-too-close-to-call/

Quote:

---

• Five of the races are in California: specifically, the 10th, 39th, 45th, 48thand 49th districts. It's not unusual for close races in California to still be uncalled even a couple days after the election. That's because mail ballots in California only have to be postmarked by Election Day; they can arrive at elections offices as late as Friday and still be counted. Since so many people in California vote by mail, that means that thousands of ballots are probably still in transit. Currently, the Republican candidates have leads of between 2 and 4 percentage points in four of the five districts. However, late-arriving ballots tend to lean Democratic in California, so those GOP leads will probably shrink, if not reverse entirely. Because of this, we're guessing that Democrats might win most, if not all, of these districts when all is said and done. The Democratic candidate already leads in one of them the California 49th which has prompted the Associated Press to call it for Democrat Mike Levin already.

---

We might not know how these have turned out until next month, though it seems likely they all tilt further Democrat. That probably means Denham falls in the 10th, and the 48th is gone too. The 39th and 45th will tighten, but we don't know by how much. Could be the Republicans hold on, could be they don't.

---

That is a good point. I suspect that a 2 to 4 percent lead will be difficult to overcome, and I don't see Levin losing either. But Rohrbacker could win with such a tight race if the late votes bucks the state wide trend (be interested to see what the late vote looks like in the OC traditionally).

More news from the blue wave:

The worst case scenario happened for Republicans here in New Jersey. The NJ Congressional delegation will be 11 Democrats and 1 Republican due to Republican gerrymandering. How does that work?

After 2010, Republican Governor Chris Christie worked the redistricting to make sure that blue New Jersey had an even 6 - 6 split among its Congressional delegation, instead of the 7/8 - 4/5 Democratic split it probably should have. To do so, numerous districts were created with thin Republican majorities.

This worked pretty well until Trump came along. One seat flipped blue in 2016 and 4 seats flipped blue in 2018. Will be interesting to see how redistricting is handled in 2021 with Democrats controlling all the levers of government.

I guess that's what happens when you mess with New Jersey's property tax deduction.

beartothebone said:

---

And a massive LOL to anyone who suggests gerrymandering is a GOP thing and doesn't happen with regularity on both sides of the aisle. That's how the game is played and why libs are crushed that they can't gerrymander their way to Florida and Ohio's electoral college votes in 2020 and future elections.

---

I heard on the radio that Florida just voted to allow convicted felons to have the right to vote again. That means 1.5 million new (likely democrat) voters. So, while I don't know whether that's a good thing or not, I'm LOLing In your face! No need to gerrymander that! My initial reaction is that Florida will never go red again, hahahaha. Good luck winning in 2020, bud.

wifeisafurd said:

---

BTW, the big winner in this election was weed. Won every election. Wed was the only wave. Also the dead guy from Nevada was a big winner.

---

It's pretty impressive how quickly public opinion has shifted on marijuana legalization.

Other big winners:

-Obamacare. Democrats ran on it and won, and Medicaid expansion passed even in red states.

-Election fairness. Ballot measures to end gerrymandering passed easily. Felons in Florida got their voting rights restored even as Republicans won narrowly in statewide races.

wifeisafurd said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

I don't know if there has been a point of confusion, but my comment was directed towards beartothebone, not you.

It is my belief that Beartothebone and all his brethren are one of the three pillars undermining and destroying our democracy. They are contributing to this by not only allowing but actively supporting the lies and attacks on reality. If this person didn't exist, Trump and friends would not get away with his BS and minority rule with the intent to subvert democracy to maintain and extend minority rule which is flourishing, hence we would not be moving toward an authoritarian government.

Please note, not all conservatives are like Beartothebone, he is a special kind, an unpatriotic kind, and someone who is killing democracy, American ideals and the principles of our founding fathers.

---

You know a large portion of the country would say the very things about you and liberals.

I don't find I have much representation these days. I face Dems who want to engage in economic warfare against me or anyone else in the private business sector, and GOP guys that want to tell me how to live my non-economic life. That didn't used to be the case, and has been lost in gerrymandering by both parties that has led to much more partisanship.

BTW, the big winner in this election was weed. Won every election. Wed was the only wave. Also the dead guy from Nevada was a big winner.

---

I'm aware of that, and I'm sure they believe it, but the difference is, I'm not supporting an administration that releases doctored photos to legitimize the pulling of press credentials for a journalist that was asking hard questions. Questions that were legitimate.

I tend to believe relying on former felons as the voting block that is going to sway elections is a bad idea. I just don't imagine them being the dedicated base will to show up on election day.

Another Bear said:

---

My mom still lives in CA 48, Rohrabacher's old district. To say the switch over isn't a big deal is pure bull. The 48th is/was prime Reagan country but also home of John Wayne and a long tradition of GOP and hardline cold war warriors...not to mentioned a bunch of Birchers, Christian kooks (Crystal Cathedral) and wing nuts.

The one commonality might be level of education and I think that's the basis of the flip...educated people don't swallow horse pucky by the gallon, and women were fed up and po'ed. They looked the other way for economics for a long time but Trump ended that, as did the Russkies. Educated people tend to stop and ask questions, like if Rohrabacher is a Russkie asset and tool. Trump didn't help nor did Kavanaugh.

Also Issa's seat in CA 49 flipped and that's just as big of a deal given it borders southern OC and SD is more conservative then OC and includes Camp Pendleton.

Flipping 48 and 49 were big deals. Both were as solidly GOP as SF is Dem. Imagine if SF flipped...that's how big of a deal it is.

---

I'm assuming you make this stuff in the Dajo vain.

Maybe you should talk to your mom some more to get you facts straight.

Rohrbacker has not lost yet nor has the race been called. He probably losses but it will be real close. The District may be full of wing nuts since it voted for Obama and Clinton, and has a higher Dem registration than GOP registration. The District boundaries have changed a lot (in fact Issa was once the Congressman), but it never included (and is not geographically close) to the Crystal Cathedral. The District was not even rated red (Cook toss-up, Sabato's toss-up, and Inside Elections blue). Your thinking is decades old and full of stereotypes. Just like SF flipping. Yes, maybe 1950 SF flipping.

As for 49, it was a District, when created , that was held by 2 Democrats and a Republican, before Issa, who was gerrymandered out of the 48th (don't tell Dajo). The 49th District had then been gerrymandered to isolate all the GOP votes in one district so it included conservative portions of the Inland Empire and inland northern San Diego County giving Issa a strong base. But in 2012, the District was redrawn to take out the conservative inland areas, to include a small portion of very southern OC and the San Diego coast all the way down to La Jolla. Your talking the few SC cities that mostly voted for Obama and Kerry, and to the extent there are liberals in San Diego county, they are in these beach cities. Issa didn't run because he knew a Democrat would win. Again, this is not even close to your SF flipping scenario. I don't know where you get this cr@p.

What's to make up? So you don't like the outcome and the GOP dying off in the OC and Rohrabacher is likely to lose. What is made up? The tone or the part where women are fleeing the GOP?

Now the word is Mimi Walters and Young Kim's seats haven't been decided? And I thought those would be safe given the GOP put up female candidates but perhaps not. If those seats go down to Dems, GOP have a yuuge woman problem.

Any way, I recall you saying your vote didn't matter in your district. Really? With all these tight races, seems every vote mattered.