WWTBAM Bored

My God, That is all we have heard from the chattering classes for months. They got everything wrong and we are still supposed to listen to the blather they spout.

I never saw us holding the senate with the 2010 class at risk-no matter who the nominee was.

From a strategic perspective-kudos to Trump for never giving up on Pennsylvania and making the late move into Michigan.

I very seldom listen to Limbaugh, but I was in the combine yesterday and flipping through and his focus was on not to give up because the polls might be wrong. Well, I figured that is an argument for the losers and figured it was over. turned out he was right.

The chattering classes all go to the same schools and have the same singular focus on the big cities and the conventional wisdom. They have no knowledge of places like the rural counties in southwest Wisconsin that flipped from Obama Blue to Trump Red.

You can't rule a country you have never been to

As Peggy Noonan said lots of people were tired of of being condescended to by their inferiors

I realize that the chattering classes have the attention span of a gnat and the 2004 is ancient history and we all hate Bush. However, Trump's victory model is essentially the same as Bush's 2004 model. Maximize the turnout and margins in the Red counties and exurbs. It has worked twice now in the last 4 elections.

The 2004 model was staring them in the face and they never even glanced at it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Spock wrote:I realize that the chattering classes have the attention span of a gnat and the 2004 is ancient history and we all hate Bush. However, Trump's victory model is essentially the same as Bush's 2004 model. Maximize the turnout and margins in the Red counties and exurbs. It has worked twice now in the last 4 elections.

The 2004 model was staring them in the face and they never even glanced at it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Those who voted for Bush in '04 probably re-wished their vote four years later. It will be the same thing with Trump.

And Bush got 40% of the Hispanic vote, which was somewhat smaller as a percentage back then.

silverscreenselect wrote:
Those who voted for Bush in '04 probably re-wished their vote four years later. It will be the same thing with Trump.

LOL.

One thing I have been wondering about for awhile and I have never seen/heard it discussed is related to preponderance of Republican control of state legislatures. This has gone on for a few years now and I suspect that we gained more last night.

How thin is the Democrat bench getting to be in a number of these states? Many Democrats with possible future state-wide appeal are being aborted early (so to speak) by the voters and never get that toehold to establish a political base for congressional/senate runs.

SSS>>>Those who voted for Bush in '04 probably re-wished their vote four years later. It will be the same thing with Trump.<<<

Just curious before I believe you on events 4 years out.

What is your record on predicting results/events in this cycle?

My favorite moment of this whole election cycle occurred about a week ago. I was flipping through stations in the combine and stopped on NPR.

They were interviewing a male health care worker(I think he was working in area of long-term therapy stuff) in Seattle area who is a bigwig in the Democrat party and had received news coverage on that.

He said 2 of his patients left him when he got the news coverage and one of his long-term (Trump supporting) patients got mad at him and all red-faced and angry. Assuming this actually happened, we were asked to believe that this prominent activist Democrat did not say anything to bring this on.

Really, this was news?

Spock wrote:One thing I have been wondering about for awhile and I have never seen/heard it discussed is related to preponderance of Republican control of state legislatures. This has gone on for a few years now and I suspect that we gained more last night.

The Kentucky House had been under Democratic control for almost a century. The Republicans needed 4 wins to flip control. They ended up winning 10 (I believe), including the seat belonging to the former Speaker of the House. Until this election, the Kentucky House was the only Democratically-controlled legislative body in the South.

earendel wrote:

Spock wrote:One thing I have been wondering about for awhile and I have never seen/heard it discussed is related to preponderance of Republican control of state legislatures. This has gone on for a few years now and I suspect that we gained more last night.

The Kentucky House had been under Democratic control for almost a century. The Republicans needed 4 wins to flip control. They ended up winning 10 (I believe), including the seat belonging to the former Speaker of the House. Until this election, the Kentucky House was the only Democratically-controlled legislative body in the South.

https://www.alec.org/app/uploads/2016/1 ... ult_02.pdf

Here is a map of state legislative control. Unfrickinbelievable.

Just a quick few thoughts on North Dakota. It isn't that long ago that the Democrats held both senate seats and the house seat. Democrat Heidi Heitkamp barely beat a flawed candidate to win her senate seat in 2012. I think that she will probably hold that seat as long as she wants, but in a deep red state could get washed out.

However, she appears to be the only Democrat who could win statewide. The state senate is down to 9 Democrats-doesn't leave a lot of bench players coming up.

Spock wrote:Here is a map of state legislative control. Unfrickinbelievable.

Why do you say that? It's pretty much the way the Presidential vote went.

Bob Juch wrote:

Spock wrote:Here is a map of state legislative control. Unfrickinbelievable.

Why do you say that? It's pretty much the way the Presidential vote went.

I think it has been a slow process of accretion of houses for the last decade or so. Be that as it may, I am more interested in any thoughts you might have about the strength (or lack thereof) of the Democrat's bench in Flyover Nation.