| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:56 pm Post subject: What do the 2018 midterms mean? |
 |
|
I got this e-mail from Route 50 this morning, and then did a little digging around. While I am disappointed that more people did not repudiate the amorality of the Republican party, I think the bigger picture looks pretty promising.
| Quote: | NOVEMBER 8, 2018 06:31 PM ET
Midterm elections highlighted the nation’s growing urban-rural divide, according to Brookings experts.
The entrenched urban-rural divide has become the dominant phenomenon of modern American—and the midterm elections this week were no exception.
Voters in metropolitan areas went for Democratic candidates over Republican ones 65 percent to 32 percent, while those in small towns and rural America preferred Republicans 56 percent to 42 percent, said William Galston at a Brookings Institution election post-mortem event Thursday.
Suburbs split 49 percent to 49 percent between the parties.
“They are the battleground,” said Galston, a senior fellow of governance studies at Brookings. “There are some indications that split tracks across geographical lines.”
Midterm turnout is estimated at 49 percent—or 113 million Americans—the most since 1966 and with the record being 51 percent in 1914. Turnout for the 2014 midterms only reached 36.4 percent.
In Florida, turnout was up 2.2 million voters, and the Republican gubernatorial candidate won by about a percentage point—indicating relatively equal mobilization on both sides, Galston said.
“Partisanship is really driving vote choice these days,” said Vanessa Williamson, a governance studies fellow at Brookings.
Because it’s easier to predict who people will vote for, campaigns are less of a persuasion game than a mobilization one, which makes alleged voter suppression in Georgia more problematic, she added.
In her victory speech, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi celebrated pre-existing medical conditions, saying “Let’s hear it more for pre-existing medical conditions.” It was a reference to how Democrats during the campaign hammered Republicans for their failed attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which would have wiped out the law’s protections for people with medical conditions.
“Health care was overwhelmingly what candidates were talking about,” said Molly Reynolds, another governance studies fellow at Brookings.
In fact, health care was the subject of 60 percent of House Democratic candidates’ advertisements.
|
Let's dive a bit deeper into some of the factors in the vote and voting trends.
Demographics
A significant part of the Trumpian angst about immigration stems from demographic trends as Latinos become larger demographic groups—and voters. This is particularly notable in Arizona and Texas. In 2000, Hispanics made up 30% of the State of Arizona’s population. That percentage increased to 37% by 2017. Of even more concern to some white voters, fully 1/3 of Hispanics are not yet of voting age.
The changes are even more stark in Texas. In 2000, there were 6.7 million Hispanics and 11.1 million whites. By 2017, there were 11.2 Hispanics and 11.8 whites, with Hispanics expected top be the largest ethnic group by 2023.
Similar trends are occurring in other states, although with lower absolute numbers.
Turnout
The strategy pursued by more progressive Democratic strategists was to increase turnout for the midterm elections. Trump pursued the same strategy, firing up his base with tall tales about migrant caravans. It worked, turnout was 49 percent, compared to 36.4 percent in 2014. That increased turnout accounts for the close race in Texas. Total turnout was 8.3 million voters, compare to 4.6 million voters for Senate in 2014 and 7.9 million in 2012. While it did not put O’Rourke over the top, the higher turnout resulted in two additional Democratic Congressional seats, including the defeat of John Culberson, who had been elected 9 times.
Arizona is a very different story, and illustrates the problems that the Democratic party has in galvanizing Hispanic turnout. Total turnout was 1.9 million, lower than 2016 (2.5 million) and 2012 (2.2 million.)
While increasing turnout worked well for some districts, most notably Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, it is not sufficient to turn red districts bllue or even purple.
Trends
In both Arizona and Texas, Republican control is weakening. In 2018m Ted Cruz got 50.9% of the popular vote for Senator. In 2014 John Coryn got 61.6% and in 2012 Cruz got 56.5%.
Trends are less clear in Arizona. The Democratic candidate Sinema currently leads, at 49.1%. In 2016, McCain got 51.2% of the vote, and in 2012 Flake got 49.2%.
Healthcare
It looks like the ACA is here to stay, and The House has an issue to focus public opinion on healthcare and the resistance of the Republicans. Popular support is over 50% and making sure that people are not turned away for pre-existing conditions is so popular that Republicans baldly lied about what they have supported. Medicaid expansion was approved by popular votes in three red states.
| Quote: | | In Idaho, the Medicaid expansion passed by an especially large margin, with 61 percent in favor and 39 percent against. The Nebraska expansion passed with a tighter margin: 53 percent of voters in favor, and 47 percent against. And in Utah, where the vote still hasn’t been certified by the state, but NBC projects a win, the proposition leads with 54 percent of the vote. |
Immigration
Trump's scare tactics on immigration certainly contributed to Republican turnout. As lazy and stupid as he is in some areas, he has a sense for how to stir up fear. Popular support for the Dreamers, and court cases, are both going the Democrats way. But I imagine that whether or not the issue is taken up in the House depends on polling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | By Dan Balz and
Michael Scherer November 9 at 7:49 PM
In the early hours of election night on Tuesday, a consensus began to take hold that the vaunted Democratic blue wave that had been talked about all year was failing to materialize. Now, with a handful of races still to be called, it’s clear that an anti-President Trump force hit the country with considerable, if uneven, strength.
Democrats appear poised to pick up between 35 and 40 seats in the House, once the last races are tallied, according to strategists in both parties. That would represent the biggest Democratic gain in the House since the post-Watergate election of 1974, when the party picked up 49 seats three months after Richard M. Nixon resigned the presidency.
Republicans will gain seats in the Senate, but with races in Florida and Arizona still to be called, their pre-election majority of 51 seats will end up as low as 52 or as high as 54. Meanwhile, Democrats gained seven governorships, recouping in part losses sustained in 2010 and 2014, and picked up hundreds of state legislative seats, where they had suffered a virtual wipeout in the previous two midterm elections.
The Democrats’ gains this week are still far short of what Republicans accomplished in their historic victories of 1994 and 2010. But they would eclipse the number of seats Democrats gained in 2006, the last time the party recaptured control of the House, as well as the 26-seat gain in 1982, when the national unemployment rate was at 10 percent. This year, the election took place with the unemployment rate at just 3.7 percent.
Day by day, the outlook for Democrats in the House has improved. At the offices of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, already high spirits have been rising all week as more races fell into the party’s column. One joke that has been making the rounds there goes like this: “This is actually turning out to be more of a Hanukkah than a Christmas election,” meaning day after day of gifts, rather than just one.
This was always an election that would test the strength of the economy, which favored the president’s party, vs. the president’s low approval ratings, which, along with the record of past midterm elections, pointed to Democratic gains. In the end, history and presidential approval combined to give Democrats control of the House by what appears to be a comfortable margin.
The Democratic wave hit hardest in suburban districts, many of them traditional Republican territory, where college-educated voters — particularly women — dissatisfied with the president backed Democratic challengers. Ronald Brownstein of the Atlantic and CNN, who has closely tracked these changes over many elections, noted in a post-election article that, before the election, two-thirds of Republicans represented congressional districts where the percentage of the population with college degrees was below the national average. After the election, he estimated, more than three-quarters of GOP House members now will represent such districts.
Democrats flipped about two-thirds of the competitive districts won by both Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Barack Obama in 2012 or by Clinton in 2016 and Mitt Romney in 2012. They also picked up one-third of districts won by Trump in 2016 and Obama in 2012. In districts where both Trump and Romney had won in the previous two elections, Democrats gained about a quarter of the competitive seats.
Also striking in House races was the number of narrow victory margins — on both sides. About 20 Democrats won or are leading in races where the margin is fewer than five percentage points, while about two dozen Republicans who won or are leading are in races with similarly small margins. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It means nothing has improved in southern Florida with the way they count votes.
It means the democrats always have lawyers on standby to challenge vote tallies in any race that's close.
It means the democrats did come up with better candidates in some races, its hard to beat a female vet, unless she is in Arizona, but that's still not clear.
It means no matter how much you over spend to get elected, it's still no guarantee, sorry Robert Francis O'Rourke, you blew a shit load of money.
It means that a power grab (Proposition 10 Ca.) was a stupid idea, price fixing is always a stupid idea, it never works, you'd think they'd learn.
It means that a blue wave only showed up in Ca. not a surprise, but the surf was small.
Nancy Pelosi is not s shoe-in for speaker, many freshman dems have already said they won't vote for her.
The Senate no longer have to fear how Collins and McCaskill will vote, they now have them covered.
There's more, but that's enough for now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"The Senate no longer have to fear how Collins and McCaskill will vote..."
If I recollect correctly, it was pointed out a bit earlier that Claire McCaskill is a Democrat. Also, you should know by now that she lost her reelection bid in Tuesday's election.
Isn't it really Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| swchandler wrote: | "The Senate no longer have to fear how Collins and McCaskill will vote..."
If I recollect correctly, it was pointed out a bit earlier that Claire McCaskill is a Democrat. Also, you should know by now that she lost her reelection bid in Tuesday's election.
Isn't it really Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski? |
All be damn, you're correct, I got the wrong 'M', but I'm surprised that mac didn't catch that, an error like that, or spelling, is what he lives on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14876
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
not since 1994 has a dem won there. Thanks trump...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/video/democrat-kyrsten-sinema-wins-arizonas-014418157.html
Democrat Kyrsten Sinema wins Arizona's open U.S. Senate seat
Yahoo News Video•November 12, 2018
| Quote: | | Democrat Kyrsten Sinema won Arizona's open U.S. Senate seat Monday in a race that was among the most closely watched in the nation, beating Republican Rep. Martha McSally in the battle to replace GOP Sen. Jeff Flake. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nw30 wrote: | | swchandler wrote: | "The Senate no longer have to fear how Collins and McCaskill will vote..."
If I recollect correctly, it was pointed out a bit earlier that Claire McCaskill is a Democrat. Also, you should know by now that she lost her reelection bid in Tuesday's election.
Isn't it really Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski? |
All be damn, you're correct, I got the wrong 'M', but I'm surprised that mac didn't catch that, an error like that, or spelling, is what he lives on. |
NW...please do your homework. You little diatribe above is littered with inaccuracies, and falsehoods.
https://www.axios.com/donald-trump-2020-presidential-election-chances-86143c8b-9045-414d-b61a-80d67be9107a.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
With the Arizona results in, I rechecked turnout and results. The Democratic candidate won by 1.7%. When Flake was on the ballot om 2014, he won by 3%. Turnout was a little higher in 2018 than 2014–2.2 million vs. 2.14 million—but lower than in 2016, 2.5 million. Flake won by 3%, so this is a 4.7% swing to the Democrats. As he himself noted, this was a referendum on Trump. He swung nearly 5% of the voters against the Republican Party.
Trump as a polarizing figure drove increased turnout by both parties. Turnout in 2018 was 49.2%, compared to 37% in 2014. That’s an increase of 30 million, with 4 million more Democratic voters than Republican voters. In 2014, there were 4.4 million more Republican than Democratic voters. For those who need help with the math, at least 8.4 million more people now realize what a scumbag Trump is. Carry on.
Last edited by mac on Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
