Trollminator wrote: I’ll give trump credit for one thing, as dumb as he is he realized there are plenty of people who are much more dumb and gullible on top of it. The money he really earned was from reality TV, which is perfect for him - get people hooked on watching him do his “you’re fired” routine with a fresh crowd of idiots fighting for a meaningless internship in his fraudulent enterprise. The next natural step was duping Americans more directly. He probably still can’t believe how much the birthed thing stuck.
Exactly. Short sound bite lies to his simplistic angry male base. He has an endless supply of them and doesn't care how many contradict each other.
The caliber of Republicans/conservatives in this era makes all of it possible. None of the prior standards apply.
Anyway, Republicans managed basically 46% nationwide, although that will drop below 46% as California is finalized.
That is what they have become, the 46% party, as I emphasized here and numerous other sites. The handful of sharp conservatives exited 2016 focused on that 46% while understanding how ominous it was, wondering how in heck they managed only 46% against Hillary Clinton? The simplistic angry males (SAMs) like the ones who post here and on so many other sites were braindead toward the 46% and somehow believed they were a beloved party.
I guess they thought that every Republican nationwide would own that electoral college button...yes, I'd prefer to lose by more than 2% and still win...thank you very much.
Anyway, I won everything I wagered on at Predictit. I wagered on Republicans far more often than not, for simple reason that the polling and therefore the odds tends to understate their chances in states with high number of conservatives. Beto is fantastic but he's not going to win in a Texas electorate with 43 or 44% conservatives. Same thing in Tennessee, which is indeed the new Alaska in terms of inept polling model, always badly overstating the Democrat. I have a Las Vegas friend who won the largest political wager of his life on Blackburn. His argument for 2 years always made perfect sense, that Tennessee stopped being polled frequently after 2006 when it turned more red, and now the polling that has resumed there is using an old flawed model that does not represent the state. He focused on 2016 polling with Trump supposedly leading by 9-11 point in Tennessee. He carried that state by 26. Same thing played out this time in the Bredesen/Blackburn race. I believe I mentioned that stuff here but it's been a while. I posted it on many sites. Blackburn doubled her poll margin, just like Trump did.
My favorite outcome was on a Democrat here in FL-27. Right wing geniuses on Predictit pushed Donna Shalala all the way down from 90 cents to briefly the underdog. I told them they were stupid, that it was one thing to have a race tighter than expected, but quite another to go all the way over the top in a district with this type of slant. Shalala won by 6 points, thank you very much.
Florida statewide was a disappointment but as I've emphasized the Republicans really have their act together here. I see it in my neighborhood all the time, the onslaught of canvassing and voter outreach. The GOP was fortifying this state throughout the past two years while Democrats pretended they could wait until after the primary and then cram like a school test. I heard from Donna Shalala every day for months, by email. Her campaign also texted me many times, and I got calls from the campaign in both the primary season and the general election. Contrast to the Gillum and Nelson campaign. They never contacted me once.
This is exactly the opposite of what I experienced living in Las Vegas and Henderson. Democrats dominate the GOTV sophistication and energy there. I saw it begin in 2004 and especially 2006. No surprise what that state has become. Granted, it is simple for Democrats in Nevada because all you have to do is dictate Clark County and you dictate the state. Florida is exponentially more complex.
The midterm electorate is much older than presidential years. For example, 75% of Florida's electorate was 45+, compared to only 60% at 45+ in 2016. Even in Texas despite Beto's push there was a change to considerably older electorate, with 61% at 45+ compared to only 53% at 45+ in 2016.
That type of thing was true throughout the country. Democratic strongholds like minorities and single women and young voters don't show up in midterms. They increased from disaster 2014 but I have no idea why anyone compares to 2014. The comparison needs to be to pro-red demographics, which rose even more and saved countless seats for Republicans.
Given this type of slant from independents, and in a presidential-type electorate, the Republican Party would have been wiped out. Beto certainly wins in Texas given the presidential electorate from 2016. Both Florida races go to the Democrats with 60% at age 45+ instead of 75% at 45+. And so forth. The House net would have been closer to 60 than 40.
I am simply giving you political math that others ignore, or don't understand. You'll never see this type of analysis on a right wing site, because they are still celebrating the 46%.
However, there is almost no chance that 2020 will see the same type of slant from independents that 2018 featured. Those independent voters have a long history of punishing a president in his first midterm, and then returning to allow benefit of a doubt two years later. That's why dunce analysts are always fooled, like Republicans in 2010 asking, "What possibly could change in 2012?"
The change is that situational dynamic of incumbent whose party has been in power only one term. Donald Trump enjoys that edge in 2020 and only Jimmy Carter has lost in that scenario in more than a century. For Democrats to prevail, Trump's approval rating needs to remain in this 42-44 range, and the Democratic nominee has to be charismatic and tefloned.
I think Trump's approval will continue to rise, minus some type of economic decline. The economy wasn't much of a topic this time but will be front and center in 2020.
