We are three quarters of the way through the first 100 Days of President Donald Trump, and he is a true disaster, a failure on so many fronts.
Trump’s public opinion ratings are the absolute worst since public opinion polling began 80 years ago for a new President.
Some Presidents had lower public opinion ratings than Trump, but it took years in office for Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, and George W. Bush to reach such low levels.
Trump has 35 percent approval against 57 percent disapproval in the latest Quinnipiac Poll, and he is lower than Barack Obama ever was.
Among men, he has 39 percent support against 51 percent disapproval.
White voters are 43 percent in favor against 48 percent negative.
Women voters are 31 percent positive against 63 percent negative.
Independent voters are 32 percent for and 57 percent against.
Non white voters are 16 percent in favor and 77 percent negative.
Democrats are 6 percent positive against 91 percent against.
On the other hand, Republicans, living in a parallel universe, are 79 percent in favor and 14 percent against.
On his personal qualities, Trump is majority negative in every area including:
61-34 that Trump is not honest
55-40 that he does not have good leadership skills
57-39 that does not care about average Americans
66-29 that he is not level headed
61-34 that he does not share their values
52 percent are embarrassed that Trump is their President, compared to 27 percent proud
On health care he gets a negative 28-64 rating, negative 61-29 on the environment, 48-41 negative on the economy, 58-35 negative on foreign policy, 49-42 negative on handling terrorism, and 57-39 negative on handling immigration issues.
Meanwhile, Republicans are negative 70-21 for their leadership in Congress, although Democrats are negative 57-34.
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan is negative 28-52 compared to Nancy Pelosi a negative 30-47 rating
Mitch McConnell is 14-47 negative while Chuck Schumer is negative 25-38.
The situation will not get better, and likely will get worse, as Trump faces foreign policy challenges, particularly North Korea most immediately.
Ronald,
Thank you for writing and posting a blog entry on this topic.
My reaction to it is that Donald Trump’s disapprovals are extreme. And if they don’t pick up at a fairly stable level, the Republicans are going to suffer congressional seat losses in the midterm elections of 2018.
The historical voting pattern is this: Since the 17th Amendment, allowing direct elections of United States senators from states’ voting citizens, was adopted and ratified (by 36 states) in 1913, there have been 100 years’ worth of midterm elections from 1914 to 2014. They number 26 in such cycles. Only in three of them was it the president’s party which had the overall seat gains: 1934, 1998, and 2002.
The Republicans were so deeply unpopular in 1934 that Franklin Roosevelt’s Democratic Party expanded their majorities. In 1998, the Republicans failed to expand on the watch of Democratic president Bill Clinton that it cost Republican House speaker Newt Gingrich his position. And the 2002 midterms, in which Republicans flipped the Senate, was the year following the attacks of September 11, 2001. But, months earlier, U.S. Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont switched from Republican to Independent, and caucused with the Democrats, moving the 50/50 chamber (with vice president Dick Cheney the tie-breaking vote) to a majority for the Democrats (and promoting South Dakota’s Tom Daschle as majority leader). That lasted approximately 18 months.
During those 100 years, and giving consideration to presidents elected beyond one full term, only Franklin Roosevelt held same-party majorities of both houses of Congress throughout his entire presidency. On the opposite end, Richard Nixon never had same-party majorities in either house of Congress.
If Donald Trump wins re-election to a second full term, in 2020, it is hard to imagine he would have a presidency holding same-party congressional majorities throughout his presidency. So, this would mean either 2018 or 2022 should be a Democratic pickup of at least one of the two houses of Congress. (Pattern is, the House flips before the Senate when it goes to the party opposite the president. Consider 2010 followed by 2014.)
What complicates this is the real divide in the Democratic Party. Their No. 1 voting-age group of support in presidential elections are those 18 to 29. And if they don’t recover from 2016, they better do so by no later than 2022. (This has to do with the possible threat of whether it’s possible that 2016 marked a Republican presidential realignment and whether that spills down to the congressional and states legislatures and governorships. I don’t think so. But, we need more time to pass with more election cycles.)
If you want to imagine the Democrats end up winning a party pickup for control, with 2018, here is how it would pretty break down….
• U.S. House of Representatives: After the 2016 presidential elections, Republicans’ majority numbered at 241 to the Democrats’ 194. This is a spread of R+47. Democrats would have to flip +24 Republican-held seats. If they do that, a similar pattern to the midterms of 2006 (Democratic pickup) and 2010 (Republican pickup) would play out. Look to the Rust Belt states and with those states along the northern section running east and going down the Atlantic areas of the map as well as, due to trending population increases, going into Texas. It could actually go out to California to possibly deal a blow by ending the House career of Darrell Issa (R-Calif. #49) who, according to a recent Larry “Sabato’s Crystal Ball,” at http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2018-house/ , is in a Toss-Up. A required net gain of +24 can add up even when a state here or there delivers gains of no more than D+2. (It’s the fine details of this nations’ 435 congressional districts, between 50 states, and these seats require an even more careful monitoring and analysis.)
• U.S. Senate: After the 2016 presidential election, the Republicans’ majority was 52 to the Democrats’ 48. That is a spread of R+4. So, the Democrats, to avoid a tie-breaking casting vote from vice president Mike Pence, need a pickup of +3. How do I think that would happen? I think a mini wave or a strong wave, nationally, would render every Democratic-held seat retained. (This means even those perceived as vulnerable—West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, Indiana’s Joe Donnelly, and Missouri’s Claire McCaskill—would either get re-elected or their Democratic successors, for nomination, would prevail in holding those seats for the party.) The Republican-held seats that could flip Democratic are: Arizona (Jeff Flake), which is trending toward the Democrats at the presidential level; Nevada (Dean Heller), because that state is trending from bellwether to Lean Democratic at the presidential level; and, though seemingly remotely, Texas (Ted Cruz) given that Donald Trump underperformed the state (+9.00, down from a 2012 Mitt Romney’s +15.78), and the trends are worth following with their finer details. (An example of that is Bexar County—with its county seat is San Antonio—which moved from a bellwether county, which voted for every presidential winner from 1972 to 2012, into a Democratic county won by Hillary Clinton by +13.43. The county to watch in the Lone Star State is Tarrant—with its county seat Fort Worth—because it is the best bellwether county-to-the-state for margins. I don’t imagine a Democratic pickup, on a statewide basis, is going to happen without carriage of Tarrant County.)
Of these two houses of Congress, and what opportunity there is of a 2018 Democratic pickup, the U.S. Senate is more limiting an opportunity for the Democrats. You can see the map here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections%2C_2018 . But if there is wave election, which would mean greater turnout by self-identifying Democrats than Republicans, more Democratic voting support by the turnout of independents, and more crossovers of Republican-to-Democratic (than the opposite), it is possible. I don’t bet on it happening. But, with these numbers for Trump, I don’t think Republicans can win seat gains. This would not be addressing only the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. This would spill over into the gubernatorial races and impact the states which especially are on a pattern of electing governors from the party opposite an incumbent president. (Think of the Democratic pickups of 2002. All those pickups winners—including Arizona’s Janet Napolitano, Michigan’s Jennifer Granholm, New Mexico’s Bill Richardson, and Pennsylvania’s Ed Rendell—were re-elected in the Democratic congressional pickups of the 2006 midterm elections with even stronger second-term-winning margins.) And this would have a impact on state legislatures.
Now, am I excited about this? No. Not with the status quo of the establishment of corporate Democrats, and their influence from corporate donors and Wall Street, still calling the shots. The Democratic Party has divide. And that is a whole other issue. But, this particular one, on Trump’s presidency, with these horrible numbers, was my focus in offering a response.
Thanks, D, for your usual perceptive analysis.
I have just started to think about 2018, and I agree it will be difficult, particularly in the US Senate, for the Democrats to retain and even gain seats.
Let us hope for the best at this juncture.
Retaliation for the chemical weapons attack in Syria.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/06/politics/donald-trump-syria-military/index.html
He’ll get a rise in the polls because of that. This is a case where we feel response is justified.
Virginia’s elections are often a national bellwether. What happens in Virginia’s off-year cycle is often a sign of what will happen nationally in the next midterm election. After going blue in ’08 for the first presidential election in a generation, Virginia’s pendulum swung hard to the right in 2009, foreshadowing the national Democratic bloodbath that was coming in 2010. Is the pendulum swinging back our way in 2018? One hint will be Virginia’s 2017 election. Do Republicans suffer a similar crushing defeat? Can we break the Republican gerrymander? Do Democrats sustain their enthusiasm and engagement or does everything fizzle out? Or maybe, do the Republicans win? The outcome in Virginia could foreshadow what happens in 2018, where Democrats nationally have leagues of ground to cover to start winning seats back.
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/03/5-top-reasons-virginias-2017-election-matters
Southern Liberal, there is no question that Virginia’s state elections will make a major difference, and have a major impact on 2018 and beyond.
Southern Liberal writes, “Virginia’s elections are often a national bellwether. What happens in Virginia’s off-year cycle is often a sign of what will happen nationally in the next midterm election. . . .”
Thank you for mentioning the state of Virginia. I mentioned geographical area, rather than naming specifically Virginia, as an influential factor when discussing party control if the U.S. House flips with the outcomes from a midterm congressional elections cycle.
Virginia has elected governors from the party opposite a president since 1977 but made an exception in 2013. Democratic pickups occurred in 2013 Virginia much in reaction to the Republicans shutting down the government. But in the next year, 2014, Republicans won a majority-control pickup of the U.S. Senate. And it was an election in which Republicans were the ones with overall gains. (Although the governorship of Pennsylvania flipped to the White House party, the second occurrence after its opposition-party pattern began all the way back in 1938.)
While I mentioned earlier that midterms tend to produce overall seat gains for the White House opposition party, the amount of gubernatorial elections on schedule are 36 (which represents 72 percent of the nation’s states). 9 of the Top 10 most-populous states are on schedule. (The exception is North Carolina, which holds gubernatorial elections in leap/presidential years.)
____________________________________
I do want to touch on something else.
I’m looking at Virginia as bellwether/Lean Democratic at the presidential level. That is because, even though its margins came closest to matching national outcomes with President Barack Obama’s pickup of the state in 2008, and with re-election carrying it again in 2012, the state which came closest to the 2016 national margin (Democratic hold for Hillary Clinton by +2.09) was Nevada (D+2.42).
I mentioned it before: When ranking carried states—ones in the Republican and ones in the Democratic columns—on their percent-points margins, Virginia went from being No. 24 for Obama, in both 2008 (when he carried 28 states) and 2012 (when he carried 26 states), and moved up to No. 15 for Hillary Clinton (who did not hold the presidency in the Democratic column and carried 20 states). Virginia, which gave Hillary a margin of +5.32 (up from Obama’s +3.88 from 2012; one of 11 states which actually shifted in Hillary’s direction), ended up having ranked above long-established Democratic-carried states like Maine (statewide, D+2.96) and Minnesota (D+1.52).
This suggests to me a trend. It’s especially notable because, if you look at pairs of states which have agreed with each other over a long term (with rare occurrences of disagreeing), the best companion state to Virginia is Colorado. Hillary carried that state at +4.91. It, too, was more Democratic than Maine and Minnesota. And I’d say that Colorado would be part of a midterm wave election benefiting Democrats. In 2008 and 2012, Colorado was Obama’s No. 23 best-performed state. It became Hillary Clinton’s No. 16. Notice, if you don’t mind, that Colorado and Virginia, or Virginia and Colorado, are like two peas in a pod.
There are states like this. Here are some example:
• California and Illinois. They have carried the same in presidential elections since 1920. The sole exception was the Democratic pickup year of 1960. They have carried the same in 24 of the last 25 presidential election cycles. 1960 losing Republican vice president Richard Nixon narrowly carried his home state California by R+0.55. Democratic pickup winner John Kennedy flipped Illinois (which was to 1960 what Florida was in 2000) by D+3.02. Kennedy won the U.S. Popular Vote by D+0.16. There was less than a five-point spread between the U.S. Popular Vote vs. Illinois; the U.S. Popular Vote vs. California; and California vs. Illinois.
• Florida and Ohio. The two have voted the same since 1964 with one exception: 1992. Democratic pickup winner Bill Clinton, who unseated Republican president George Bush, narrowly missed Florida (R+1.89) and narrowly won a pickup of Ohio (D+1.83). Between those two states was a margin spread less than five points.
• Nevada and New Mexico. The latter is the younger of the two states, with its first vote as it achieved statehood in 1912. They have disagreed only once, in 2000, when we had the previous split outcome of an Electoral College and presidential winner (Republican pickup winner George W. Bush who flipped Nevada) and U.S. Popular Vote (Democratic hold for Al Gore who narrowly carried New Mexico as the two states’ margins were less than five points in spread).
• Pennsylvania and Michigan. With the latter the younger of the two states, with its first vote in 1836, there have been five (of Michigan’s 46) presidential elections in which they carried differently. Three of them were with one state having a major-party nominee who did not carry the other state: 1848 (Lewis Cass of Michigan), 1856 (15th president James Buchanan of Pennsylvania), and 1976 (unseated 38th president Gerald Ford of Michigan). The two other occurrences were between Democrat Franklin Roosevelt’s four-elected terms in which he carried both states three times (Pennsylvania was one of six states which held for unseated Republican Herbert Hoover in 1932; Michigan flipped for Republican Wendell Wilkie in 1940). It’s no coincidence the duo flipped Democratic in the same election of 1992 for Bill Clinton. It is historical pattern that Donald Trump won Republican pickups of not one but both states in 2016.
• Indiana and Missouri. This is based on margins and is likely to continue going forward. In 2008, when they carried differently, John McCain held Missouri narrowly by R+0.13; Barack Obama flipped Indiana by D+1.03. That was a spread of 1.16. In 2012, the spread was tighter as Indiana flipped Republican for Mitt Romney by +10.20 while he carried Missouri by +9.36. The spread was 0.84. In 2016, Republican pickup winner Donald Trump carried Indiana by +19.01 and Missouri by +18.51. The spread was 0.50. At the presidential level, these two have been likeminded.
This brings me to Virginia and Colorado. The two have carried the same in all presidential elections since 1948 but with exception of 1992. Bill Clinton won a Democratic pickup of Colorado by D+4.26 while Virginia held Republican for George Bush by R+4.38. That was a margins spread of 8.94. When losing Republican Bob Dole flipped Colorado in 1996, his margin was R+1.37 while he held Virginia, which Bill Clinton wanted to flip, by R+1.95. The margin spread was 0.58. Beginning with 1996 and including 2016, the spread between Colorado vs. Virginia has been no greater than 3.53. (George W. Bush carried Virginia by R+8.20 and Colorado by R+4.67 with re-election in 2004.) Hillary Clinton’s Democratic hold of the two states, as the Democrats lost the White House with Election 2016, was Virginia at D+5.32 and Colorado at D+4.91. That was a spread of 0.41. These two states are also likeminded. And I would conclude, when discussing Virginia, with looking at Colorado. They both demographic changes throughout the past decade or two. And it was no coincidence that they were both ripe to become Democratic pickups in 2008. (Next up: Arizona and Georgia.)
WOW, D, you continue to fascinate me with your illuminating detail and analysis.
It makes me wonder what your occupation is, as you sound like a very good journalist, or political scientist.
What you have put here, and so often in the past, really explains state voting trends and adds to this blog tremendously.
IF the Democrats are to come back in the Presidential race in 2020,. the emphasis MUST be on Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Florida, above all, and there must be a nominee who can appeal to the white working class in the first three states in particular, as well as the constantly growing and changing population in the Sunshine state.
So a new face must emerge who can appeal to those who are becoming more alienated from Donald Trump and the Republican Party.
Thanks again, D, for your contributions, and future ones.
I second the concerns in this Mother Jones article.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/how-are-democrats-supposed-appeal-white-working-class
Our community goes Republican every election. Culture is a factor. Many of the whites in our community are socially conservative and are so concerned with guns, gays, and abortion that they vote Republican despite its very negative implications for their own economic prospects.
Princess Leia, so therefore these people get what they deserve from Republicans, harm to their economic prospects.
I have no sympathy for their stupidity, intolerance, and narrow mindedness, and nothing will ever change for them until they give up their maniacal behavior.
We have no sympathy whatsoever for them either. The people we do worry about are the people who don’t vote for the GOP. They have to pay the price for those people’s choices.
They also have to pay the price for people who decided to protest vote for third parties or who decided not to vote at all.
This is the main reason why we feel it’s important to hold your nose and vote:
Republicans control 32 of 50 state legislatures and split another six. There are 25 of 50 governments controlled entirely by Republicans and only 6 state governments controlled by Democrats. Republicans and Democrats split 14 state governments, one of which is Virginia.
Do you know what happens when Republicans control just one more state legislature?
They meet the 2/3s threshold to call a Constitutional Convention and force their conservative agenda on us through the US Constitution.
Say goodbye to marriage equality; say goodbye to women’s healthcare equality; say goodbye to our social safety net and goodbye to countless other liberal reforms accomplished since the New Deal.
You are absolutely correct, Southern Liberal, and I shudder at the thought!
Ralph Northam (considered the establishment candidate) is winning straw polls.
Tom Perriello (recently endorsed by Bernie) is winning social media.
Real polls are tied.
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/northam-winning-straw-polls-perriello-winning-social-media-real-polls-tied
Pragmatic Progressive writes, “I second the concerns in this [‘Mother Jones’] article.” (A link was provided to a piece written by Kevin Drum.)
I do not trust Kevin Drum.
I know not to trust him because, just for a few examples, one can consider what he had to say shortly before and after the November 8, 2016 elections.
_________________________________________
“Is the GOP Going Up In Smoke?” (10.10.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/10/gop-going-smoke
“On Saturday [10.08.2016] I pondered what the Republican Party would do when appeals to its white base were no longer enough to win. Perhaps this is the answer: they’ll go up in smoke. Maybe that’s what it takes to force a major party into the kind of profound change they need to survive.”
_________________________________________
“Politico: Donald Trump Is Doomed” (10.21.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/10/politico-donald-trump-doomed
“The left has felt this way about [Hillary] Clinton since the start, so I’m not sure the email leaks really make a lot of difference.”
_________________________________________
“Trump Meltdown Continues Apace” (10.23.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/10/trump-meltdown-continues-apace
_________________________________________
“Hillary Clinton Is an Open Book” (11.02.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/hillary-clinton-open-book
_________________________________________
“What’s the GOP Strategy for 2020?” (11.04.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/whats-gop-strategy-2020
“So what’s my point? … If Republicans are having a tough time winning in 2016, even after eight years of Democratic rule and running against a widely-disliked figure, how are they going to win in 2020 when the nonwhite population has grown another 1.6 percent? Or in 2024, when it’s grown 3.2 percent? What’s the strategy here?”
_________________________________________
“Nevada Looks Like a Big Clinton Win This Year” (11.05.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/nevada-looks-big-clinton-win-year
(Hillary’s big win in carrying Nevada was +2.42 percentage points over Donald Trump. A 2012 re-elected Barack Obama carried Nevada, over Mitt Romney, by +6.68.)
_________________________________________
“Final Polls Show Clinton With Strong Lead” (11.07.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/final-polls-show-clinton-strong-lead
_________________________________________
“Could Bernie Sanders Have Beaten Trump?” (11.10.2016) http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/could-bernie-sanders-have-beaten-trump
“It’s obvious that Hillary Clinton’s biggest weakness during the election was Emailgate. … Plainly Bernie Sanders wouldn’t have suffered from either one of these problems. … In the end, this is unanswerable. For myself, I doubt that Sanders could have beaten Trump.”
_________________________________________
“[F—] You, James Comey” (11.11.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/11/fuck-you-james-comey
“As for myself, I blame Emailgate.”
_________________________________________
“2016 Was Bad for Democrats, But It Wasn’t an Epic Disaster” (12.01.2016) @ http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/2016-was-bad-democrats-it-wasnt-epic-disaster
“2016 was a pretty good year for Republicans. But that’s all.” (According to Kevin Drum, Republicans winning a pickup of the presidency and retaining majorities at all levels of government was not an “Epic Disaster” for the Democrats and was merely a “pretty good year for Republicans.”)
_________________________________________
Conclusion: Kevin Drum is a hack.
D – Like he said, the thing we are also concerned about regarding outreach to Trump voters is that Democrats shouldn’t be moving to the right on social issues and we can’t ignore the needs of people of color.
If Democrats start doing racism or homophobia just to appease them, I’m out of the party.
Pragmatic and Leia – Considering that we have an African American Muslim guy and a Latino guy as heads of our party, I would say, no, we don’t have to fear about that.
Ms. LeTourneau’s latest Washington Monthly posting nails it about Trump and his campaign.
“That is precisely why, during the campaign, I quit trying to write about Trump’s policies. To understand this president is to recognize that he is not a populist, or an anti-globalist, or an anti-interventionist. He is a narcissist. His narcissism expresses itself in racism, sexism and xenophobia. It is also why he is a congenital liar. Trump will say and do anything that reinforces the fantasy of himself that lives inside his own head.”
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/04/10/there-is-no-trump-doctrine/#.WOvCyMgDJ1Y.facebook
I think it is important that the Democrats make their pitch in moral rather than technocratic terms. Everyone should watch the video of the Tennessee town hall where the woman makes the “Christian” pitch for insurance–that the stronger help the weaker, the healthy bring up the sick. It shouldn’t necessarily be Christian as such, but really all religions do preach help for the less fortunate. Non-libertarian atheists and agnostics do as well. It is more that the moral argument resonates so much better than the GOP’s dog-eat-dog philosophy. Everyone can identify with an unexpected illness or accident.
Health care is the big key for the Dems. Not just saving the ACA but expanding Medicaid and lowering the Medicare age or allowing a buy-in. A simpler system where the benefits are readily identifiable. A big pitch for mental illness and addiction coverage, a big issue for these parents and also a big pitch to save rural hospitals. Expose the GOP as the callous, cruel party it really is.
On the other issues the big pitch should be consumer protection, again on moral grounds because Govt should not let the predators loose again. And higher wages as a moral issue and because people with more money to spend lift the whole economy.
The jobs those folks want aren’t coming back, but it is important to hold out the prospect of a better future for their children and for their communities and a more secure old age for themselves.
Rustbelt Democrat, you will not get an argument from me on what you say here! LOL
I hope such an appeal will work over the next few years.
This also nails it regarding the racism Trump used in his campaign.
https://bpicampus.com/2016/09/28/trump-trade-and-white-guy-ness/
Farron Cousins, host of “Ring of Fire,†has this to say about the 2018 midterm elections.…
http://youtu.be/aDyC-dWxM4I
Let us hope, D, that this projection holds true!
The hardest part is that we are working against the GOP, Fox, Rush, the rest of the right wing media and a main stream media that ignores anything Republicans do wrong while fixating on any misstep made by a Democrat.
A much needed message.
http://thedemocraticstrategist.org/2016/12/lux-why-the-darkness-will-pass-and-progressive-populism-will-light-the-way-forward/
I very much agree with the person that commented. The pessimistic attitudes across much of the liberal blogosphere is a turn off. Â
Former Republican and Princess Leia,
The Democrats are not going to win back power without an understanding of their problems, without understanding people’s/voters’ issues, and without changing how they operate going forward.
I will share two videos.
The first was from May 31, 2016. (The primaries were still going at the time.)
http://youtu.be/ZeiPVPEtino
Here is a video from November 11, 2016. (This was three days after the general election of November 8, 2016.)
http://youtu.be/3tzSjIx7FtU
Seconded, Leia. Thanks for that.
Instead of constantly moaning and groaning about the party, the blogs we read educate their readers about the importance of grassroots, starting at your local level, in improving the party. Â
This is one of the blogs we follow that does so:
https://www.facebook.com/SmartypantsBlog
The Pennsylvania husband and wife Winning Progressive, formerly winningprogressive.org and now only on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/WinningProgressive), quite often talks about the Indivisible Movement, which is challenging politicians, through town halls, coordinated calls, local public events, district office visits.
Information about the Indivisible Movement. https://www.indivisibleguide.com/
Re: identity politics. We should never back down on commitments to gender and racial equality.
Nails precisely how we feel! 🙂
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/11/democratic_politics_have_to_be_identity_politics.html
Joe Wilson got a good dose of karma today. 🙂
http://www.postandcourier.com/politics/attendees-chant-you-lie-at-u-s-rep-joe-wilson/article_ca0370dc-1e2e-11e7-8b2d-e31b2631dae3.html
AlterNet explains that when the alt-left says “identity politics,†what they actually mean is “civil rights.â€
http://www.alternet.org/human-rights/stop-calling-it-identity-politics-its-civil-rights
That’s why we don’t appreciate the two videos that D posted.
This paragraph from that article perfectly explains how we feel:
Follow the “identity politics are bad†logic to its natural conclusion. What need is there for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus? For the Congressional Black Caucus? For women’s rights organizations? Aren’t those just “identity politics†that divide us and prevent us from focusing on class, which is the “real issue?†And when those institutions are gone, who will be fighting for the rights of marginalized people? Who will be fighting for reproductive rights, affirmative action, equal pay, ending police brutality, voting rights, and civil rights? Certainly not the alt-left, and definitely not the right.
Southern Liberal,
I will respond either Wednesday (04.12.2017) or Thursday (04.13.2017).
Southern Liberal writes, “AlterNet explains that when the alt-left says ‘identity politics,’ what they actually mean is ‘civil rights.’â€
I am in agreement with the following…
“Bernie Sanders Nailed It On Identity Politics and Inequality, and the Media Completely Missed the Point†• By Katie Halper • http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/12/bernie-sanders-nailed-it-on-identity-politics-and.html
Trump won the Electoral College Vote.
Trump did not win the Popular Vote, one of the many things Trump has lied about.
While elevation to the Oval Office results from an Electoral College vote, the will of the people as to what they wish their elected officials to do is expressed—unambiguously—by a quadrennial popular vote.
When Trump pushes his agenda, he is opposing the will of the American people—and that remains true even though he won the Electoral College. Every statement he or one of his subordinates makes to the effect that they are working on behalf of Americans’ priorities in enacting their agenda is a lie.
Nearly three million more Americans voted for their government to implement the Democratic agenda than the Republican agenda on November 8th. It is inarguably the case, therefore, that while Trump won the election, Mrs. Clinton won the debate over the soul of the nation and the future of its public policy—and resoundingly so. This is why you are seeing protests and angry town halls.
The point is that the popular vote shows that most Americans like that the Dems stand up for diversity or multiculturalism.
What Bernie Misunderstands About Identity Politics
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/11/25/what-sanders-doesnt-understand-about-identity-politics/
Polling news for Virginia. If the final election results are anything like this, the Republicans are in big trouble. 🙂
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/breaking-q-poll-perriello-leading-northam-25-20-either-perriello-northam-demolish-gillespie
Identity Politics vs Class-Based Populism is Not an Either/Or Question (Part I)
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2015/10/10/identity-politics-vs-class-based-populism-is-not-an-eitheror-question-part-i/
Identity Politics vs Class-Based Populism is Not an Either/Or Question (Part II)
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2015/10/10/identity-politics-vs-class-based-populism-is-not-an-eitheror-question-part-ii/
Thumbs up to that, Former Republican! 🙂
Southern Liberal – Thanks for that news.
Former Republican writes, “Trump won the Electoral College Vote.
Trump did not win the Popular Vote, one of the many things Trump has lied about.
While elevation to the Oval Office results from an Electoral College vote….”
Fact is, as you recognize, the Electoral College—representation in all states in the Union—is key to how the people who participate with voting elect a president of the United States. It is their expressed will, for their states’ electors, applicable to each state that a presidential winner carries.
The Democrats, along with the Republicans, knew this going into 2000 and, 16 years later, 2016—two consecutive Republican presidential pickup years examples in which we had split outcomes. (The previous occurrences were 1824, 1876, and 1888.)
The U.S. Popular Vote was first recorded in 1824. It has been recorded in 49 consecutive elections from which 5 of the U.S. Popular Vote winners did not win the Electoral College. This means the Electoral College and the U.S. Popular Vote has been carried by 89.79 percent of presidential winners. Since 89.79 percent is not 100 percent, meaning it is not a guarantee, that gives people an argument for the National Popular Vote. But, there is also this: When it comes to representation in the Electoral College, longer established than the U.S. Popular Vote, people who say one state should not decide our fate also have a point. Hillary Clinton, who carried 20 states plus District of Columbia (40 percent of the nation’s states), won the U.S. Popular Vote by +2,868,519. She carried the state of California by +4,269,978 votes.
I explained, back in December, why the split occurred in 2016.
____________________________________________
https://www.theprogressiveprofessor.com/?p=29196 | Comment #04
Reason for why Donald Trump did not win over the popular vote was because he did not take Mitt Romney’s 2012 national loss off -3.86 and shift +3.87 to win by at least +0.01.
States in which Donald Trump shifted the minimum +3.87 numbered just 25. By comparison, 2008 Democratic pickup winner Barack Obama hit his needed [+2.47] in 43 states. (Note for revising original post: A 2004 John Kerry lost the U.S. Popular Vote by –2.46 percentage points.) 1992 Democratic pickup winner Bill Clinton, in need of +7.73, reached in 41 states. 1980 Republican pickup winner Ronald Reagan met his necessary +2.07 in 46 states.
…
The states in red are ones in which Donald Trump reached a +3.87 shift. Those states in blue are ones in which Trump failed to shift sufficiently in his direction….
http://www.270towin.com/maps/nBxYv
http://www.270towin.com/presidential_map_new/maps/nBxYv.png
More polling results. 🙂
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/q-poll-results-virginians-strongly-support-progressive-policies-issue-issue
For anyone who tries to claim that progressive policies aren’t also majority – and by definition centrist/mainstream – policies, check out these Q-poll results for Virginia.
“Virginia voters support 94 – 5 percent, including 90 – 8 percent among Republicans, background checks for all gun buyers.â€
By a 62%-32% margin, Virginians support limiting people to one handgun per month.
“If more people carried guns, Virginia would be less safe, 53 percent of voters say, while 35 percent say it would be safer.â€
“Virginia voters support 59 – 35 percent allowing adults to legally possess small amounts of marijuana for personal use.â€
“By an overwhelming 92 – 6 percent, voters support allowing adults to use marijuana for medical use if a doctor prescribes it.â€
“Virginia voters also say 59 – 30 percent that increasing the number of people eligible for Medicaid coverage is a ‘good idea.’â€
Quinnipiac didn’t poll on other issues, like support for clean energy or LGBT equality or a woman’s right to choose, but previous polls have found support for those as well.
Tom Perriello Would Propose Virginia Constitutional Amendment to Protect A Woman’s Right to Choose in First Legislative Session
Smart move, on both policy and political grounds, by Tom Perriello’s campaign.
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/tom-perriello-propose-virginia-constitutional-amendment-protect-womans-right-choose-first-legislative-session
Southern Liberal – Thanks again for the addition polling information.
Some more hopeful news. The recent Kansas vote is a +24% swing in favor of Democrats.
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/virginia-dems-rainbow-kansas-vote
We are in support of the National Popular Vote movement.
http://www.fairvote.org/national_popular_vote#endorsers_of_the_npv_plan
Another issue we fight to fix is gerrymandering.
http://www.fairvote.org/gerrymandering#gerrymandering_key_facts
Explains why we’re also not thrilled about Ralph Northam.
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/concern-ralph-northam-june-13-will-vote-tom-perriello
Here is a pretty interesting piece written by Andrew Sullivan.…
_____________________________
Why Do Democrats Feel Sorry for Hillary Clinton?
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/why-do-democrats-feel-sorry-for-hillary-clinton.html
Every day, the incoherence deepens: He’s [Donald Trump] going to cover “everyone,†but he’s going to push 24 million people off their health insurance. He’s going to wipe out the debt, but his tax cuts and spending spree will add trillions to it. He’s never going to intervene in Syria, but he just did. He’s going to get Mexico to pay for a big, beautiful wall, but he isn’t. China is a currency manipulator, but it isn’t. The media is the enemy of the people, but he is on the phone with them every five minutes and can’t stop watching CNN and reading the New York Times. He’s going to be a tightwad with taxpayers’ money, unlike Obama, but his personal travel expenses are on track to be eight times more than his predecessor’s. He’s going to work relentlessly for the American people but he spends half his days watching cable news. We’ve got to be “very, very tough†in foreign affairs, but when he sees dead babies on TV, he immediately calls General Mattis and lobs 59 Tomahawk missiles. He has a secret plan to defeat ISIS, but pursues Obama’s strategy instead.
…
I’ve done what I could in this space to avoid the subject of Hillary Clinton. I don’t want to be the perennial turd in the punchbowl. I’d hoped we’d finally seen the last of that name in public life — it’s been a long quarter of a century — and that we could all move on. …
It simply amazes me the hold this family still has on the Democratic Party — and on liberals in general. The most popular question that came from interviewer Nick Kristof’s social-media outreach, for example, was: “Are you doing okay?†…
And everywhere you see not an excoriation of one of the worst campaigns in recent history, leading to the Trump nightmare, but an attempt to blame anyone or anything but Clinton herself for the epic fail. …
As a young woman, it was historical to finally have a woman at the top of a major party ticket.
Her popular vote lead was unprecedented. That is what is fueling the need to reform our voting system.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-popular-vote_us_58599647e4b0eb58648446c6
Andrew Sullivan, who wrote that New York Mag article, is a conservative political commentator. Smacks of obvious conservative bias.
Pragmatic Professor,
Can you be more specific?
Pragmatic Progressive—I apologize again for “Professor.†(It may be two words staring with a P for a forum member name—and compared to Ronald’s “Progressive Professrâ€â€”that I get things messed up. I apologize.)
Can you be more specific with your response to the piece by Andrew Sullivan? (Thank you.)
Agreed, Pragmatic.
He’s been obsessively hating the Clintons since the 90’s.
Mr. Sullivan just proved why Hillary lost: there are many in this country who hold an incalcitrant contempt for the Clintons as a whole, and Hillary in particular, that leads them to ignore all of her qualities and accomplishments, focus on and magnify her flaws, fumbles and errors, and develop this hatred for her that is rooted in this “feeling” that she can’t be trusted. This feeling isn’t accidental. Nor is it backed by any concrete facts or evidence, despite investigation, after lawsuit, after inquiries, all trying desperately to catch her red-handed, and always coming up short. This “I don’t like/trust her” feeling is the product of a decades long campaign by many folks through numerous organizations with the express purpose of taking down the Clintons. Bill was already finished being president, so naturally Hillary was their main target. We all know how the story goes: they scrutinize every little thing she does, infer the worst thing possible and lodge destructive accusations, and it’s all lined, right under the surface, with this misogynistic rationale: she’s this devious conniving woman trying to dupe us (men) and anything less that absolute purity is evil incarnate.
Are the Clinton’s perfect? Of course not, far from it. No powerful political family could be. Sure Hillary has lied before. You know what, so have I. Get over it. But they are still the good guys, at least to me. I value and appreciate intelligence, competence, and the sense of social responsibility that pushes one to want to make our planet a better place. And she possesses all those qualities. Being the former First Lady, there are numerous ways Hillary could have chosen to make her millions. So it doesn’t bother me that she made her $ through philanthropic means. Sullivan is quite open about his HIV positive status, and I find it disheartening that he loves bashing on the Clintons without ever giving them any credit for all the good they’ve done combating the global AIDS/HIV epidemic.
So yes, there are many who will always despise Hillary Clinton and there is nothing she can say or do that will change that. But there are also many who support her, believe she would have made a fantastic president who would have accomplished so much good for our country and our planet, and we lament the fact that she endured so much criticism from hypocrites who do the exact same or worse.
Former Republican, I agree with you 100 percent on Hillary Clinton!
Really? So this woman went to college, educated herself, became a lawyer, decided to dedicate her life to being a public servant to make the country a better place for women and children, but SHE put Tramp into the White House??? That’s total BS. That article is embarrassing and ignorant garbage.
Clinton personified Presidentialism. America was substantially all like, What you got in the way of clowns?
Rustbelt – LOL!
Princess Leia mentioned the special election for U.S. House from Kansas’s 4th Congressional District held this past Tuesday [April 11, 2017], which resulted in a Republican hold for nominee and winner Ron Estes over Democratic nominee James Thompson.
Estes received 52.5 percent of the vote to 45.7 percent for Thompson. The raw-vote totals were 63,505 for Estes and 55,310 for Thompson. In raw-vote margin, that +8,195 for Estes. For percentage-points margin, it was +6.8 for Estes.
In 2016, when now-CIA director and Republican Mike Pompeo was last re-elected, he received 166,998 votes and 60.67 percent. Daniel Giroux received +81,495 votes and 29.61. The raw-vote margin was +85,503 votes for Pompeo. For percentage-points margins, it was +31.06.
The shift, just five months later, for percentage-points margins was D+24.26 (from that R+31.06).
Information on that can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas%…election,_2017 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas'…ional_district .
_______________________________________________
I came across this from “The Guardian.”
‘The Democratic party is undermining Bernie Sanders-style candidates’
By Jamie Peck
Thursday, April 13, 2017 | http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/13/progressive-democratic-candidates-james-thompson-loss
. . .
While his [James Thompson’s] candidacy initially seemed like a long shot in a district that had re-elected [Mike] Pompeo just last year with 60.7% of the vote, in the weeks before the election, the race grew unexpectedly close.
This led to a sudden infusion of cash from the National Republican Congressional Committee to Thompson’s opponent Ron Estes, who in the end raised $459,000, $130,000 of it from the NRCC. He also received massive donations from representatives of big business and help from such national figures as Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Ted Cruz, and the president himself, who tweeted about the race.
Estes spent much of his money on TV attack ads, like the one that claimed Thompson supports using tax dollars to fund late term abortions, as well as abortions performed because parents don’t like the gender of their baby.
Given our current political climate, you’d think the Democrats would have jumped at the chance to take back a Congressional seat and demonstrate opposition to Trump, but you’d be wrong. While Thompson managed to raise $292,000 without his party’s help, 95% of which came from individuals, neither the DNC, DCCC, nor even the Kansas Democratic Party would help him grow that total in any substantial way. His campaign requested $20,000 from the state Democratic Party and was denied.
They later relented and gave him $3,000. (According to the FEC, the Party had about $145,000 on hand.)
. . .
I came across this insightful video of Thom Hartmann—who has a simulcast of his radio program on Free Speech TV and is seen here from his program on RT America (published date: 11.24.2015)—on how Democrats can win again, certainly at the presidential level, in today’s “red states.†I agree with him. And the bottom line of Election 2016, when explaining why Hillary Clinton actually lost to Donald Trump, is that the 2016 Republican presidential primaries voters nominated the candidate they needed. The 2016 Democratic presidential primaries voters did the opposite.
http://youtu.be/bqp3UoMH-dg
Per the article I posted about the Kansas election:
http://bluevirginia.us/2017/04/virginia-dems-rainbow-kansas-vote
Something crazy happened yesterday in the Kansas fourth Congressional District.
KS04 is a solid GOP seat that went for Trump by 31%. Yesterday, it only voted for GOP by 7%. Sure, Democrats lost it as about everyone expected, but that’s a still a +24% swing in favor of Democrats.
“Mr. Estes is the state treasurer and tied to the deeply unpopular Gov. Sam Brownback, but Republicans are worried that the Democratic shift in the seat could reflect a larger backlash against President Trump that will cost them seats in next year’s midterm elections. Tuesday’s move to the left was similar to those of a large number of seats in the 2006 Democratic wave.â€
Let me put this in context of Virginia’s elections and our work at the Competitive Commonwealth Fund: if a +24 point Democratic swing happens in Virginia, Democrats would have 95 of 100 House districts.
Yes, you read that right. 95 House Districts controlled by the Virginia Democratic Party.
Except there are still 18 VA House races with no Democratic candidate. That’s 18 races where Democrats are on track to forfeit without even trying.
The Competitive Commonwealth fund has a lot more remaining, but if anybody asks why we are playing around with these deep red districts, or why they should donate to us, or why they should just run for office, we will remind them of KS04.
Rustbelt summed it up the best. I say let them experience a W or a Trump every 8 years, then they’ll see that R’s suck.
We donated some money to the Virginia Democratic Party this weekend to help out with upcoming elections.
The 2016 election shows that too many voters were fooled by a con man. Trump doesn’t care about the poor or the middle class.
Democrats Welcome Bernie Takeover
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329049-democrats-welcome-bernie-takeover
(“More than a dozen Democrats interviewed by The Hill say the Vermont Independent has become a powerful and welcome voice for a party struggling to find its identity after a devastating defeat in 2016.â€)