GA-06 and SC-05 election day & results thread

[RINO Tom]

Does anyone think that a Sanders clone would have won either of these races? Be honest.

Sanders clones wont win until the leadership of the party is purged.

Half of the Democratic party has no confidence in the party and views the DNC as totally corrupt.

The question wasn't one about the leadership, it was about GA-6. Do you think a Sanders clone would have won GA-6?

Do you not think it's a legitimate response to say, "what does it matter?"  I'd argue that there's no difference in losing by 4 points or 8 points in this district if there is such a high floor of voters in a place like GA-6 that will remain with Republicans even when the GOP POTUS is unpopular (and remain with them even more loyally under more favorable circumstances), which I believe there is.  Timmy and I have been saying this forever, and it's not like we've been "proven right" yet ... but I'm telling you from my anecdotal experience that there is a massively high floor of wealthy, college educated, largely White suburban voters who don't give a flying shlt what the GOP has to say to rural districts to win them, and they don't care at ALL if they're viewed as a "suburban party" or a "rural party" or if the Democrats are viewed as a "cosmopolitan party" or whatever; that cultural guilt trip might win a few of them over, but most of these voters know that their local Republican is for economic conservatism, and they don't care about the rest.  Period.

[RINO Tom]

At the end of the day, the "populist" Donald Trump Tweeted this at the "neoliberal" Ossoff:

"Democrat Jon Ossoff, who wants to raise your taxes to the highest level and is weak on crime and security, doesn't even live in district."

Rhetoric style be damned, there is no freaking realignment going on.  Republicans across this country - in literally every district - are running with Reaganite stances, and President Trump is on board.

[RINO Tom]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The presidential election now has everyone questioning traditional politically thinking. It has now gotten to the point where people are now overthinking things.

It's all style, my friend.  Of course they should attack Trump.  However, their style of attacking him from Clinton to Ossoff (acting intellectually above him, appealing to people's *common sense* of opposing such a baffoon and generally condescending attitude that anyone with any pride in themselves would ditch such a trashy party as the GOP) is quite simply not winning enough socially moderate Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, and it's CERTAINLY not winning back any former Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who were turned off by Clinton's campaign.

There is a reason that Pelosi and Schumer are attacking Trump mostly on how his healthcare ideas will remove coverage from vulnerable Americans and how he's out to give tax cuts to the rich ... that's worked for Democrats in the past.  This "reasonable alternative" for "reasonable otherwise-Republicans" has crashed and burned multiple times.  Could a Sanders-type have won GA-6?  Irrelevant ... I don't think any Democrat could win the current GA-6, who cares if it's 4 points or 12?

[RINO Tom]

So sick of the smug revisionism and, frankly, ignorance coming from liberals who claim that "before year XXXX, the GOP was alright and not crazy yet."  You all would have hated Eisenhower, just accept it.

[RINO Tom]

So sick of the smug revisionism and, frankly, ignorance coming from liberals who claim that "before year XXXX, the GOP was alright and not crazy yet."  You all would have hated Eisenhower, just accept it.

I mean, I have very little love for Eisenhower, but I don't see how anyone can deny the GOP's lurch to the right.

That's all fair and fine, but both parties have lurched away from the center (or, more accurately, been purged of any meaningfully influential moderate wing), and I'm not going to sit here and pretend I would have loved JFK because he doesn't seem quite as in-your-face progressive to me as a modern Democrat.  I am a frequent criticizer of today's GOP, and I won't deny it lurched right; it's the romanticization of past Republicans strictly in order to further demonize current ones that gets annoying ... if you're left of center, you can trash the current GOP perfectly fine without saying a single good thing about past Republicans.

[RINO Tom]

So sick of the smug revisionism and, frankly, ignorance coming from liberals who claim that "before year XXXX, the GOP was alright and not crazy yet."  You all would have hated Eisenhower, just accept it.

Agreed, conservatism has always been a cancer and there are no good Republicans.

[RINO Tom]

This election proves to me that the Republican Party is no longer a political party, it is a cult of low-IQ extremists that has no objectives for governing. It exists only to hold onto power at any cost. It is incredibly sad that getting people to vote Democratic when an incumbent President is disliked by 60% of voters is like trying to get people to shop at Kmart. America is doomed.

57.1% of the people in the great GA-6 have a four-year degree or better, and 79.5% went to some college.  Let's compare that to nearby GA-4, a D+24 district represented by a Democrat, where 29% have a four-year degree or better, and 61.6% went to some college.

You really shouldn't call either party's voters low-IQ when there are literally millions of each, but at least don't sound low IQ yourself while doing it.

[RINO Tom]

And would you all suggest that out of the tens of millions of people that voted for Democrats in 2016, the most loyal ones are not in large part "idiots"?

[RINO Tom]

On the whole, you're right, but he did get crossover vote, it just wasn't enough.

Same story with Hillary.  Eventually actual Democratic voters (not political nerds who picked a team and want to win the EC and control the Senate or some political commentator, but the tens of millions of loyal Democrats who vote Democratic because they believe in the core principles of liberalism) are going to get fed up with it ... they probably already are.

[RINO Tom]

Ossoff wasn't a bad candidate. GA-6 is just too Republican and nominating a Berniecrat wouldn't change anything. Becoming a left-wing populist party is a viable strategy for the Dems, but don't complain if you don't win wealthy suburban districts that way. If you want to do that you should nominate moderates like Ossoff (and even then a lot of those districts might be too Republican).

The longterm problem for Democrats is their current pool of voters if they're seriously this obsessed with "suburban inroads."  The GOP can quite easily form a coalition of wealthy suburbanites who want government out of their lives and rural communities that want the same.  Democrats like Ossoff and the voters he'd need to win in an area like GA-6 are going to have interests diametrically opposed to inner-city and heavily minority districts that make up the base of support for the Democratic Party.