Special Election megathread (6/11: OH-6, 6/25: CO-4)

[pppolitics]

Bye Bye, Nina!

[pppolitics]

https://twitter.com/kirk_bado/status/1422746034296528897?s=19

Jacques Parizeau says hi.

She didn't even consider that MAYBE people just don't like her.

[pppolitics]

Insert gif of Hillary laughing

[pppolitics]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1422706792249925634

[pppolitics]

I've been pretty neutral in this race so I don't really have any strong feelings about it. But I will say that the media narrative of this being a "progressive versus moderate" contest will probably grate on me. It's not like Brown is Joe Manchin, or something. More aptly this race was probably one of attitude: team player versus rogue.

Nina Turner compared voting for Joe Biden last year to eating a “bowl of sh*t”.

Now Biden supporters are returning the favor.

[pppolitics]

Glad Turner lost. She is an absolute clown. That “concession” speech is pathetic.

Well, let me tell you, voting for Nina Turner is like eating a bowl of sh*t.

[pppolitics]

What Nina Turner missed is that we Democrats actually like our party and we don't like it when someone sh*ts all over it.

[pppolitics]

There's a lot to be said about such a race and it's obvious the breakdowns here aren't as neatly sorted along racial lines as some expected, but I do think it's worth pointing out that this shouldn't really be considered an upset:

We had no unbiased polling in the race, or even up-to-date internal polling. I don't think Turner ever had more than 45% in one of her own released polls, and she appears to have received that. In the end, the vast majority of non-Turner voters decided to unite behind the most viable establishment-supported candidate. It's another one of these situations where the perceived outcome from the get-go seemed too good to be true (a la Bernie winning the presidential nomination as a front-runner with 25% of the vote). Turner had the largest and most solid base of supporters, but all other factions were pretty much opposed to a candidate like her. In retrospect, obviously both sides saw the winds changing in June, which is why so much establishment money began pouring into the district and why Turner started calling in national progressives.

Probably the worst outcome of all of this is that we have to continue suffering from the Terminally Online crowd's belief that Clyburn is some sort of kingmaker, instead of an opportunist who waits to see which way the wind is blowing and comes into town at the last minute, long after rank-and-file Democratic infrastructure makes its move.

And perhaps this will be the election where people figure out - hopefully - that Clyburn isn't some kingmaker in Democratic primaries, and that his endorsement is a lagging indicator rather than a leading one: that he almost always endorses the candidate who has the best chance of winning (and the rest of the time, as is likely the case here, endorses a candidate out of sheer pettiness).

Turner dragged Clyburn into this.

[pppolitics]

There's a lot to be said about such a race and it's obvious the breakdowns here aren't as neatly sorted along racial lines as some expected, but I do think it's worth pointing out that this shouldn't really be considered an upset:

We had no unbiased polling in the race, or even up-to-date internal polling. I don't think Turner ever had more than 45% in one of her own released polls, and she appears to have received that. In the end, the vast majority of non-Turner voters decided to unite behind the most viable establishment-supported candidate. It's another one of these situations where the perceived outcome from the get-go seemed too good to be true (a la Bernie winning the presidential nomination as a front-runner with 25% of the vote). Turner had the largest and most solid base of supporters, but all other factions were pretty much opposed to a candidate like her. In retrospect, obviously both sides saw the winds changing in June, which is why so much establishment money began pouring into the district and why Turner started calling in national progressives.

Probably the worst outcome of all of this is that we have to continue suffering from the Terminally Online crowd's belief that Clyburn is some sort of kingmaker, instead of an opportunist who waits to see which way the wind is blowing and comes into town at the last minute, long after rank-and-file Democratic infrastructure makes its move.

And perhaps this will be the election where people figure out - hopefully - that Clyburn isn't some kingmaker in Democratic primaries, and that his endorsement is a lagging indicator rather than a leading one: that he almost always endorses the candidate who has the best chance of winning (and the rest of the time, as is likely the case here, endorses a candidate out of sheer pettiness).

Turner dragged Clyburn into this

Yeah, I don't think the read on Clyburn just "riding into town for Brown" at the last minute after he figured she would win is accurate.

Clyburn actually said why he got involved:

The most senior CBC member in Congress—House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn—got personally involved, too. At a June event with Turner, rapper and activist Killer Mike suggested it was “stupid” for Clyburn to have endorsed Biden in the presidential primary when all he got out of it was making Juneteenth a federal holiday, a sentiment which Turner—who had been trying to show off how she could work with people she’s had harsh words for in the past—appeared to approve. Clyburn endorsed Brown shortly after, and didn’t hide that the remark set him off.

“I personally got involved … when I was invited by the Turner campaign,” Clyburn said in a recent interview with The State. They “talked about my stupidity for endorsing Joe Biden, and I just kind of decided if I’m going to be stupid, might as well be stupid.”

[pppolitics]

The Sandercrats have a fundamental misunderstanding.

They think they are like the Tea Party and the more they sh*t on their own party, the better chance they have of getting elected.

That is not how it works.