Wednesday, June 6, 2018

Tuesday's Primaries

Let’s talk about the election. Last night was actually a little instructive, though not too much. To best discuss this though, let’s do it by debunking the liberal analysis of the election, shall we?

Clear Blue Sailing In California

The Democrats avoided the thing they had worried about the most in California last night. They had been worried about being locked out of four races because vote spreading might have resulted in two Republicans advancing from the “Jungle Primary.” Since that didn’t happen, most liberal pundits today are claiming that things are on track for the Democrats to take those seats and, therefore, get closer to retaking the House.

Here’s the thing. The Republicans in each of those races scored more than 50% of the votes. So the Republican is going to win. And statements like this from Politico: “The Republican came in first, but the next four candidates were Democrats,” are ludicrous wishful thinking. The next thousand candidates could have been Democrats, but it doesn’t change the fact that all together they don’t come near 50%.

California Dreaming

As an aside, in California, the Republicans avoided being shutdown in the Governor’s race. The thinking is that this may help bolster Republican turnout, but I actually think it’s the reverse – it will depress Democratic turnout. Everyone knows that the Republican can’t win. So GOP voters have no reason to care even though they have a candidate. So I don’t see how it spurs GOP turnout.

Where this race matters is that it robs the Democrats of a choice. If it had been two Democrats, they could have chosen between liberal and super-liberal, but now they get liberal. And since they know Newsome can’t lose, they have no reason to show up either. So the effect down ticket, I suspect, will be decreased Democratic turnout.

The Year Of The Woman (redux)

We are apparently in the Year of the Woman... the twentieth in the last twenty years by my count. This time we really mean it though. Why, there’s a fat shamed Miss America, a chick from Idaho (which doesn’t have women), a former navy pilot, and some other chicks too. This is all because of #metoo!!

Yeah. About that. Look, for as long as I can remember, feminists in the media have been celebrating the pending Year of the Woman. There’s always some form of #metoo reason and a handful of women who end up candidates and the feminists predict a dramatic change in the number of women in the House/Senate/Presidency. It never happens. And it won’t happen this year either. Most of these women won the Democratic nomination in solidly Republican districts. Barring something unusual, that means they will lose.

Burn Bernie Burn, Dipsh*t Inferno

Oh praise the maker, Bernie’s revolution is finally dying. In a couple races in Iowa and a couple in New Jersey, Bernie’s people got whacked. The revolution is dead. The Democrats are saved from going crazy(er)!

Not so fast. The problem with Bernie’s people has never been that they might win seats and run against Republicans. The Democratic Party is too well controlled to let that happen anywhere but the most lunatic districts. The problem is that Bernie’s people knock over the board when they don’t win. Wiping out Bernie people will depress Democratic turnout, especially among the fickle young, and could well result in other forms of unpleasantness, e.g. third party runs, protests, etc.

New Jersey Voters Send Message to Corrupt Sen. Menendez

Yep, he only got 60% of the vote against an unknown candidate. Is he on the hot seat come election time? Hardly. New Jersey doesn’t swing that way.

Trump People Are Animals

Finally, they are pointing to a Republican Congresswoman in Alabama who criticized Trump has now been forced into a runoff as proof that Trump voters are nuts. This is seen as further proof that Trump supporters supposedly are obsessed with him. I see the truth as rather different. First, the Trump obsession is coming from the anti-Trumps who can’t stop talking about him as if they were some jilted lover. What I think the voters are doing here is punishing disloyalty in general, not defending Trump. From what I am seeing, people are sick of a certain group of conservatives/moderate GOPers/establishment types constantly joining the left in their idiotic attacks on Trump. This was the same thing Reagan faced until 1984 and it gets really old fast. Whether you like Trump or not – and for the record I think he’s an ass – people do not approve of disloyalty... and disloyalty this has become rather than valid criticism.

What all of the above tells me is that (1) we’re still a fifty-fifty nation with a gerrymandered House and a Senate divided by red and blue states, (2) turn out will be typical in this cycle and neither side has much of an advantage, and (3) all politics remains local.



tryanmax said...

So, basically, California Democrats are excited that they still have a chance? I wonder how much they drained the coffers to buy that chance.

This year will finally be the year that women prove men suck!

I hope the Bernie wing continues to sabotage the DNC long after Bernie retires from the scene. What's the saying? "Old Socialists never die--they just smell that way."

The NeverTrump right has struck on a new theme lately, and it doesn't do anything to assure Trump voters of their loyalty. They've lifted a page from the smug-left playbook and have started deriding Trump's jingoism, as they see it.

Putting aside the textbooks and looking at practical linguistics, I've offered several times that "populism" is just an epithet for "democracy" when things don't go someone's way. In the same way, "jingoism" is most used--not to describe bellicose foreign policy, as is proper--but to besmirch expressions of patriotism that aren't to ones liking.

So NeverTrump is taking the anti-patriotic position. Smart move, guys.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Yep. All the Democrats did was get a chance to win, but not a likely one. And from what I understand, they spent a fortune to make sure they weren't wiped out. The thing is that they believe there is an anti-Trump wave out there, which there just isn't any evidence for. Even the generic House ballot is only +3% for the Democrats, which is at the low end of normal. What's more, Trump's popularity is hovering around 50% and strong in "key demographics." So I think the election will be a wash.

Yep, this is the year... finally. You know, I've heard this "Year of the Woman" stuff every year for decades. At some point, you'd think they would be embarrassed to keep calling it.

The Bernie wing is like the talk radio wing. They want it their way or they walk. Beating them in primaries doesn't change anything. You can't cure stupid.

The NeverTrumps remain obsessed. They are as irrational as the leftists they imitate. They believe all rumors. They obsess about things like whether Trump's wife likes him or not. They ignore policy and achievement. They get off on mocking. And they can't stop themselves from bringing him up time and again.

tryanmax said...

What saddens me is that NeverTrump pulled in a lot of conservative voices that I respect(ed). How one can spend decades cultivating conservative philosophy only to bury it in petulance because the smartest guy didn't win, I don't know.

I'll take the guy who does conservatism on instinct over the guy who can explain it but never does it every single time.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, Unfortunately, their behavior confirms much of what I've thought of this group for years. They are ivory tower and all that implies -- lack of humanity, no sense of the public complete with major blindspots, no sense of practicality, inability to see beyond a rigid worldview, and the intolerance that comes from declaring oneself superior.

I always look back at Reagan as the ideal conservative because he understood the principles and had fundamentally conservative instincts, but was never hidebound, had his pulse on the public, and was always working to get more of what he believed in.

I see very little of those traits in so many modern conservatives. To many are all or nothing, too many are happy to be martyrs, too many don't even understand their own principles and their instincts are to be what liberals mock them for.

AndrewPrice said...

And before anyone says I'm calling Trump a conservative or comparing him to Reagan, I'm not. But Trump has done some amazingly conservative things. Yet too many people would rather gush over his relationship with his wife than acknowledge that.

BevfromNYC said...

Here's a perfect example of why NeverTrumpers are in trouble

Bill Kristol: "I’ve always loathed the facile anti-Americanism of parts of the Left. But how can someone who loves America and the principles for which it stands not also loathe the bloated and hollow, boastfully smug and proudly ignorant Americanism of the Trump Right?"

Yeah, truly, this makes me want to vote for Trump over and over. Why do political pundits and politicians think that by insulting the voters that they can change the voters mind? Did no one learn from the 2016 election cycle at all?

What is frightening is that actually Sally Kohn, of ALL people actually gets it now.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, This is exactly the problem. This highlights two problems with how establishment conservatives see the world:

1. It's all or nothing. 1 or 0. They either love a person or they hate them. They have no concept of a middle ground, where you can support people you don't necessarily like or necessarily agree with. What's more, they are more interested in attacking people who are closer to them than they are attacking people father away politically. Hence fratricide is a big thing.

2. They completely mistake packaging for substance. He's loud. He's rude. He needs to go! They never thing to look beyond that.

And yeah, telling people they are stupid because they don't share your narrow views is not going to win anyone over.

AndrewPrice said...

"Who trolls a picture of a dog in a park?" Yep.

AndrewPrice said...

As an addendum to the article, the following poll results came out today. Here are the "key" Senate races this year and the approval ratings for the incumbents:

Of the 10 senators considered to be in a competitive Senate race by Morning Consult this fall, only one had an approval rating above 50%: Democrat Jon Tester of Montana (52%). The rest fell below that threshold:

Bill Nelson, D-Fla.: 45%
Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: 45%
Joe Manchin, D-W.Va.: 44%
Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D.: 44%
Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis.: 42%
Joe Donnelly, D-Ind.: 41%
Bob Casey, D-Pa.: 41%
Claire McCaskill, D-Mo.: 38%
Dean Heller, R-Nev.: 38%

Does that look like it's going to be a Democratic sweep? Hardly. Only one Democrat is even at 50%. That's eight endangered Democrats, one endangered Republican.

I doubt most of these will lose, but it shows that this idea of a blue wave is nonsense.

AndrewPrice said...

Let me add.. three women on that list. The Annual Year of the Woman isn't looking so good, is it?

Anthony said...

I agree the primaries tend to indicate that not much will change in terms of power these midterms. That would be a surprise.

There have been very few surprises thus far. For example, for people with careers in the same party, be they politicians or pundits, going against the president in the first few years of a wave tends to destroy careers regardless of the issue. That has been the case with Bush II and Obama and the pattern is holding with Trump. Such people can kiss the ring, retire or become irrelevant. The difference between the second and third options is criticism of the president can close doors at think tanks and what have you.

Post a Comment