The Death of the Grand Old Party

Noodles

The sequel will probably be better.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,973
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
The GOP is not quite dead yet:

Can Democrats Avoid a Wipeout in 2022?

"While most Democrats believe that going big offers them their best chance of maintaining at least one of their majorities next year, many quietly acknowledge that, no matter what they achieve, they face long odds of holding the House in the first midterm election after the decennial redistricting process spurred by the census."
Not gonna lie, and I know it's self defeating, but if the Dems manage to drop the ball again in 2022, I may be just done with all of it. At that point the world will likely just burn up.anyway, so it won't matter in the long run ever giving a shit about politics ever again. The idiot Majority will have spoken, who am I to stand against it.
 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
The GOP is not quite dead yet:

Can Democrats Avoid a Wipeout in 2022?

"While most Democrats believe that going big offers them their best chance of maintaining at least one of their majorities next year, many quietly acknowledge that, no matter what they achieve, they face long odds of holding the House in the first midterm election after the decennial redistricting process spurred by the census."
"Historically" be damned. We've never had a president like the former guy, or an administration of such sheer crookedness, hate, and childish behavior. Plus, changing demographics., which is why the Republicans are writing so many voter suppression laws. If they win anything away from the Dems, that will be why, and I hope it's investigated with the sane vigor as they enjoyed trying to prove fraud that didn't exist for Dear Leader.
 

Cindy Claveau

Radical Left Degenerate
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
3,488
Location
US
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
June 2007
SLU Posts
44403
The GOP is not quite dead yet:

Can Democrats Avoid a Wipeout in 2022?

"While most Democrats believe that going big offers them their best chance of maintaining at least one of their majorities next year, many quietly acknowledge that, no matter what they achieve, they face long odds of holding the House in the first midterm election after the decennial redistricting process spurred by the census."
The gerrymandering is bothersome and potentially devastating, but they still have the problem of Trump and his ridiculous self-immolation on the pyre of logic.

I smell lawsuits coming in the near term.

 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
The gerrymandering is bothersome and potentially devastating, but they still have the problem of Trump and his ridiculous self-immolation on the pyre of logic.

I smell lawsuits coming in the near term.

That's why they're fighting so hard against HR 1. They can't win if they don't cheat, which they've been doing with their twisted gerrymandered districts and voting restrictions. They've even said so right in court--to SCOTUS.

 

Aribeth Zelin

Faeryfox
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
4,140
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
03-11-2011
SLU Posts
9410
The gerrymandering is bothersome and potentially devastating, but they still have the problem of Trump and his ridiculous self-immolation on the pyre of logic.

I smell lawsuits coming in the near term.

Though there is a problem with this in that it makes it pretty easy to gerrymander when the lines are straight. Like, oh, the panhandle of Florida. The coastal areas are a lot more of a mix of 'red and blue' but because we're lumped in with interior rural areas, we're stuck with Gaetz. And because our population isn't high enough, we're also linked in with somewhat redder, more rural counties to the east, as well.

but because its just a straight line? Yeah. Also, technically, the fairest way to draw those distrcts would be to make them straight lines up and down. Because then at least the 'conservatives' are completely disenfranchised either - even if I'd prefer it myself.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Cindy Claveau

Beebo Brink

Climate Apocalypse Alarmist
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,051
SL Rez
2006
Not gonna lie, and I know it's self defeating, but if the Dems manage to drop the ball again in 2022, I may be just done with all of it.
"Drop the ball" implies that Democrats are somehow negligent or careless or just too lazy to win. Quite the opposite is true -- we're fighting overwhelming corruption and voter suppression, not to mention years worth of poisoning of the American mind by toxic Fox News and scammers like Rush Limbaugh. We are fighting urban vs. rural demographics and the extreme skewing of political power in low-population red states. We don't have an Idiot Majority, we have an Idiot Minority with disproportionate control over this country's fate.

Instead of turning my back on "losers" because they lost, I applaud the courage and tenacity of people who keep on fighting. The good guys don't always win, but god bless them for trying.
 

Archer

Not a Robot
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
704
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
2007
I don't think it's impossible for Dems to hold the House in 2024, but lessons need to be learned from the past, as the Biden administration seems to have done with the "go big or go home" strategy. The Democrats in close races, or even those trying to flip seats need to absolutely HAMMER the message that everything that is coming from Washington that is helping people is coming from Democrats, not Republicans. They need to continuously throw in everyone's faces that their opponent and their party voted against the help that people are receiving. That's the message that will likely keep the House.
 

Beebo Brink

Climate Apocalypse Alarmist
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,051
SL Rez
2006
That's the message that will likely keep the House.
Messages are step one, but keeping the House is dependent on mobilizing Dem voters who traditionally turn out in larger numbers for presidential elections but not for the off-year elections. One of the (many) reasons Republicans have dominated politics is that their user base shows up for every single election and votes.

So 2022 is going to depend on good old-fashioned Get Out the Vote efforts at the state level. And it has to be strong enough to compensate for voter suppression laws and gerrymandering. Fingers crossed that the success of Biden's first 100 days doesn't lull voters into a feeling that normalcy has returned. If we don't keep a majority, we're back to Republican rule.
 

Noodles

The sequel will probably be better.
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,973
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
"Drop the ball" implies that Democrats are somehow negligent or careless or just too lazy to win. Quite the opposite is true -- we're fighting overwhelming corruption and voter suppression, not to mention years worth of poisoning of the American mind by toxic Fox News and scammers like Rush Limbaugh. We are fighting urban vs. rural demographics and the extreme skewing of political power in low-population red states. We don't have an Idiot Majority, we have an Idiot Minority with disproportionate control over this country's fate.

Instead of turning my back on "losers" because they lost, I applaud the courage and tenacity of people who keep on fighting. The good guys don't always win, but god bless them for trying.
That's kind of what I am saying a bit. They are (in theory) the party of actual majority support. But they seem to regularly lose quite a bit after big wins. Feels like there is some lesson they need to learn and something to correct to stop this from happening. They seem to manage big come backs but not sustain them, so any real progress ends up lost.
 

Beebo Brink

Climate Apocalypse Alarmist
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,051
SL Rez
2006
That's kind of what I am saying a bit. They are (in theory) the party of actual majority support. But they seem to regularly lose quite a bit after big wins. Feels like there is some lesson they need to learn and something to correct to stop this from happening. They seem to manage big come backs but not sustain them, so any real progress ends up lost.
Who is the "they"? Because there's no one monolithic block of "Democrats" -- there's national party leadership, state party leadership and there's voters, all distinct blocs. Each plays a part in any election but they don't act in lockstep precision.

We've had party leadership falter at times in the past, but much less so in the recent elections. Setting aside all the voting obstacles that I detailed in my previous post, Democratic voters have a tendency to stay home in off elections... but that wasn't true in 2018.

Both party machinery and the Democratic electorate are operating at pretty high levels right now, galvanized by the Trump era. At the same time, however, the GOP is raging back out of sheer desperation. They may be the minority, but they have a grip on the levers of power and they aren't going to give that up without a monumental fight. You still seem to be blaming "Democrats" for a poor showing despite knowing that the GOP has stacked the deck against us. It doesn't matter if the majority of people in the U.S. are in favor of a Democratic agenda if those same people are actively blocked from getting their votes counted. Not all losses are the loser's fault. It doesn't matter if we have a majority if the minority is granted -- by our Constitution -- disproportionate representation in Congress.

Dems have been set up to lose, so it won't be entirely surprising if we do indeed lose. A loss isn't always a sign of incompetence. Sometimes the bad guys win because the odds are in their favor.
 

Free

*censored*
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
42,258
Location
Moonbase Caligula
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565

Soen Eber

Vatican mole
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,954
Because there's no one monolithic block of "Democrats" --
Exactly.

It's because of this the Republicans can gin up FUD, because there are so many voices, and some of them are bound to be both off-key and frightening to a large subset of voters. See the "defund the police" article linked in my signature. We nearly lost the Senate because of how this was interpreted because conservatives are so literal-minded in their fear and suspicion.

We need consistent messaging, and, I hate to say that, maybe even some "gate keepers" - as horrible as that sounds. I don't mean silencing or supressing, but a clarification that sets boundary lines around core Democratic political goals.
 

Aribeth Zelin

Faeryfox
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
4,140
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
03-11-2011
SLU Posts
9410
Exactly.

It's because of this the Republicans can gin up FUD, because there are so many voices, and some of them are bound to be both off-key and frightening to a large subset of voters. See the "defund the police" article linked in my signature. We nearly lost the Senate because of how this was interpreted because conservatives are so literal-minded in their fear and suspicion.

We need consistent messaging, and, I hate to say that, maybe even some "gate keepers" - as horrible as that sounds. I don't mean silencing or supressing, but a clarification that sets boundary lines around core Democratic political goals.
Getting the 'purists' to stop being so bloody shortsighted might be nice too. So what if <insert politician here> isn't as progressive as I'd like - are they at least more or less going in the right direction? Then fine.

Or you know, maybe vote against people if you can't find someone to vote -for-.
 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
Exactly.

It's because of this the Republicans can gin up FUD, because there are so many voices, and some of them are bound to be both off-key and frightening to a large subset of voters. See the "defund the police" article linked in my signature. We nearly lost the Senate because of how this was interpreted because conservatives are so literal-minded in their fear and suspicion.

We need consistent messaging, and, I hate to say that, maybe even some "gate keepers" - as horrible as that sounds. I don't mean silencing or supressing, but a clarification that sets boundary lines around core Democratic political goals.
"Defund the police" was always a lousy slogan, lending itself too easily to misinterpretation and weaponization by the conservatives. The real meaning got drowned out. It should have been "demilitarize the police", but that's not as easy to chant, I guess.

But, back to the self-immolization of the GQP:

 

WolfEyes

Well known member no one knows
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,502
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
2009
Exactly.

It's because of this the Republicans can gin up FUD, because there are so many voices, and some of them are bound to be both off-key and frightening to a large subset of voters. See the "defund the police" article linked in my signature. We nearly lost the Senate because of how this was interpreted because conservatives are so literal-minded in their fear and suspicion.

We need consistent messaging, and, I hate to say that, maybe even some "gate keepers" - as horrible as that sounds. I don't mean silencing or supressing, but a clarification that sets boundary lines around core Democratic political goals.
What we need, imo, are people who are not afraid to keep vigil, constantly correct the narrative and be listened to, not just heard. Seems like we had that at one time.
 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
What we need, imo, are people who are not afraid to keep vigil, constantly correct the narrative and be listened to, not just heard. Seems like we had that at one time.
People the Republicans will listen to? *ucker Carlson and Hannity fans?
 

WolfEyes

Well known member no one knows
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,502
SL Rez
2004
Joined SLU
2009
"Defund the police" was always a lousy slogan, lending itself too easily to misinterpretation and weaponization by the conservatives. The real meaning got drowned out. It should have been "demilitarize the police", but that's not as easy to chant, I guess.
I don't disagree about interpretations. The police forces would never have been militarized if they didn't get the funding for it. So it is correct, just too open for deliberate misinterpretation. I always thought of it as meaning take away the funds that made it possible for the military equipment (like the tanks) and leave what they need for the equipment they actually need. We all know if they don't spend all of the funding they receive, their budgets are reduced. Which is one of the "reasons" police departments buy things like used tanks.

It's insane and needs to stop.
 

Romana

The Timeless Child
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
5,097
SL Rez
2010
I don't disagree about interpretations. The police forces would never have been militarized if they didn't get the funding for it. So it is correct, just too open for deliberate misinterpretation. I always thought of it as meaning take away the funds that made it possible for the military equipment (like the tanks) and leave what they need for the equipment they actually need. We all know if they don't spend all of the funding they receive, their budgets are reduced. Which is one of the "reasons" police departments buy things like used tanks.

It's insane and needs to stop.
They could, and should, use those funds for training cops not to be so trigger happy and /or biased, or having mental health professionals in hand to help deal with disturbed people. Oh, yeah, and diversity training and me diverse hiring.