UN US Midterm Elections 2018 Megathread - Blue Wave or Red Tsunami? Because you know we need one.

mildly_miffed_69 · Nov 12, 2018

i'm pretty satisfied with these results, to be honest. lots of surprising pickups that make me hopeful for 2020.

hopefully this energy carries through to the end of the decade. is a house supermajority possible?

It's HK-47 · Nov 12, 2018

mildly_miffed_69 said:
i'm pretty satisfied with these results, to be honest. lots of surprising pickups that make me hopeful for 2020.

hopefully this energy carries through to the end of the decade. is a house supermajority possible?

When you understand why the Democrats gained as many seats as they did: No.

I'll just whole-ass quote from the Washington Post here because even they understand what happened:

"Republicans had many more difficult House seats to defend than Democrats overall. There were twice as many Republican incumbents defending House seats in states Hillary Clinton won in 2016 than there were Democrats defending seats in states Trump won. Republicans also had more than twice as many “open” House seats to hold on to as their Democratic rivals had: 36 Republican representatives chose not to stand for reelection this year because they were retiring or seeking another office. Seven others either resigned or otherwise left office before the election. As a result, Republicans had 43 House seats to defend without the benefit of a true incumbent candidate. On top of this, Republicans had three “open” Senate seats, and one more with a pseudo-incumbent.

Yet Democrats managed to win surprisingly few of these “open” contests. In the vast majority of cases, a new Republican was elected instead, and they tended to be even closer to Trump than their predecessors. So Trump actually cemented his hold over the Republican Party: Most of his staunchest Republican critics have either stepped down, been removed through a primary challenge or otherwise failed to win reelection. On top of this, virtually all of the Senate Democrats who voted against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh from the states that Trump won in 2016 were voted out of office and replaced by Republicans."

The election was already monsterously skewed in the favour of the Democrats before it even started, and they still turned out a surprisingly low result from it. They came out ahead because the odds were astoundingly stacked in their favour, not necessarily because of any genuine notion of a "Blue Wave."

1Tonka_Truck · Nov 12, 2018

As far as I can tell, John Tester was the only one to survive Kavanaugh's Revenge. Only the Bozeman transplants saved him.

Corbin Dallas Multipass · Nov 12, 2018

It's HK-47 said:
When you understand why the Democrats gained as many seats as they did: No.

I'll just whole-ass quote from the Washington Post here because even they understand what happened:

"Republicans had many more difficult House seats to defend than Democrats overall. There were twice as many Republican incumbents defending House seats in states Hillary Clinton won in 2016 than there were Democrats defending seats in states Trump won. Republicans also had more than twice as many “open” House seats to hold on to as their Democratic rivals had: 36 Republican representatives chose not to stand for reelection this year because they were retiring or seeking another office. Seven others either resigned or otherwise left office before the election. As a result, Republicans had 43 House seats to defend without the benefit of a true incumbent candidate. On top of this, Republicans had three “open” Senate seats, and one more with a pseudo-incumbent.

Yet Democrats managed to win surprisingly few of these “open” contests. In the vast majority of cases, a new Republican was elected instead, and they tended to be even closer to Trump than their predecessors. So Trump actually cemented his hold over the Republican Party: Most of his staunchest Republican critics have either stepped down, been removed through a primary challenge or otherwise failed to win reelection. On top of this, virtually all of the Senate Democrats who voted against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh from the states that Trump won in 2016 were voted out of office and replaced by Republicans."

The election was already monsterously skewed in the favour of the Democrats before it even started, and they still turned out a surprisingly low result from it. They came out ahead because the odds were astoundingly stacked in their favour, not necessarily because of any genuine notion of a "Blue Wave."

Don't forget outright election fraud!

mildly_miffed_69 · Nov 12, 2018

It's HK-47 said:
When you understand why the Democrats gained as many seats as they did: No.

I'll just whole-ass quote from the Washington Post here because even they understand what happened:

"Republicans had many more difficult House seats to defend than Democrats overall. There were twice as many Republican incumbents defending House seats in states Hillary Clinton won in 2016 than there were Democrats defending seats in states Trump won. Republicans also had more than twice as many “open” House seats to hold on to as their Democratic rivals had: 36 Republican representatives chose not to stand for reelection this year because they were retiring or seeking another office. Seven others either resigned or otherwise left office before the election. As a result, Republicans had 43 House seats to defend without the benefit of a true incumbent candidate. On top of this, Republicans had three “open” Senate seats, and one more with a pseudo-incumbent.

Yet Democrats managed to win surprisingly few of these “open” contests. In the vast majority of cases, a new Republican was elected instead, and they tended to be even closer to Trump than their predecessors. So Trump actually cemented his hold over the Republican Party: Most of his staunchest Republican critics have either stepped down, been removed through a primary challenge or otherwise failed to win reelection. On top of this, virtually all of the Senate Democrats who voted against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh from the states that Trump won in 2016 were voted out of office and replaced by Republicans."

The election was already monsterously skewed in the favour of the Democrats before it even started, and they still turned out a surprisingly low result from it. They came out ahead because the odds were astoundingly stacked in their favour, not necessarily because of any genuine notion of a "Blue Wave."

thanks for the source. this makes sense, and it'll most likely not happen.

but i'll be hopeful that it happens regardless.

Bob's Fries · Nov 12, 2018

It's HK-47 said:
When you understand why the Democrats gained as many seats as they did: No.

I'll just whole-ass quote from the Washington Post here because even they understand what happened:

"Republicans had many more difficult House seats to defend than Democrats overall. There were twice as many Republican incumbents defending House seats in states Hillary Clinton won in 2016 than there were Democrats defending seats in states Trump won. Republicans also had more than twice as many “open” House seats to hold on to as their Democratic rivals had: 36 Republican representatives chose not to stand for reelection this year because they were retiring or seeking another office. Seven others either resigned or otherwise left office before the election. As a result, Republicans had 43 House seats to defend without the benefit of a true incumbent candidate. On top of this, Republicans had three “open” Senate seats, and one more with a pseudo-incumbent.

Yet Democrats managed to win surprisingly few of these “open” contests. In the vast majority of cases, a new Republican was elected instead, and they tended to be even closer to Trump than their predecessors. So Trump actually cemented his hold over the Republican Party: Most of his staunchest Republican critics have either stepped down, been removed through a primary challenge or otherwise failed to win reelection. On top of this, virtually all of the Senate Democrats who voted against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh from the states that Trump won in 2016 were voted out of office and replaced by Republicans."

The election was already monsterously skewed in the favour of the Democrats before it even started, and they still turned out a surprisingly low result from it. They came out ahead because the odds were astoundingly stacked in their favour, not necessarily because of any genuine notion of a "Blue Wave."

Even if it was in the Democrat favor, it still surprises me that there's so many goddamn votes for Beta O' Rourke. Should we really be worried about the increasing fucktard amounts of Californians in Texas?

8777BB5 · Nov 12, 2018

From what I'm reading we really need to build that wall around California

Your Weird Fetish · Nov 12, 2018

Bob's Fries said:
Even if it was in the Democrat favor, it still surprises me that there's so many goddamn votes for Beta O' Rourke. Should we really be worried about the increasing fucktard amounts of Californians in Texas?

8777BB5 said:
From what I'm reading we really need to build that wall around California

Ben Shapiro has reported a surprising statistic. Recent arrivals in Texas were actually more likely to vote for Ted Cruz than people that had been there for longer than ten years. Perhaps the people moving from California to flee taxes are actually changing their views, but their kids aren't?

IV 445 · Nov 12, 2018

It's HK-47 said:
The election was already monsterously skewed in the favour of the Democrats before it even started, and they still turned out a surprisingly low result from it. They came out ahead because the odds were astoundingly stacked in their favour, not necessarily because of any genuine notion of a "Blue Wave."

Thank you for unpacking that HK. I still have some difficulty wrapping my head around this election, but you’ve made it slightly less difficult

It's HK-47 · Nov 12, 2018

mildly_miffed_69 said:
thanks for the source. this makes sense, and it'll most likely not happen.

but i'll be hopeful that it happens regardless.

I can't fathom why you'd want to put absolute, undisputed control over a system of government into the hands of people like Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, and a veritable army of hyper-rich race-baiting maniacs but good luck with that all the same, I suppose.

Your Weird Fetish · Nov 12, 2018

Well political division is inherently good since if they're at eachother's throats they can't get to the people's. This pack of jackals is just especially rabid and disease ridden so its not really much protection.

Yandere Science · Nov 12, 2018

Bob's Fries said:
Even if it was in the Democrat favor, it still surprises me that there's so many goddamn votes for Beta O' Rourke. Should we really be worried about the increasing fucktard amounts of Californians in Texas?

70 million dollars were spent on that, and free positive media coverage nation-wide that would probably add up to even more. 70 million dollars to lose a Senate seat to Ted Cruz, same as with the $35 million spent losing a House seat to Handel in the Georgia special election.

mildly_miffed_69 · Nov 12, 2018

It's HK-47 said:
I can't fathom why you'd want to put absolute, undisputed control over a system of government into the hands of people like Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, and a veritable army of hyper-rich race-baiting maniacs but good luck with that all the same, I suppose.

Prior to 2016, I could feel alright being defined as a "moderate" and walking over the invisible line between "right" and "left" without issue. This is no longer the case for me.

A lot of people I used to work with (who you'd call conservative) consider my positions to be hyper-progressive simply because I don't align with the president, no matter what it is. Only after 2017 has someone said to my face that not wanting to import Islam is "leftist", but okay.

The unfortunate reality is that, in my personal opinion, modern day R candidates are attempting to ride off of populism instead of actual policy, feeding into the hands of the narrative of the "left" everyone's afraid of. The "new right" shares none of the values that prevented me from being a "liberal", and current establishment Dems are technically the closest in ideology at the moment. Just a hypothetical: if I had to choose between a 2020 authoritarian right vs 2020 authoritarian left, I'd be forced to choose the left for the sake of my own best interests. It sucks, but that's where we're at.

I know this is an unfavorable view on KF, but I don't really browse these boards for the imaginary forum points, so. I hope this explains my position a little, @It's HK-47.

Cubanodun · Nov 12, 2018

Corbin Dallas Multipass said:
Trying to steal elections is like... the worst thing you can do. That changes us from a democracy to a dictatorship. That's what ACTUAL FASCISTS do.

You dont say...

The Great Citracett · Nov 12, 2018

Speaking of stealing elections:

damian · Nov 12, 2018

TheGreatCitracett said:
Speaking of stealing elections:
View attachment 591402

Who could have (not) seen this coming?

It's HK-47 · Nov 12, 2018

mildly_miffed_69 said:
Prior to 2016, I could feel alright being defined as a "moderate" and walking over the invisible line between "right" and "left" without issue. This is no longer the case for me.

A lot of people I used to work with (who you'd call conservative) consider my positions to be hyper-progressive simply because I don't align with the president, no matter what it is. Only after 2017 has someone said to my face that not wanting to import Islam is "leftist", but okay.

The unfortunate reality is that, in my personal opinion, modern day R candidates are attempting to ride off of populism instead of actual policy, feeding into the hands of the narrative of the "left" everyone's afraid of. The "new right" shares none of the values that prevented me from being a "liberal", and current establishment Dems are technically the closest in ideology at the moment. Just a hypothetical: if I had to choose between a 2020 authoritarian right vs 2020 authoritarian left, I'd be forced to choose the left for the sake of my own best interests. It sucks, but that's where we're at.

I know this is an unfavorable view on KF, but I don't really browse these boards for the imaginary forum points, so. I hope this explains my position a little, @It's HK-47.

Oh there's a lot of people on both sides and to both extremes on the Farms. I wouldn't say that it's unpopular here because we've become such a melting pot (of friendship) that I've seen people support either side of the aisle just as fervently. I mean look at @Mrs Paul. She fucking hates Trump. It's just that A&H tends to largely be dominated by pro-Republican voices, likely because /pol/ is hot garbage and they've been routed out of just about anywhere else there is to even have a conversation with someone online without it descending into "ism-tossing."

What's curious about your stance to me is that it's essentially the exact, same concern I have with the Democrats: They're not operating on local policies, they're operating on coastal elitism and riding the coat-tails of Progressivism as a means to use it like a shield to obfuscate the fact that at their core, the entire party has become or is being led by people with overtly Marxist tendencies. Maxine Waters, for example, spear-headed attempts in the past to put the Communist Party into a position of power in the U.S., and she's far from being the only Democrat who's done that.

What the Democrats profess and what the Democrats intend are two astronomically different things, and that's just one of the plethora of reasons that I dove over the fence after 2016. If the Democrats had anything worth offering, why is it that every single "hot spot" that the Democrats have had almost exclusive control over have all become festering hives of corruption and mismanagement and poverty? San Fransisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Detroit, Miami, Washington D.C., Seattle, San Diego, Boston, it's a long, long list and every single one of those cities has an ungodly number of problems despite the fact that these people who are "selling all the solutions" have held power there for decades, and in some cases the Democratic party has held office in some counties for over a century.

Obama and the Democratic party had absolute control over the House and the Senate following the 2008 election, and yet... Nothing changed. Everything just kept getting worse. We stayed in the war, we ramped up drone strikes, he pulled his administration hip-to-hip with Big Pharma, he bailed out Wall Street, he lobbied to lower the minimum wages in foreign countries, he escalated some sort of "war on police", he ended Habeus Corpus, he dramatically expanded the domestic spy networks, he had a horrifying interest with cracking down on whistle-blowers, I mean could go on and on and on about him and his administration and the Democratic party at large, but it really boils down to one thing:

They're putting on a big, beautiful smile, but the only thing in their suitcase is snake oil. I can't possibly change your mind or tell who or what to vote for, but I'd be careful around the Democratic party right now. There's some incredibly two-faced people at the helm of that ship. The Republicans just had a massive "house-cleaning" to purge out all of the Neo-Cons, but the Democrats still haven't rolled the skeletons out of their cabinet. If anything, it just looks like they've reinforced all the worst ones.

Regret · Nov 12, 2018

mildly_miffed_69 said:
Prior to 2016, I could feel alright being defined as a "moderate" and walking over the invisible line between "right" and "left" without issue. This is no longer the case for me.

A lot of people I used to work with (who you'd call conservative) consider my positions to be hyper-progressive simply because I don't align with the president, no matter what it is. Only after 2017 has someone said to my face that not wanting to import Islam is "leftist", but okay.

The unfortunate reality is that, in my personal opinion, modern day R candidates are attempting to ride off of populism instead of actual policy, feeding into the hands of the narrative of the "left" everyone's afraid of. The "new right" shares none of the values that prevented me from being a "liberal", and current establishment Dems are technically the closest in ideology at the moment. Just a hypothetical: if I had to choose between a 2020 authoritarian right vs 2020 authoritarian left, I'd be forced to choose the left for the sake of my own best interests. It sucks, but that's where we're at.

I know this is an unfavorable view on KF, but I don't really browse these boards for the imaginary forum points, so. I hope this explains my position a little, @It's HK-47.

Though I disagree with your position on the matter, I can understand where you're coming from.

Yandere Science · Nov 12, 2018

TheGreatCitracett said:
Speaking of stealing elections:
View attachment 591402

To be fair, the people of Arizona might actually be that retarded.

Ruin · Nov 12, 2018

I don't think the right wing bias on KF is anywhere near as severe as people allege. It's just that first and foremost we follow the lulz and "I shit my pants and smeared it on the walls to own Drumpf!" is much funnier and more entertaining than the sort of generic racism and Nazi shit the fringe right produces.

UN US Midterm Elections 2018 Megathread - Blue Wave or Red Tsunami? Because you know we need one.

mildly_miffed_69

why did you post that?

It's HK-47

Meatbag's Bounty of Bodies

1Tonka_Truck

Loaded Like A Boxcar Moving Like A Racecar

Corbin Dallas Multipass

mildly_miffed_69

why did you post that?

Bob's Fries

8777BB5

Keep Her Sexy and Straightforward

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist

IV 445

Guest

It's HK-47

Meatbag's Bounty of Bodies

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist

Yandere Science

mildly_miffed_69

why did you post that?

Cubanodun

Chaos Engine Operator

The Great Citracett

HERE COMES THE THE COCK BOAT! Set sail for dick.

damian

Not cough Zack.

It's HK-47

Meatbag's Bounty of Bodies

Regret

Yandere Science

Ruin

Mercenary Slut

UN US Midterm Elections 2018 Megathread - Blue Wave or Red Tsunami? Because you know we need one.

why did you post that?

Meatbag's Bounty of Bodies

Loaded Like A Boxcar Moving Like A Racecar

why did you post that?

Keep Her Sexy and Straightforward

Intersectional fetishist

IV 445

Guest

Meatbag's Bounty of Bodies

Intersectional fetishist

why did you post that?

Chaos Engine Operator

HERE COMES THE THE COCK BOAT! Set sail for dick.

Not *cough* Zack.

Meatbag's Bounty of Bodies

Mercenary Slut

Not cough Zack.