If the GOP Had Disowned Trumpism, 2022 Would Be

[Cameron]

Republicans seem poised to do well next week, at least if the polling is accurate or underestimates GOP support as has happened a few times recently.

That said, there are close races in many many places where they shouldn’t really be. Given high inflation and food and gas prices, and Biden’s unpopularity, there is no reason Dems should be polling close to the GOP in Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, etc. These races are close because even despite the factors in the GOP’s favor, many (including myself) cannot contemplate ever voting for Trumpist candidates.

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives this cycle we’d be looking at one of the biggest blowouts in history. Instead, they may eek to modest control of Congress by +1 to +3 margins in a host of states and districts, which they seem historically likely to use to promptly shoot themselves and America in the foot.

 

[Callen]

I think if there weren't so many Trumpers running things would not be as tight as they are. It would be a huge red tidal wave. With inflation where it is and Biden's numbers so low it should not be this tight especially in the 5 tight Senate races, it should be a blow out.

 

[Excon]

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives [...]

iLOL
In your opinion? Hilarious.

The majority of each party determines that which is reasonable to them. Not the minority or outsiders.

 

[Cameron]

iLOL
In your opinion? Hilarious.

The majority of each party determines that which is reasonable to them. Not the minority or outsiders.

Yes, this is an opinion board.

This is not about primary results it is about general election results.

 

[Excon]

This is not about primary results it is about general election results.

Does what I said apply to the general election as well?
Of coarse it does.

 

[bongsaway]

Republicans seem poised to do well next week, at least if the polling is accurate or underestimates GOP support as has happened a few times recently.

That said, there are close races in many many places where they shouldn’t really be. Given high inflation and food and gas prices, and Biden’s unpopularity, there is no reason Dems should be polling close to the GOP in Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, etc. These races are close because even despite the factors in the GOP’s favor, many (including myself) cannot contemplate ever voting for Trumpist candidates.

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives this cycle we’d be looking at one of the biggest blowouts in history. Instead, they may eek to modest control of Congress by +1 to +3 margins in a host of states and districts, which they seem historically likely to use to promptly shoot themselves and America in the foot.

I wonder how much the gop would 'win' without gerrymandering? I expect the gop to take the house and lose three senate seats.

 

[Cameron]

Does what I said apply to the general election as well?
Of coarse it does.

The majority of a party alone does not decide a general election. This is about whether, in electing who is “reasonable to them,” GOP primary majorities have picked the right candidates to maximize their potential in the general election.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yes, this is an opinion board.

This is not about primary results it is about general election results.

Hmm… what are those 11/8/2022 general election results?

BTW, winning a close race is normal in races described as “toss up” elections according to polling.

 

[bongsaway]

Hmm… what are those 11/8/2022 general election results?

BTW, winning a close race is normal in races described as “toss up” elections according to polling.

According to today's republicans, it was rigged if they lost.

 

[Cameron]

Hmm… what are those 11/8/2022 general election results?

BTW, winning a close race is normal in races described as “toss up” elections according to polling.

We shall see what the actual results are. But the point is that with everything going against Dems, we probably shouldn’t be in a position now where there is still any doubt about what they will be.

Whether a race is described as a toss up is a factor of the popularity of the candidates chosen. If the GOP had nominated better candidates, many these likely would not be “close races”, and perhaps more bluer races would be toss ups in the GOP’s favor.

JMO but if you have a basis for a different view feel free to share it. Do you think that what the polls show is the GOP’s best potential under the circumstances?

 

[Excon]

The majority of a party alone does not decide a general election. This is about whether, in electing who is “reasonable to them,” GOP primary majorities have picked the right candidates to maximize their potential in the general election.

Oy Vey!

Do not the winners of the primaries move on to the general election?
Of course they do.
This is why you get the candidates that you do. Period. The voters in the primaries decide.
Again. Not the minority or outsiders.

 

[Cameron]

Oy Vey!

Do not the winners of the primaries move on to the general election?
Of course they do.
This is why you get the candidates that you do. Period. The voters in the primaries decide.
Again. Not the minority or outsiders.

Yeah I’m not going to repeat myself.

 

[Excon]

Yeah I’m not going to repeat myself.

iLOL Good.

 

[quip]

Same.
The GOP is still despicable as it always was -Trump or no Trump - and will always be so.

 

[Cameron]

iLOL Good.

If people don’t understand that the candidate a primary majority picks will not always be the best candidate for a general election, well, that pretty much explains why we are where we are.

 

[ttwtt78640]

We shall see what the actual results are. But the point is that with everything going against Dems, we probably shouldn’t be in a position now where there is still any doubt about what they will be.

Few doubt that control of the US House will be flipped and the US Senate races cited by you are predicted to be close. If the republicants win half (two out of the four) of those ‘toss up’ races then the US Senate will also become majority republicant.

Whether a race is described as a toss up is a factor of the popularity of the candidates chosen. If the GOP had nominated better candidates, many these likely would not be “close races”, and perhaps more bluer races would be toss ups in the GOP’s favor.

Agreed, yet that could be said of the demorat candidates as well. Normally, the incumbent (or their party) has the advantage.

JMO but if you have a basis for a different view feel free to share it. Do you think that what the polls show is the GOP’s best potential under the circumstances?

There are quite a few close races for Governor which has (or at least should have) very little (if anything) to with federal government (or presidential) politics.

 

[Excon]

If people don’t understand that the candidate a primary majority picks will not always be the best candidate for a general election, well, that pretty much explains why we are where we are.

So, you do not like how it works. Figures.

 

[ttwtt78640]

If people don’t understand that the candidate a primary majority picks will not always be the best candidate for a general election, well, that pretty much explains why we are where we are.

That is definitely true. What appeals to the demorat or republicant ‘base’ may not be appealing to the ‘independent’ voters needed to win in the general election.

 

[tres borrachos]

Republicans seem poised to do well next week, at least if the polling is accurate or underestimates GOP support as has happened a few times recently.

That said, there are close races in many many places where they shouldn’t really be. Given high inflation and food and gas prices, and Biden’s unpopularity, there is no reason Dems should be polling close to the GOP in Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, etc. These races are close because even despite the factors in the GOP’s favor, many (including myself) cannot contemplate ever voting for Trumpist candidates.

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives this cycle we’d be looking at one of the biggest blowouts in history. Instead, they may eek to modest control of Congress by +1 to +3 margins in a host of states and districts, which they seem historically likely to use to promptly shoot themselves and America in the foot.

I say it would be the same, because except for twice in the last 100+ years, the party out of power in the White House picks up seats. The Trump effect had neither a positive nor a negative impact on the midterms.

Now, 2024 will be a different matter IMO.

 

[Airyaman]

Republicans seem poised to do well next week, at least if the polling is accurate or underestimates GOP support as has happened a few times recently.

That said, there are close races in many many places where they shouldn’t really be. Given high inflation and food and gas prices, and Biden’s unpopularity, there is no reason Dems should be polling close to the GOP in Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, etc. These races are close because even despite the factors in the GOP’s favor, many (including myself) cannot contemplate ever voting for Trumpist candidates.

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives this cycle we’d be looking at one of the biggest blowouts in history. Instead, they may eek to modest control of Congress by +1 to +3 margins in a host of states and districts, which they seem historically likely to use to promptly shoot themselves and America in the foot.

In order to get a candidate, you have to go through MAGA, which is now the largest part of the GOP base. So it's really a moot point.

 

[Blue Dog]

It seems the majority of republican voters still embrace Trumpian politics. Moderates and Conservatives are anathema to the current party…

 

[MrNiceGuy]

I wonder how much the gop would 'win' without gerrymandering? I expect the gop to take the house and lose three senate seats.

Both parties gerrymander.

 

[cpwill]

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives this cycle we’d be looking at one of the biggest blowouts in history. Instead, they may eek to modest control of Congress by +1 to +3 margins in a host of states and districts, which they seem historically likely to use to promptly shoot themselves and America in the foot.

It's difficult for me to think of a reasonable counter-case to this. What's frustrating is, conditions may be so bad for Democrats that Republicans still win, and, the conclusion they will draw is the opposite one.

 

[jpevans]

Republicans seem poised to do well next week, at least if the polling is accurate or underestimates GOP support as has happened a few times recently.

That said, there are close races in many many places where they shouldn’t really be. Given high inflation and food and gas prices, and Biden’s unpopularity, there is no reason Dems should be polling close to the GOP in Ohio, Georgia, Arizona, etc. These races are close because even despite the factors in the GOP’s favor, many (including myself) cannot contemplate ever voting for Trumpist candidates.

IMO, if the GOP had denounced Trump and nominated reasonable conservatives this cycle we’d be looking at one of the biggest blowouts in history. Instead, they may eek to modest control of Congress by +1 to +3 margins in a host of states and districts, which they seem historically likely to use to promptly shoot themselves and America in the foot.

Adam Kinzinger said it best, He & Liz aren't Brave, the GQP is cowards.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

It seems the majority of republican voters still embrace Trumpian politics. Moderates and Conservatives are anathema to the current party…

Trump isn't and never was the problem. The problem is the system which brought us Trump, and the two-party system which is controlled by the military industrial complex and the security state. Trump was the wrench in the works which was much-needed. The neoconservatives and warmongers in the GOP jumped ship and moved to the Democrat Party, which is why the Democrat Party is now the undisputed champion of warmongering.

Last May a remarkable column by Stephen Kinzer appeared in the Boston Globe. It was headlined: “Republicans Return To Their Roots As The Antiwar Party.”

More significantly, the subheading ran: “Since the Vietnam era, Americans have come to expect antiwar rhetoric from liberal Democrats. Cancel that.” It began:

“With Americans now engulfed in passion for Ukraine, it wasn’t surprising that President Biden proposed sending $33 billion worth of weaponry and other aid to Ukraine’s beleaguered military. Nor was it surprising that Congress raised the number to $40 billion, or that both the Senate and House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor. Hidden within that lopsided vote, though, was a shocker: Every single “no” vote – 11 in the Senate and 57 in the House – came from a Republican.

“Since the Vietnam era, Americans have come to expect antiwar rhetoric from liberal Democrats. Cancel that. This month’s votes in Washington signal a dramatic role reversal. Suddenly it is conservative Republicans who oppose US involvement in foreign wars.”

Strikingly not only did the “conservative” Democrats vote for the $40 billion that included more weapons of death and destruction for Joe Biden’s cruel proxy war against Russia to the last Ukrainian. All the “progressives” did so, including AOC and The Squad, Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna, Barbara Lee and all the rest. It was a clean sweep.

Second, this was not a one-off event. There is another vote coming up in the next few weeks for another $13.7 billion for Ukraine with over $7 billion for weapons. What is the response of the 100 Democrats to this request by Biden? The answer came during the September 11 Week Of Action called for by Code Pink and the progressive Peace In Ukraine Coalition reported here as follows:

“In the nation’s capital CODEPINK co-founders Medea Benjamin and Jodie Evans, together with Colonel Ann Wright and other activists, kicked off the Week of Action, going door to door to the offices of the House Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), …. While some members of the caucus call for much-needed diplomacy and raise concerns about the risk of nuclear war – either through a miscalculation or an intentional first strike – not one member of the nearly 100-member CPC will commit to voting against more weapons for Ukraine.” (Emphasis, jw)

This was also acknowledged in a very dispiriting interview by The GrayZone with prominent activists after the lobbying effort.

The pro-war mentality among the progressive Dem pols is not limited to Biden’s cruel proxy war to the last Ukrainian. It extends to a second proxy war now being ginned up in Taiwan. When Nancy Pelosi recently visited the island to stir up secessionist sentiment, not a single progressive Democrat in Congress made so much as a peep of protest. In fact Rep. Ro Khanna, Co-chair of Bernie Sanders’s 2020 Presidential campaign boosted it in rants on CNN and Twitter.

Both of these proxy wars bring the US into conflict with two other major global nuclear powers. If the progressive pols cannot be against military escalation in cases like this, it is hard to see that they have any claim to be for peace. And yet all too many activists in the progressive antiwar movement are loyal to them. In fact some peace organizations have gone so far as to endorse them for election in 2022, even after their vote for the $40 billion to Ukraine

The Democratic Party, Now the Leading Party of War | Libertarian Party

by John V. Walsh Last May a remarkable column by Stephen Kinzer appeared in the Boston Globe. It was headlined: “Republicans Return To Their Roots As The Antiwar Party.” More significantly, the subheading ran: “Since the Vietnam era, Americans have come to expect antiwar rhetoric from liberal...

www.lp.org