Only 700 votes up, and still absentees to count (1000ish), I'll wait to really celebrate a W.

However, in a district where Trump won by 20 points this seems significant regardless of which candidate was victorious.

It's also worth noting that the Dem was running on a centrist platform, which personally I'm hoping doesn't signal to the party establishment to dig in their heels on center-left candidates going forward....but who am I kidding, of course it will.

3/14/2018 8:19:55 AM

You guys are getting way too excited.

The Republican candidate was an extremely lazy candidate who I think let complacency take the place of campaigning. He didn't raise any money, and by the time the full weight of the Republican party came in to save the day, it was too late.

And the guy still lost by a very slim margin, against a guy who could also be a middle of the line Republican.

I don't think this particular election will be a midterm bellwether.

3/14/2018 10:22:00 AM

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/pennsylvania-18-district-lamb-results/

3/14/2018 10:47:24 AM

Democrats who oppose abortion and support gun rights aren't some rare unicorn. They were called Blue Dogs during the 2006-2010 Dem controlled Congress. The only difference is that Lamb is much further to the left on most issues than members of that caucus.

3/14/2018 11:03:46 AM

It's worth noting that this "middle of the line Republican" supports unions, supports the Affordable Care Act, opposes the recent Republican tax legislation, and supports a woman's right to have an abortion.

That being said, I think that I'm going to have to side with rjrumfel over those who provide this type of analysis professionally; he seems pretty confident about this one.

3/14/2018 11:03:51 AM

Lamb isn’t going to move the party left for sure but he will prevent the line from moving further right... for about six weeks until primaries. The result is more important for perception and supporter enthusiasm heading into midterms.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 11:12 AM. Reason : X]

3/14/2018 11:11:40 AM

He has 7 whole positions on his website. One is pro-health insurance, one is pro-fracking, one talks about cracking down on drug dealers. He was also a federal prosecutor and is pro-gun. This guy is Doug Jones round two, possibly worse. He'll vote with Republicans on the most important issues. If it's a win at all, it's minuscule.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 11:35 AM. Reason : .]

3/14/2018 11:30:19 AM

To pupil's snarky comment in regards to the professionals...they really nailed Hillary's election didn't they?

3/14/2018 12:34:39 PM

did 538 forecast a Clinton win at 100%?

3/14/2018 1:01:00 PM

^^
These types of comments merit the snark.

3/14/2018 1:02:47 PM

My original comment contained no snark though.

As a Republican, I legitimately want to see good Democrats run that I can get behind. This guy Lamb probably falls more in line with my views than many of the conservatives out there.

But I think people are getting too excited. I don't want to see the kind of complacency we saw in the Hillary campaign.

3/14/2018 1:12:47 PM

the reason it's a bad sign for republicans is that this wasn't even a competitive race, there are dozens of races more competitive than this one

3/14/2018 1:16:52 PM

Rick Saccone lost a district that's more conservative than a hundred other congressional districts. That he only lost it by a very slim margin seems like a ridiculous sentiment to take away from this outcome.

3/14/2018 1:20:37 PM

Who exactly is claiming this is some triumphant death blow to the GOP? CNN, predictably, is making a big deal out of it because the race was so close, but as others have pointed out, it's not like this was some huge high stakes race that has anywhere near the same implications as the Jones/Moore election.

With that said, I don't see how this is anything other than a positive for the Dems. Eeking out small wins over the GOP is a good thing, and for those paying attention, it shifts the narrative from "The Dems can't even win a presidential election because they hitched their star to someone horrible like Hillary" to "Dems can win against Trumpism if they run semi-decent candidates and turn out the vote"

3/14/2018 3:42:02 PM

i've never understood that argument, is Pelosi so shallow that she will stop fundraising if someone else takes over as leader?

3/14/2018 4:12:00 PM

Quote :

"Who exactly is claiming this is some triumphant death blow to the GOP? CNN, predictably, is making a big deal out of it because the race was so close, but as others have pointed out, it's not like this was some huge high stakes race that has anywhere near the same implications as the Jones/Moore election"

Where are you getting this impression? I haven't seen any talking head shows (I don't watch them) but from an article standpoint it's not calling this some blowout dominating earth shattering thing. They are correctly pointing out that Trump won this district by 22 points and the Trump-aligned incumbent did not win by 22 points and in fact ultimately lost.

3/14/2018 4:15:18 PM

Quote :

"With that said, I don't see how this is anything other than a positive for the Dems."

Two things that are bad IMO:

1. It breeds complacency. Lamb spent more than any Democrat ever has in that district, and this is a singular special election that Dems could focus their efforts on.
2. It continues the idea that the only way to win a red district is to run a centrist. I don't believe that's true.

https://medium.com/the-outsider-news/yes-progressives-can-win-deep-red-districts-1ade0e09ad76

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 4:56 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2018 4:44:17 PM

Quote :

"Where are you getting this impression?"

I'm not. I was just responding to:

Quote :

"You guys are getting way too excited. The Republican candidate was an extremely lazy candidate who I think let complacency take the place of campaigning. He didn't raise any money, and by the time the full weight of the Republican party came in to save the day, it was too late. And the guy still lost by a very slim margin, against a guy who could also be a middle of the line Republican. I don't think this particular election will be a midterm bellwether."

3/14/2018 5:30:35 PM

^^

1) What are you even saying about complacency? That we shouldn't want Ds to win because then future Ds might not fight as hard? Is this some "Journey is more important than the destination" type bullshit? Also maybe they spent more than they ever have, but the Republicans spent 5 times as much, in what should have been a safe district.

2) It is absolutely true for issues like gun control. Someone with a progressive economic policy can win in deep red district but he would probably have to be even MORE pro-gun than a moderate.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 5:34 PM. Reason : ]

3/14/2018 5:33:28 PM

Most NRA members even support a lot of gun control measures.

The trick to running on gun control is framing your message correctly. They key thing conservatives like to hear is full throated support for "the 2nd amendment" which is all any politician has to say-- especially since the 2nd amendment doesn't actually restrict much beyond a total gun ban, and only on a federal level.

3/14/2018 5:40:52 PM

^^
Hillary would have won if Democrats weren't so embarrassingly sure of themselves. I don't mean him winning in the first place is bad (actually I do personally lol), just can't interpret it as the beginning of a ~~BLUE WAVE~~.

^
Yes. Progressives can win with the right message. The problem is they don't receive the same backing as establishment-backed Democrats, even after winning primaries.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 6:00 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2018 5:59:17 PM

^^^^sorry, I misinterpreted this quote of yours.

Quote :

"CNN, predictably, is making a big deal out of it because the race was so close"

Also, this shit blew my mind:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/14/politics/pa-18-democratic-playbook/index.html

Quote :

""Everyone learned their lesson from Jon Ossoff," a Democrat operative said. "We realized that nationalizing a race like that obviously didn't work and ultimately we lost.""

No shit. That's literally your job. Your job as a politician is to represent your local constituents. No wonder they've been losing for decades.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 6:29 PM. Reason : a]

3/14/2018 6:20:19 PM

I'd concede guns and leave the issue alone completely if the compromise is that we pretend its 100% a mental health issue and commit to addressing 100% of the mental health issue on every front including the root causes.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 7:42 PM. Reason : but we know democrats don't want to solve mental health because it hurts profits.]

3/14/2018 7:42:05 PM

Imagine if the Democrats dropped the gun issue and the Republicans dropped the abortion issue and instead we focused the energy/money/resources/time on education and mental health. Just imagine how that would improve things.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 8:18 PM. Reason : a]

3/14/2018 8:18:21 PM

^The problem is the republicans are also the ones saying feelings don't matter. If we taught how to empathize and care for others as a core piece of curriculum (alongside science, math, and history), then society itself would become less violent and guns wouldn't be the same kind of problem.

But instead anyone who suggests we focus on any kind of emotional intelligence is labeled a snowflake and is automatically discredited.

3/14/2018 8:39:20 PM

^ it is crazy how the gun issue drags somewhat reasonable people down a rabbit hole.. and I just got finished going through your "discussion" with two of my friends (Brett and Steve) that went down the rabbit hole and became Facebook warriors to varying degrees spouting off far right memes.

[Edited on March 14, 2018 at 9:09 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2018 9:08:06 PM

Quote :

"This guy is Doug Jones round two, possibly worse."

I swear to God, I think you could win the Powerball, and somehow think you got fucked because the winnings got split with another winning ticket holder.

Quote :

"The trick to running on gun control is framing your message correctly. They key thing conservatives like to hear is full throated support for "the 2nd amendment" which is all any politician has to say-- especially since the 2nd amendment doesn't actually restrict much beyond a total gun ban, and only on a federal level."

The fuck? I think that most people, when they hear "I support the 2nd Amendment", halfway hear that as their cue to listen up for you to subsequently list all the ways in which you don't, haha.

The idea that the 2A "doesn't...restrict much beyond a total [federal] gun ban" is also absurd."

...and I'm not even in the "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" camp.

3/14/2018 9:58:21 PM

Quote :

"and I'm not even in the "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" camp"

Good. One of those crazies is enough for this board.

3/14/2018 10:57:27 PM

^^^Ha! Brett is a great guy, knew him well when we were undergrads. But he sure does love him some guns, and pulls out the same talking points over and over and over and over again and changes the subject the second he gets called out for citing unrelated information.

That's why discourse has fallen apart in America, it's not just the fake news and alternative facts, it's using real information and honest truth...but changing the conversation to fit the facts instead of using facts that fit the actual conversation.

3/15/2018 12:49:47 AM

Quote :

"The idea that the 2A "doesn't...restrict much beyond a total [federal] gun ban" is also absurd." "

I meant it doesn't restrict what can be restricted except

- Can't ban all guns
- can't have a registry

pretty much anything else is fair game
- background checks
- agr restrictions
- "assault weapons" ban
- permitting/training reqs
etc

[Edited on March 15, 2018 at 1:45 AM. Reason : ]

3/15/2018 1:44:48 AM

Quote :

"This guy is Doug Jones round two, possibly worse."

3/15/2018 1:54:14 AM

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/05/tennessee-us-senate-2018-poll-phil-bredesen-marsha-blackburn/485649002/

We're a bit away from the election, and the number of unsure respondents could wipe out Phil Bredesen's lead; however, I feel that Tennessee should hardly even be on the table.

4/6/2018 3:32:06 PM

the Washington Post just won a Pulitzer for their Roy Moore story

I hope rjrumfel is doing ok

4/16/2018 3:27:38 PM

Refresh my memory, did I ever support Roy Moore? Or say anything negative about WaPo's coverage of it? Legitimate question.

I know I questioned the timing of everything. But the actual journalism? I don't think I did.

4/16/2018 4:19:20 PM

It was me saying wapo was trash. kendrick lamar also won a pulitzer so its kindve a joke.

4/17/2018 4:40:36 AM

Jerry Saltz won a Pulitzer too. Google him so you have talk shit about him as well.

4/17/2018 7:01:46 AM

Psssst. He’s trolling.

4/17/2018 10:59:29 AM

Holy shit, Mark Harris beat Robert Pittenger in N.C.-9

I mean, I’d never vote for either, but this is like throwing out your shit sandwich for a steaming bowl of diarrhea.

5/9/2018 8:20:27 AM

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/

Sadly, Mark Meadows and Matt Gaetz have >99% chance of winning their districts.

8/16/2018 3:51:43 PM

I just do not get Mark Meadows staying power in that district. Obviously gerrymandering and all that, but still, he is just wrong on so many levels for WNC.

In better news it looks like that Mark Harris race in NC is gonna be a toss-up? Sending his opponent money NOW!!!

8/16/2018 4:09:15 PM

Both the Arizona and Tennessee Senate races appear to have flipped from blue to red since the Kavanaugh and Blasey Ford Senate testimony.

It bewilders me that it would have fired up the Republican base as much as it did.

10/10/2018 11:01:18 AM

Really? You're bewildered?

Trump won the election. That should have been lesson enough to not get your hopes up.

The balance of power is going to end up staying where it is, and pollsters, campaign managers, and voters are all going to be throwing their hands up, scratching their heads saying "how did we get here?"

10/10/2018 11:10:37 AM

There will be no blue wave. Gerrymandering will prevent it. The best to hope the left has is for is an utter deadlock.

[Edited on October 10, 2018 at 11:12 AM. Reason : +]

10/10/2018 11:11:59 AM

I'm not bewildered that Republicans could keep the Senate, I'm bewildered that the Kavanagh and Blasey Ford testimony would have fired up the Republican base as much as it did.

The Senate was always a toss-up, at best.

[Edited on October 10, 2018 at 11:27 AM. Reason : ]

10/10/2018 11:27:23 AM

You know I don't just think it fired up the Republican base. I guarantee you there were some independents or even moderate Democratic men that got turned around a little after that.

10/10/2018 11:31:01 AM

I don't understand why.

Were the accusations against Roy Moore any more credible than those against Brett Kavanaugh?

10/10/2018 11:33:41 AM

Moore was a national spectacle sure, but not a SCJ.

10/10/2018 11:50:17 AM

I've considered that, but didn't the Republicans have a long list of potentially even more conservative judges to replace Kavanaugh if he wasn't confirmed?

10/10/2018 11:57:19 AM

but he should have been confirmed until democrats used some woman to try to smear him, why should someone's character be attacked because of unsubstantiated rumors from a woman? it probably didn't happen, but even if it did we need to stop this liberal PC culture who isn't letting boys be boys. it wasn't that big of a deal, they were teenagers full of hormones, guys do that kind of stuff. He's a clean cut kid who played sports and got good grades since when is that not good enough? it's disgusting how democrats used this innocent woman like this!

take all of that and package it into part of the larger republican culture war and boom - energized republicans

10/10/2018 12:05:18 PM

So I guess that the only difference was that Brett Kavanaugh was 17 and Roy Moore was 35.

10/10/2018 12:11:36 PM