The first-term Baldwin, D-Madison, says she’s prepared to have the GOP target on her back. In a memo to supporters Monday, Baldwin campaign manager Scott Spector said she’s “in strong position” to win re-election....How will that work this time? The relationship between the GOP and President Trump is too tenuous to lay the usual foundation. With Trump, one might say both parties are out of power.
The Baldwin memo notes midterm elections historically favor the party out of power — which, in 2018, will be Democrats.
January 25, 2017
A problem with Democrats looking at 2018 and counting on the way the party out of power has, historically, lost ground.
I'm reading the Wisconsin State Journal's report on a memo Senator Tammy Baldwin just sent around to supporters:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
54 comments:
With Trump, one might say both parties are out of power.
Except that one of the parties will vote for and pass Trump's agenda. The other parties has already dug in its heels. If Trump's agenda is seen as a success the Democrats are toast.
Let me add that at this point the Democrats have nothing to offer buy complaints and platitudes while Trump and the GOP take concrete actions. People voted for action, change and jobs.
She is lucky it was Tommy Thompson won the race to be her opponent. Her future depends on the candidate the Rs recruit to oppose her.
Please excuse my spelling and typos. I am having visual acuity issues.
Missing who.
It is actually much too soon to tell what shape the Trump administration's policies will take, and how its relationships with each party will develop. But who wants to actually sit and wait for real things to happen when there is so much dead air to fill 24/7? Let's all pretend we can figure it out now, while taking time off to estimate crowd size and hypothetical fraudulent voters. It's like President Trump just passed the bar exam, but wants to prove that he got a really high score.
Dump corruption and lies. Dump democrats 2018.
To say it's early days is an understatement, but I see absolutely nothing that suggests Democrats understand their predicament. One of the bits of received wisdom of my childhood, and reinforced by half a dozen Saturday matinee action movies, is that you don't struggle in quicksand. The Donks are positively Zumba-ing in the stuff.
"She is lucky it was Tommy Thompson won the race to be her opponent. Her future depends on the candidate the Rs recruit to oppose her."
I assume it will be Sean Duffy.
What difference does Democrats make now. DJT is all the news making all the right moves.
What Democrats are no longer needed for now includes: Saving Inner Cities, Strengthening Labor Unions, Building up Defense, creating a Stock Market stimulus.
"Sean Patrick Duffy (born October 3, 1971) is an American politician, prosecutor, former sports commentator and reality television personality. He first entered public life as a cast member on The Real World: Boston, 1998's Road Rules: All Stars, and 2002's Real World/Road Rules Challenge: Battle of the Seasons, before going on to serve as district attorney of Ashland County, Wisconsin and the U.S. Representative for Wisconsin's 7th congressional district. He is a member of the Republican Party and supported Donald Trump's 2016 presidential bid... Duffy started log rolling at age five and speed climbing (sprinting up 60 and 90 foot poles) at 13. He holds two speed-climbing titles.... In 1997, Duffy appeared on The Real World: Boston, the sixth season of the MTV reality television show, and on Road Rules: All Stars in 1998, where he met his future wife Rachel. Duffy later appeared on Real World/Road Rules Challenge: Battle of the Seasons, which aired in 2002. Both appeared in a filmed segment on 2008's The Real World Awards Bash, while Duffy served as district attorney."
She should take a strong stand in favor of more Syrian immigrants. That's a proven vote getter for the Democrats.
DOW over 20,000!!!!!!
Duffy got his law degree at William Mitchell College of Law, not UW. Baldwin got her law degree at UW. I had her as a student (when she was already a member of the state legislature, if I remember correctly).
We want Eric Hovde.
Trump plays better off the Republicans like Lindsey Graham right now than he does the Democrats.
The Democrats are coming across as flat-out deranged right now, jumping at every twitch Trump makes. The black-bloc protests against a guy that took office 24 hours ago and never-ending media coverage of the silly wool-hat vagina protests are making the Democrats look absolutely ridiculous.
Lindsey Graham RINOs actually offer a more competent foil for Trump right now. And he's riffing off it beautifully. If I thought Reince were more competent I'd think it were being coordinated by the RNC.
Looking at Baldwin's Wikipedia page, I see she got her JD from UW in 1989, and the political position she had at the time was on the Dane County Board of Supervisors (not the state legislature as guessed at above).
It would be important to examine how many seats the party in power had to defend before concluding the party in power always get whupped. It looks more like wishful thinking from the left. In 2018 the Democratic Caucus will have to defend 25 Senate seats vs 8 for the GOP.
Funny how the Democrats were already girding for a tough defense before this year's election. Now their midterm victory is historically inevitable.
Spicer was right.
Mid-term elections help the party out of power...if its voters go to polls.
Democrat voters have, for multiple cycles now, simply not done so. And they get lectured to do so by Hollywood dimbulbs who ALSO do not do so.
Looking at Baldwin's Wikipedia page, I see she got her JD from UW in 1989, and the political position she had at the time was on the Dane County Board of Supervisors (not the state legislature as guessed at above).
Former student?
I've wondered how professors view students who do exceptionally well in life. My mom taught nursing so her graduating students all become nurses and she takes a ton of pride in that.
Megan McArdle has an interesting take on the Democrats' future.
The Senate map in 2018 is brutal for Democrats. If Democrats want to get their mojo back, they’re going to need to do more than get a small minority of voters to turn out for a march. They’re going to need to get back some of those rural votes.
To do that, they’re probably going to have to let go of the most soul-satisfying, brain-melting political theory of the last two decades: that Democrats are inevitably the Party of the Future, guaranteed ownership of the future by an emerging Democratic majority in minority-white America. This theory underlay a lot of Obama’s presidency, and Clinton’s campaign. With President Trump's inauguration on Friday, we saw the results.
Democrats cannot survive outside of big cities. The next election may be a test of that theory.
You need to fix the headline. The party out of power *gains* ground. Not to say that it garners it.
I suppose she has a decent shot of winning re-election, given she is the incumbent and Wisconsin is hardly Alabama. That said, you can spin anything you want in a memo. I doubt they are as confident in private.
The fact that the Dems have to defend so many seats, many of them in unfriendly territory, is going to thin out the money available. I suspect that a winnable election like Wisconsin would have priority though.
It's coin flip-ish.
I've noticed Baldwin standing in the background lately during Democrat pressers. Guess they're trying to get her exposure.
Mike K *really* wants to change the subject.
OK, mike. First of all, there's this;
"He was also a phenomenally gifted campaigner in his own right, who garnered a lot of extra votes from people of all ethnicities and all walks of life."
This garnering really does get old.
Secondly, I think all this talk about how Trump was elected by six hicks in a cornfield somewhere is a bunch of what you might find in a cow pasture somewhere. The Dems have an advantage in the cities. McArdle is correct, that it is easier for the losers who congregate in cities to make themselves seen and heard. But there are sane people in cities too. They just don't get quoted on their political opinions in the NYT. And they don't spend much of their time destroying their neighbors' property. I live in Oregon, and my vote for Trump was therefore not counted. Does that make me chopped liver?
After the Trump Administration voter fraud investigation and subsequent law changes, the Dems will be a permanent minority party.
Trump is basically an independent who hijacked the Republican party and used it for his purposes (which may turn out to be a good thing in the long run).
If Trump can get something moving with the inner cities by the 2018 elections, it will siphon off enough of the black vote to make a significant difference, unless it is countered by increased Hispanic voting for Demos.
Hopefully the Repubs won't sit on their "laurels" and will try to get out the vote.
" I live in Oregon, and my vote for Trump was therefore not counted. Does that make me chopped liver?"
No, it makes you like my son-in-law who lives in McMinnville. Portland controls Oregon politics like Chicago does with Illinois and NYC does for NY state.
Oregon seems to be survived better than NY state which is devastated by NYC politics and the idiots who get elected.
He brother-in-law has a gun safe that would look good in a huge gun store. They live in the wine country and the BIL repairs winery equipment and rebuilds old cars. They are all doing very well. We thought of moving there but my wife does not do well in cold wet climates. That's why we are in Tucson.
California is hopeless. Even Orange County went for Hillary.
The first-term Baldwin, D-Madison, says she’s prepared to have the GOP target on her back.
OK, so does this mean that "eliminationist rhetoric" is back in fashion again? Or is it only OK if it is use in a self deprecating way or if used by a Democrat?
Just wanting up update the rule book...
exhelodrvr1 said...
If Trump can get something moving with the inner cities by the 2018 elections, it will siphon off enough of the black vote to make a significant difference, unless it is countered by increased Hispanic voting for Demos.
In a related story, did you see how Trump was grabbing more trade union support from the Democrats yesterday?
Talking out of my ass, but Nixon went from winning 301 electoral votes in a somewhat close 68 election to winning over 500 in 72. Nixon created EPA, opened China and even reached tentative agreement on a natl healthcare plan with Ted Kennedy (which the Dems botched).
If Dems choose rioting, violence and nominating radicals as their come-back strategy against DT, do not be surprised by 72 repeat. My dem friends all think Trump is a lunatic but (interestingly) are not willing to accept my even odds $1K bet on which party will win the 2020 pres. election.
I do not believe the current actions of the democrat party and their supporters looks like a viable alternative to a republican. Just me though.
Victor Davis Hanson makes a similar argument re Reagan - http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444140/trump-economy-prosperity-will-silence-his-opponents.
DT probably assumes that all he needs to do is get the economy growing and real unemployment down and his (or his appointed successor's) reelection is guaranteed.
President Trump was a real estate guy who obviously understands the value & uses of leverage. He also wants to invest in infrastructure spending. It also turns out that the US can borrow money very cheaply. While campaigning he was critical of the growth in the government debt under Obama.
I predict that the first three of these facts will overbear the last one.
As for 2020, I don't think Hillary is going away. Her example might be Nixon, whom everybody wrote off in 1964. As long as enough Dems believe she was the perfect candidate who lost only because of Comey and Putin skulduggery, she might take another shot at it (if she lives). The Donors might not be so easily deceived.
"Baldwin, D-Madison"
Why not D-WI like they do for Bernie and Warren later in the piece? Is it like my two Senators who could just as well be labeled as D-Detroit?
Original Mike said...
After the Trump Administration voter fraud investigation and subsequent law changes, the Dems will be a permanent minority party.
The senate by default is going to be 60/40 republican. There are over 30 red states. The house will permanently be republican. Only voter fraud in a few key states gave dem's an advantage in presidential elections.
The democrat party will pick up some disaffected Chuck types but for the most part it will have to go the way of the whigs before the Dem party is anything more than a big city local phenomenon.
Original Mike: for years she was a nobody in the Senate. After Ron Johnson beating Feingold the Dem leaders know they need to bring her into the limelight. The Committees she's now on are: "Senator Baldwin serves on the Senate Appropriations Committee, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation."
Looks like they are trying to pump up her resume.
Also:I concur about Hovde. It's who should have taken her on the last time. We had way too many people with nostalgia for Tommy. Huge mistake!
If Trump keeps doing his thing, and his thing keeps doing what it is doing, I bet the Democrats will end up with a 'microminority' status.
Achilles said... [hush][hide comment]
Original Mike said...
After the Trump Administration voter fraud investigation and subsequent law changes, the Dems will be a permanent minority party.
...but for the most part it will have to go the way of the whigs before the Dem party is anything more than a big city local phenomenon.
1/25/17, 11:04 AM
Sorry but all of this is wishful thinking. The pendulum always swings. No party had permanent control. Each party is made up of people and people do stupid things for stupid reasons. At least once before it looked like the Rs were in for the long, long haul and they got complacent and stupid. Then it was the Ds turn. Wash, rinse, repeat.
One of the surest ways to quicken that turn-around is to go and get cocky. Shoot, the ink isn't even dry on his new stationary and some are claiming "we are here to stay".
One of the surest ways to quicken that turn-around is to go and get cocky. Shoot, the ink isn't even dry on his new stationary and some are claiming "we are here to stay".
No joke. This wasn't a 1984 landslide. It wasn't a rout. You need to hold Trump's feet to the fire more than the press.
If he waffles on immigration, then there is going to be a massive, massive problem.
If he waffles on immigration, then there is going to be a massive, massive problem.
He has little incentive to do so. Let him boot three million wetbacks out of Cali by Nov 2020 and then see how the vote goes.
"My dem friends all think Trump is a lunatic but (interestingly) are not willing to accept my even odds $1K bet on which party will win the 2020 pres. election."
I think you are safe.
"Let him boot three million wetbacks out of Cali by Nov 2020 and then see how the vote goes."
That is a different question. Maybe the Dims in California will fight to keep the illegals. I don't see how if Trump follows through on federal money. The lefties think California (and New York) pay more to the feds than they receive. It will be interesting if that gets tested.
Chicago is a different problem. That city is so out of control that the feds might come in and take it over like they did with New York in the 70s. Remember the headline; "Ford to New York; Drop Dead?"
She will lose. The state has gotten redder. The Lebanese thing won't help her either.
I see the Democrats will double-down on the antifa agenda which is demonize the white male, open borders, law breaking and communism.
Hope it works out for guys.
He has little incentive to do so. Let him boot three million wetbacks out of Cali by Nov 2020 and then see how the vote goes.
Do not disagree. But if you're looking for something that could destroy him, that is one that could.
That is a different question. Maybe the Dims in California will fight to keep the illegals. I don't see how if Trump follows through on federal money. The lefties think California (and New York) pay more to the feds than they receive. It will be interesting if that gets tested.
I'm PRAYING the idiots in CA decide to secede. Sure, it'll fuck over the intelligent folks in CA, but it'll be nice for those people who think they are vital to our needs to see how expendable they can be.
Does ANYBODY think, in the case of a CA secession, that their water won't dry up? Colorado supplies a lot of their water and Trump can turn off that spigot to a non-state --- or force them to pay extremely high prices for it --- with little problem.
Canada has the water, but that would involve building nasty pipelines.
Too early to tell. The "out party" thing works for Dems (as voters rarely reward a party that has both Congress and the WH in a midterm election) but GOP usually benefits from lower turnout elections. Possible splits in the GOP could harm them, if Trumpers or anti-Trumpers stay home or go third party in some races, or the split could help them as candidates can play off as a resistance to Trump or to the other GOPers. And of course much depends on the state of the economy and any scandals two years from now.
So in other words, no reading the tea leaves here. Check in again mid-2018.
That is a different question. Maybe the Dims [sic] in California will fight to keep the illegals. I don't see how if Trump follows through on federal money. The lefties think California (and New York) pay more to the feds than they receive. It will be interesting if that gets tested.
Of course the "Dims" will fight to keep the illegals. You don't expect a Democrat guy to mow his own lawn do? And would Democrat women clean their own home or change their kids' diapers themselves? Get real! The Democrat women are busy online posting tweets and Facebook rants about how miserable their lives are under Trump. No time to change their babies' diapers -- without the illegals the poor kids would have diaper rash 24/7.
Actually, California could have all the fresh water it wants after it secedes. You just build a lot of desalinization plants right on the coast, and you build a lot of nuclear power plants to power the desalinization.
Oops. I think I see the problem.
At any rate, the question of secession was settled on April 9, 1865, at Appomattox Court House.
At any rate, the question of secession was settled on April 9, 1865, at Appomattox Court House.
Settled by a war that many continue to fight.
Micheal K: Actually, it was New York State which came in and put New York City under a financial control board. The New York Times headline was about Ford declining to bail out NYC before NYS came in.
BTW, the State of New York Financial Control Board still exists, but in a monitoring and advisory position.
Post a Comment