Jump to content

mtutiger

2018 Midterm Elections

Recommended Posts

I figured this would be a good opportunity to start a thread dedicated to the upcoming Midterms

Based on this, it looks like the GOP wants to go back in time to a much better cycle...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relying on anti-Hillary nostalgia as a primary election talking point wouldn't make me feel good about my chances if I were a Trumper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed... I know several "never trumpers" who ended up reluctantly voting for him because he's not Hillary Clinton.  ****, that subliminally may be why people like me went third party instead of voting for her.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary's not running for anything this time, and the level of vitriol that existed 2 years ago isn't anywhere near those same levels today.  I can see anti-Hilary nostalgia working for a small subset of voters, but it's going to be a rallying cry to vote as it was in 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The run against Pelosi hasn’t been working well for them in swing districts since most of the candidates have not embraced her.

Why does the GOP always need a boogie man (or woman) to run against.

It says a lot about how they feel about their actual policies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Clinton sucks" train may have won an election in mid-2017, but the steam is running out on that engine the further and further her candidacy gets in the rear-view mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I think it will work better as a strategy than is being suggested.

 

1 hour ago, Edman85 said:

Agreed... I know several "never trumpers" who ended up reluctantly voting for him because he's not Hillary Clinton.  ****, that subliminally may be why people like me went third party instead of voting for her.

I remember thinking, post Nov 2016, that one of the positive benefits of a TRUMP Presidency was that we would never have to hear about Hillary Clinton anymore. I guess I was wrong on that one. It's almost as if the rebuke of Hillary Clinton was less about making Hillary go away and more about needing someone to pin insecurities on.

I tend to agree that it might be the most effective option of a plan to run on in 2018, I just find it amusing that the best option is to make the midterms 2016 all over again, except without Hillary on the actual ballot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand it is a short-term strategy.  I understand it isn't a great strategy given she isn't running for anything and really is irrelevant now. 

That stated, from my perspective, it is probably the best strategy they have available, in that I think it will fire up the base as much as anything they have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mtutiger said:

 

I remember thinking, post Nov 2016, that one of the positive benefits of a TRUMP Presidency was that we would never have to hear about Hillary Clinton anymore. I guess I was wrong on that one. It's almost as if the rebuke of Hillary Clinton was less about making Hillary go away and more about needing someone to pin insecurities on.

I tend to agree that it might be the most effective option of a plan to run on in 2018, I just find it amusing that the best option is to make the midterms 2016 all over again, except without Hillary on the actual ballot.

I think you can run against a historical event or program that isn't actually even on the table in the current cycle, but I doubt running a candidate that has left the scene is likely to be very effective. It may work on the base, but Trump's base is probably solid. I think once you get outside it, most independents or swing voters are just going to turn off talk about Hillary.  The effectiveness on cable new can't be taken too seriously, the nightly audience is only a few % of the electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mtutiger said:

 

I remember thinking, post Nov 2016, that one of the positive benefits of a TRUMP Presidency was that we would never have to hear about Hillary Clinton anymore. I guess I was wrong on that one. It's almost as if the rebuke of Hillary Clinton was less about making Hillary go away and more about needing someone to pin insecurities on.

I tend to agree that it might be the most effective option of a plan to run on in 2018, I just find it amusing that the best option is to make the midterms 2016 all over again, except without Hillary on the actual ballot.

The thing is, most losing presidential candidates DO go away. Hillary has gone on a year and a half "woe-is-me" tour. She's made it about her more than the GOP ever has. This, combined with what may be continuing legal entanglements for her, keeps her in the news by default- before the GOP ever puts her in a campaign commercial. If she would have just shut the **** up to begin with, she wouldn't be mentioned at all at this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, stanpapi said:

The thing is, most losing presidential candidates DO go away. Hillary has gone on a year and a half "woe-is-me" tour. She's made it about her more than the GOP ever has. This, combined with what may be continuing legal entanglements for her, keeps her in the news by default- before the GOP ever puts her in a campaign commercial. If she would have just shut the **** up to begin with, she wouldn't be mentioned at all at this point. 

I'll give you Romney. Who else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, stanpapi said:

The thing is, most losing presidential candidates DO go away. 

Mitt Romney is running for Senate.

John McCain didn't retire.

John Kerry didn't retire, became Secretary of State.

Al Gore? The inconvenient truth is that he didn't go away either.

Literally the only reason I hear about the Clintons these days is because of TRUMP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Mitt Romney is running for Senate.

John McCain didn't retire.

John Kerry didn't retire, became Secretary of State.

Al Gore? The inconvenient truth is that he didn't go away either.

Literally the only reason I hear about the Clintons these days is because of TRUMP.

And a Presidential spouse died and the former President's gathered for her funeral because Mrs Bush was beloved by them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, ROMAD1 said:

And a Presidential spouse died and the former President's gathered for her funeral because Mrs Bush was beloved by them.  

Fair point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mtutiger said:

 

I remember thinking, post Nov 2016, that one of the positive benefits of a TRUMP Presidency was that we would never have to hear about Hillary Clinton anymore.

Oh, my - if only this had been true post Nov, 1960. :( !!

The thing with Hillary however is that we knew given her age and history that this was going to be her last run and she would be effectively 'over' if she lost - not withstanding whatever fantasies play well with the Fox audience.

And likewise more generally it is probably not defeats that make candidates go away as much as age, and like Hillary some candidates don't have enough ducks in a row to run for Prez until they are old enough that they are near their last go round. Luckily for us, Hills is 70. That's not an age that is much of an impediment to incumbency, but is also not an age when many pols are moving into new elected endeavors. The fact that sitting Senators can retain their seats after a failed run is sort of the anomaly here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mtutiger said:

Mitt Romney is running for Senate.

John McCain didn't retire.

John Kerry didn't retire, became Secretary of State.

Al Gore? The inconvenient truth is that he didn't go away either.

Literally the only reason I hear about the Clintons these days is because of TRUMP.

I don't mean they didn't go do something else. I meant they didn't sit and wallow in their own despair for months on end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tiger337 said:

I see Stan is still discussing his favorite woman.  

The first post in this thread referenced her. I responded to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stanpapi said:

The first post in this thread referenced her. I responded to it. 

because the first post in this thread references..... The GOP strategy, which is all about her.... which is really shocking

1st post:  on topic.  Yours:  Not on topic.  Hillary isn't running.

Nice try stud

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary is a transitional villain for Trumpers until a new one is created next year for the 2020 elections. Warren has been prepped by Fox propaganda to be the next villain, and I suspect they and Trumpers want her to be the Dem nominee. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, stanpapi said:

I don't mean they didn't go do something else. I meant they didn't sit and wallow in their own despair for months on end. 

OK? And what bearing does that have on any of our lives?

I had this debate with Melody a couple of months ago: largely, it only matters to those whose political identity is defined in part by their hatred of Hillary Clinton. 

She is out of the game, she is not in elected office nor does she hold any leadership position within the Dem Party. The rest of us have moved on. And if you don't like what she has to say, ignore her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

And if you don't like what she has to say, ignore her.

No, you don't ignore her, you magnify her.  That way the focus is on her rather than the current administration.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I think once you get outside it, most independents or swing voters are just going to turn off talk about Hillary. 

I tend to agree, but I do not doubt it will resonate with independents who are right leaning and/or hate the Clintons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Euphdude said:

Hillary's not running for anything this time, and the level of vitriol that existed 2 years ago isn't anywhere near those same levels today.  I can see anti-Hilary nostalgia working for a small subset of voters, but it's going to be a rallying cry to vote as it was in 2016.

But...but....Obama wants to take everyone's guns away. And Hillary is a crook...look a CAT!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,317
    • Total Posts
      2,855,593
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...