• Republican Karen Handel has won Georgia's special election
    92 replies, posted
i didnt even know about the election until after it was over
[QUOTE=Whoaly;52385422]Only after spending twice as much as the GOP. I expect that if the Republicans had bothered to match or exceed Democratic efforts (which they obviously didn't think was necessary) this would have been a much different result.[/QUOTE] [URL="https://ballotpedia.org/South_Carolina%27s_5th_Congressional_District_special_election,_2017"]but Republican Ralph Norman cleanly outspent Parnell in SC-05, and he only got a 3 point lead in a place with a supposed +20 lean in his favor.[/URL] and he had far more personal funds to put into the campaign, too. at the least you've gotta admit that campaigns across the board are getting middling results when they really shouldn't be.
[QUOTE=IFawDown;52384057]How awfully bigoted of you[/QUOTE] Tolerance is a two-way street. Cletuses don't show any, so they don't get any.
[QUOTE=Gummylamb;52385347]Nobody is surprised that ignorance and reactionary conservatism trumped education and compassion, but why laugh?[/QUOTE] Probably because "Ignorance and reactionary conservatism trumping education and compassion" sums up Komodoh to a T.
[QUOTE=CanUBe;52385602]Tolerance is a two-way street. Cletuses don't show any, so they don't get any.[/QUOTE] Ignorant, too. This district is a suburb of Atlanta and pretty well off, and over 56% of the district graduated college. You can disagree with them, but to write these people off as dumb and ignorant because they disagree with you politically just makes you look dumb and ignorant. How is not supporting a raised minimum wage a litmus test for whether someone is intolerant and "irreparably stupid", and therefor can throw derogatory slurs at them without care? What if their position is more nuanced than a for/against checkbox?
[QUOTE=IFawDown;52385919]Ignorant, too. This district is a suburb of Atlanta and pretty well off, and over 56% of the district graduated college. You can disagree with them, but to write these people off as dumb and ignorant because they disagree with you politically just makes you look dumb and ignorant. How is not supporting a raised minimum wage a litmus test for whether someone is intolerant and "irreparably stupid", and therefor can throw derogatory slurs at them without care? What if their position is more nuanced than a for/against checkbox?[/QUOTE] I don't care if their position is "nuanced" they are voting against their own interests. Even if they for some reason don't support a "[B]livable[/B] wage" (her words not mine) they're gonna get fucked in the ass by climate change, a process Republicans wholeheartedly support. Therefore they are dumb and ignorant regardless of any education they may have recieved. Obviously college is wasted on these stupid hicks.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;52385543][img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCz4BubUMAIgRh-.jpg[/img] :v: Shit, how do I thumbnail?????[/QUOTE] use [t] tags instead of [img] tags
There's no fucking way ossof lost this fairly tbh. He had far more pull than this lady did, ESPECIALLY after she flat out said you don't deserve to survive on a 40 hour work week. I don't get it.
Do we have voting analysis? I would like to see who voted democrat and Republican based on Age bracket, income, male/female etc.
[QUOTE=Itachi_Crow;52386129]There's no fucking way ossof lost this fairly tbh. He had far more pull than this lady did, ESPECIALLY after she flat out said you don't deserve to survive on a 40 hour work week. I don't get it.[/QUOTE] Never underestimate the general stupidity of the Republican vote bank, as in this case where they literally voted for a woman who doesn't believe in paying livable wages. They're also pretty much raised to vote party in the case of most moderate and diehard supporters and it will take a chunk for those guys to vote anything other than Republican. Ossoff did a good job for all that he was fighting for a solid red district that was also gerrymandered to hell and back. Frankly, outlawing gerrymandering and applying harsh penalties after redrawing of the voting districts will go a long way to prevent this shit from happening.
[QUOTE=IFawDown;52385919]Ignorant, too. This district is a suburb of Atlanta and pretty well off, and over 56% of the district graduated college. You can disagree with them, but to write these people off as dumb and ignorant because they disagree with you politically just makes you look dumb and ignorant. How is not supporting a raised minimum wage a litmus test for whether someone is intolerant and "irreparably stupid", and therefor can throw derogatory slurs at them without care? What if their position is more nuanced than a for/against checkbox?[/QUOTE] "Nuanced" means selfish or stupid in this situation. There's objectively no sensible reason to be against raising minimum wage. Average overall wages have remained stagnant in spite of the fact that productivity has increased and the economy has been growing. In spite of the fact that the economy has been growing and productivity has increased, industries that have been mostly responsible for this have had less than stellar performance at actually creating jobs. Minimum wage has not actually been keeping up with inflation either, and the cost of living has increased by something like 65-70% over the last 25 years. Underemployment has been a severe issue for us since the Great Recession hit. Workers are also being expected to carry more obligations that cut into their lives (we don't have rational work-life policies in this country), and they're also suffering from more stress and exhaustion as a consequence (which carries its own health issues; prolonged stress is terrible for you psychologically and physically). It's pretty fucking simple: you either want people in this country to have some means of financial stability and jobs that are able to decently utilize them without being overbearing, be able to have expanded access to healthcare so they'll be healthy and will raise healthy families, be able to have expanded access to schooling (good-quality schooling at that, but the fact that the United States needs to completely change its educational system altogether is another topic entirely) so they won't be knuckle-dragging idiots who haven't got a modicum of practical knowledge to work with... or you don't. When you're dealing with a consumer-based economy like the United States', it's obviously important to make sure that consumers can afford to (you know) consume. How is robbing them of a proper minimum wage, healthcare, decent education, etc. going to help anything for anybody (except maybe a handful of people who know of a way they can enrich themselves in the process)? Answer: it's not. I'd also like to see the statistics about how the college-educated people voted in this situation, since college-educated people are typically more liberal/progressive than uneducated people are.
Yeah we lost but we won!
[QUOTE=Itachi_Crow;52386129]There's no fucking way ossof lost this fairly tbh. He had far more pull than this lady did, ESPECIALLY after she flat out said you don't deserve to survive on a 40 hour work week. I don't get it.[/QUOTE] A lot of the people who vote red literally believe that if you're not making it on your current wages, you just need to work harder. And that it's entirely your own fault, nobody else, except the government, that you're poor.
I wouldn't necessarily blame the voters (though Handel is an awful candidate). Democrats are going to continue to lose so long as they keep running as centrist corporatists, which is what Ossof did.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;52385408]Let me put it another way: the democrats have lost [B]every[/B] special Congressional election since Trump's presidency began, and you can't deny that the democrats were pushing for an actual win. The democrats still have the same flawed assumptions that lost them the 2016 election: that there is a large contingent of Romney republicans so disgusted by Trump that it will put Red states in play.[/QUOTE] The Democrats have lost special elections in red districts? Really makes u think. That being said, [URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/06/21/special-elections-are-still-painting-a-good-picture-for-democrats-overall/?utm_term=.89a048e77865"]they are over-performing[/URL]. You and Jordax can stop concern-trolling over how Democrats must feel right now.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52386445]I wouldn't necessarily blame the voters (though Handel is an awful candidate). Democrats are going to continue to lose so long as they keep running as centrist corporatists, which is what Ossof did.[/QUOTE] Yep
[QUOTE=Jordax;52385454]And I thought they said last year that they didn't want to be the party of big money anymore, yeah right, that's why they made this the single most expensive congressional district vote of all time.... [/QUOTE] When the Republican presidents approval rating is hovering in the high-30's you'd be stupid not to take the opportunity to invest in special elections and seeing how much you can gain. [QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52386445]I wouldn't necessarily blame the voters (though Handel is an awful candidate). Democrats are going to continue to lose so long as they keep running as centrist corporatists, which is what Ossof did.[/QUOTE] It's really easy to make this point when the centrist candidate loses in an upset, but when they see the biggest gains in 40 years it's hard to argue that "generic Progressive" would have done better based on literally no evidence. District 6 is suburban, affluent, and deeply red. I don't think a Sanders-esque candidate would have done much better.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52386468]When the Republican presidents approval rating is hovering in the high-30's you'd be stupid not to take the opportunity to invest in special elections and seeing how much you can gain. It's really easy to make this point when the centrist candidate loses in an upset, but when they see the biggest gains in 40 years it's hard to argue that "generic Progressive" would have done better based on literally no evidence. District 6 is suburban, affluent, and deeply red. I don't think a Sanders-esque candidate would have done much better.[/QUOTE] "The biggest gains in 40 years" means absolutely nothing if they can't win. Congratulations, Ossof, you came marginally close to beating the lady who is on the record saying she doesn't support a livable wage. Top job. Democrats have lost over 1,000 seats under Obama. Milquetoast neoliberalism is a losing strategy.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52386445]I wouldn't necessarily blame the voters (though Handel is an awful candidate). Democrats are going to continue to lose so long as they keep running as centrist corporatists, which is what Ossof did.[/QUOTE] Conversely, I think that's the only chance they have at winning these elections. As disappointing as that is.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52386522]"The biggest gains in 40 years" means absolutely nothing if they can't win. Congratulations, Ossof, you came marginally close to beating the lady who is on the record saying she doesn't support a livable wage. Top job. Democrats have lost over 1,000 seats under Obama. Milquetoast neoliberalism is a losing strategy.[/QUOTE] Losses under Obama, who is less neoliberal than the last Democratic President (Clinton) and far less neoliberal than the Republicans, is evidence that neoliberalism is a bad political position. This argument doesn't really convince me.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52386468]When the Republican presidents approval rating is hovering in the high-30's you'd be stupid not to take the opportunity to invest in special elections and seeing how much you can gain. It's really easy to make this point when the centrist candidate loses in an upset, but when they see the biggest gains in 40 years it's hard to argue that "generic Progressive" would have done better based on literally no evidence. District 6 is suburban, affluent, and deeply red. I don't think a Sanders-esque candidate would have done much better.[/QUOTE] Then why blow more than 30 million dollars on a singular congressional vote when your party has its worst fundraising month in 14 years? That sends more of the message of ''We have no idea how to handle your donations at all'' instead of ''We are totally making progress with your donations, 2018 is our year la, just give us even more money!''. It just seems like a piss-poor investment to break a spending record on a congressional vote, only to end up 24 votes down compared to a year prior when the goal was upping the voters for your side, but that could just be me. Maybe some of those donors just love the idea of pissing money away. And maybe some supposed political analysts are massive sadomasochists by the looks of it.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52386522]"The biggest gains in 40 years" means absolutely nothing if they can't win. Congratulations, Ossof, you came marginally close to beating the lady who is on the record saying she doesn't support a livable wage. Top job. Democrats have lost over 1,000 seats under Obama. Milquetoast neoliberalism is a losing strategy.[/QUOTE] I just don't see why you are so confident that Generic Progressive would have won, or even would have done better. [QUOTE=Jordax;52386857]Then why blow more than 30 million dollars on a singular congressional vote when your party has its worst fundraising month in 14 years? That sends more of the message of ''We have no idea how to handle your donations at all'' instead of ''We are totally making progress with your donations, 2018 is our year la, just give us even more money!''. It just seems like a piss-poor investment to break a spending record on a congressional vote, only to end up 24 votes down compared to a year prior when the goal was upping the voters for your side, but that could just be me. Maybe some of those donors just love the idea of pissing money away. And maybe some supposed political analysts are massive sadomasochists by the looks of it.[/QUOTE] Because they obviously thought they could win. The fact that they came within 3 points shows that there was definitely a chance of it happening. It's the narrowest margin that district has ever seen. You aren't going to turn deep red counties or districts red in one special election. This could be part of laying the ground work for future Democratic options that might help them keep the district in play instead of a Republican washout which it has been historically. As far as sadomasochism goes, Republican voters currently hold the monopoly on that as of November 2016. [editline]21st June 2017[/editline] From [URL="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-can-democrats-win-georgia-6-ossoff-handel/"]538[/URL][QUOTE] As compared to the 2016 presidential results, Democrats have outperformed their benchmarks by an average of 14 percentage points so far across the four GOP-held districts to have held special elections to date. As compared to the 2012 presidential election, their overperformance is even larger, at almost 18 points. They’ve also outperformed their results from the 2016 and 2014 U.S. House elections by roughly 11 points, after one accounts for the fact that the special elections were open-seat races rather than being held against incumbents.[/QUOTE] "Democrats spent all this money and accomplished nothing what losers" is Fake News.
[QUOTE=Jordax;52386857]Then why blow more than 30 million dollars on a singular congressional vote when your party has its worst fundraising month in 14 years? [/QUOTE] Where have you heard this? To my knowledge, congressional democratic fundraising is [url=http://time.com/4784229/campaign-finance-democrats-online/]the best[/url] it's been in years
Isn't she the dipshit who said she doesn't support a living wage? This really isn't surprising though since Georgia is a deeply Red State
[QUOTE=Tarver;52386230]Yeah we lost but we won![/QUOTE] You know I guess I'm not surprised that conservatives are incapable of seeing past the surface level.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52386905]From [URL="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-can-democrats-win-georgia-6-ossoff-handel/"]538[/URL] "Democrats spent all this money and accomplished nothing what losers" is Fake News.[/QUOTE] [IMG]https://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/chat-dem-blame-0621-1.png?quality=90&strip=info&w=575&ssl=1[/IMG] "nope no problem for Republicans here"
[QUOTE=Gummylamb;52387413]You know I guess I'm not surprised that conservatives are incapable of seeing past the surface level.[/QUOTE] And I'm not surprised to see Liberals looking for a participation trophy for coming up short
[QUOTE=Tarver;52389342]And I'm not surprised to see Liberals looking for a participation trophy for coming up short[/QUOTE] Cool strawman my friend.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52389913]Cool strawman my friend.[/QUOTE] :) [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Why reply - Shit history" - Reagy))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Tarver;52386230]Yeah we lost but we won![/QUOTE] They voted for a woman who is against the ACA, doesn't support a living wage, opposes abortion and stem cell research, thinks the federal government shouldn't try and fight climate change, thinks that gays don't have a right to get married and be treated like normal people, and who has been described (accurately) as a "Palin-style conservative". If they want to destroy themselves the hard way, cool. We don't give a fuck about them lol, just don't drag the rest of us down with that sort of degeneracy please.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.