Support NeoGAF

[kirblar]

I don't know if it played a role in this election, but for the next census, will/should the democrats gerrymander just has much as republicans? Otherwise they won't win these fights.

Getting a new VRA passed at a national level that puts restrictions on gerrymandering is probably our best shot.

 

[B4s5C]

By not sending any support to this race, it sends a message that you won't be helped or supported by the DCCC if you decide to run for office in these extremely red districts which leads to Republicans strengthening their grip in these districts.

I'm glad James ran and I helped with his campaign doing phone and text banking. I will support other candidates similarly running in red districts. Saying no support whatsoever should be sent is extremely obtuse thinking.

 

[ElFly]

I'd argue that you need further movement on a national level (Trump's numbers dropping another 5% sort of thing) in order to put it within striking distance. Cash wasn't going to do enough to make up that 4%.

you know who disagrees? the republicans, who actually did support their candidate

given they won the election, I am gonna guess they were right and you and the DNC are wrong

 

[RPGCrazied]

It will be interesting what lessons Cruz takes from this in his approach to dealing with O’Rourke, and vice versa.

I hope he feels the same fury in Texas next year. I'm a Texan and will do everything in my power to replace Cruz. And damn right, we're mad and we are coming.

 

[kess]

Given that you're a rentier complicit in the system fucking us all over, do you have much ground to talk?

Is this some kind of GAF meta-joke now

 

[Smellycat]

I was incredibly confused by the thread title. 2004 elections?

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Wow look at how far to the center they had to go by selecting Thompson to be competitive.

Is this some kind of GAF meta-joke now

No, just referencing the fact that he said he's a commercial banker.

 

[Matt]

you know who disagrees? the republicans, who actually did support their candidate

given they won the election, I am gonna guess they were right and you and the DNC are wrong

The DNC did not make this decision.

 

[Roberto Larcos]

Given that you're a rentier complicit in the system fucking us all over, do you have much ground to talk?

Argumentum ad hominem.

Why not attempt to rebut El_Tiguere's points, instead?

 

[pigeon]

Argumentum ad hominem.

Why not attempt to rebut El_Tiguere's points, instead?

Cost-benefit analysis.

 

[Valhelm]

Thompson was certainly a good candidate for the district, which demonstrates how a lot of nuance can get lost in statements like "we need to run more centrist candidates if we want to win red districts." Each district has its own characteristics and there's no "one size fits all" candidate for red districts. Sanders cleaned up in the Plains states during the primaries, and part of the reason was that his more populist style plays well there. That doesn't mean you run a Sanders clone there, but you maybe do look for someone who can appeal in the area along similar lines and is a good cultural fit. A district in suburban Atlanta will have different requirements. People often have an understanding of a 50-state strategy as having some sort of slider that runs from "liberal" to "conservative" and you pick a candidate who fits at a point on that determined by the district's Partisan Voting Index, but that's not really how it works (and a 50-state strategy shouldn't just be about election-related decisions anyway).

Of course it goes without saying that we can't compromise on our core values. No running white supremacists to try and pick off seats.

I broadly agree with you, but we should remember that Sanders won with Midwestern Democrats, not Midwesterners at large. Data certainly suggests that Sanders is popular pretty much everywhere, but we don't know if somebody with his specific persona and platform can actually win elections in red states.

Could Sanders have done as well as Thompson in this district? I would be surprised.

 

[Cipherr]

The DNC did not make this decision.

It's not the DNC's job to do something with this race. But it seems like that might have been already explained to you.

It was the state party that denied money, not the DNC/DCCC

Is there a level of anger that is a proper classification to understand why you are providing an argument with no substance based on no data because of nebulous 'feelings' while consistently failing to understand it is the DCCC not the DNC and having no ideas as to what should have been done differently given the three criteria I listed on the other post?

Reading this having to be pointed out over and over is hilarious.

Almost as funny as thinking that blowing a truck ton of money in KANSAS is a good idea. Glad none of you guys have your hands on the valve. Party would be broke and destitute losing close races it could have flipped because they burned all their resources on +15 to +20 deficit races....

2020: "What do you mean we failed to flip Utah!? What about Idaho?"

 

[Aaron Strife]

Ah, I assumed they and ND had gone up to two cause of the oil boom lol. My mistake.

Even then though, it's pretty hard to gerrymander a state with only two districts. MT is roughly a 60-40 state in presidential elections so at most you could draw two districts that are both 60-40 GOP, but shoring up either district would only make the other one more competitive.

In any case, Montana's congressional lines are drawn by an independent commission, even though that's been a moot point for several decades. Some analysts have predicted it'll get a second district with the next Census. A West/East division would be pretty likely, and West Montana would probably elect a Democrat.

 

[ElFly]

Reading this having to be pointed out over and over is hilarious.

Almost as funny as thinking that blowing a truck ton of money in KANSAS is a good idea. Glad none of you guys have your hands on the valve. Party would be broke and destitute losing close races it could have flipped because they burned all their resources on +15 to +20 deficit races....

2020: "What do you mean we failed to flip Utah!? What about Idaho?"

losing close races that could have flipped compared to what

to the total congress and presidential domination the republicans have right now?

The DNC did not make this decision.

so the problem is that the GOP can get Ryan and Trump to help in the election but the DNC will wash their hands since this the state level party denied the funds

not sure why you people are so happy the party did not make the same effort the GOP did to win this

"yes we lost, but we didn't want to win anyway"

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

so the problem is that the GOP can get Ryan and Trump to help in the election but the DNC will wash their hands since this the state level party denied the funds

not sure why you people are so happy the party did not make the same effort the GOP did to win this

"yes we lost, but we didn't want to win anyway"

Again, the GOP can get Trump/Pence/Cruz to help because they are well-liked in the district. I have yet to hear anyone provide examples of prominent Democrats that could have helped in this race. There's Bernie, I guess, but nothing stopped him from going on his own. I'm not even sure he has that much appeal in the district - just that other Democrats have none at all.

Also, the thing is that the GOP should definitely not have had to make an effort in the first place! The fact that they felt they had to is a big deal. There are 100 districts that are less conservative than KS-04 - I'm pretty sure the representatives of those districts are starting to become a bit anxious about 2018.