It’s Official: Democrats Are Performing Better After The Abortion Ruling

Its about results for me. The total sum of your list is a lower quality of life for the poor and middle. The wording is pretty. "Inflation reduction" is the package. The product is "More inflation"

 

I think that's a sound analysis. But the mid-terms have usually been a referendum on the incumbent President. It doesn't look like that will be the case this time. It looks every day more and more like a referendum on Trump.

The way this usually works is that democrats are motivated to vote when the President is a Republican, but not so much when it's a Democrat with low approval ratings. Republicans have typically been a constant in the equation, and Democrats the variable. So if Democrats make this about Trump, and about topics like Roe v Wade, they have a shot at turning all predictions upside down.

The Democrats' wet dream is that Trump declares he is running before the mid-terms. If he does, I predict Democrats will KEEP the house. If he doesn't... it looks 50-50 to me.

 

Here’s what I based my house forecast on. There are 59 competitive, switchable, at risk districts. Currently held by 43 Democrats and 16 Republicans. Safe seats as of 2 Sep, 178 Democratic, 198 Republican. Probable net gain for the Republicans is 15-20 seats. Which would give the GOP control of the house with the majority over the Democrats somewhere between 229-206 to 234-201.


The Republicans have an advantage due to 31 house democrats either retiring or running for higher office vs. 18 for the Republicans. These open seats are much easier to switch or flip than beating an incumbent. Add to that that the Republicans have a 20-seat advantage in safe seats/districts, it hard for me to see how the Democrats can retain the house. The Republicans need to win 20 out of the 59 competitive/at risk seats to reach 218, the democrats need 40 out of the 59.


Of course, all of this is dynamic and changes. But as of today, I don’t see the democrats retaining the house. Then again, who knows what Trump’s next move is or what the heck he’ll do. Yeah, if Trump were to announce he is running in 2024, that might do it. A month ago, the Republicans led in the enthusiasm gap by 10 points about voting in this midterm, the Democrats now has tied it today.


It does seem to me; this midterm has become an election about Trump and little else. All good news for the Democrats.

 

Again, I think your analysis is well-thought out. But I feel this time we're before a different animal. Sarah Palin lost in Alaska against somebody who is not an incumbent in a red state. She lost because she's an extremist. If she hadn't run, I strongly believe that a moderate Republican would have won (I know it's a weird system they have in Alaska but... even so... the non-incumbent democrat got more than 50% of the votes) I think even Republicans are starting to grow weary of extremists.

So I think your analysis is great, but you should factor in how extreme the Republican candidates are. In close races, I feel that extremist pro-Trump candidates, even incumbents, will have a harder time than usual.

 

538....

 

ok good but he did not call out BLM or ANTIFA, who were very destructive? I will not vote for either, but I call it like I see it

 

I agree on Alaska. Rank choice voting is weird as the peoples first choice can lose to their second choice if that makes sense. Senate wise is where the extreme candidate really shows up. Oz in PA, Masters in AZ, Vance in OH, Budd in NC, Walker here in GA. In the house, 435 races vs. 35 in the senate. The GOP also has 21 seats to defend in the senate to 14 for the Democrats. The house it’s the democrats with the most seats to defend 222-213. Different dynamics, district wise vs. statewide races. Extreme candidates have a lot better chances of winning in the smaller districts than any statewide election.


I think the bottom line is the more the Democrats can keep this election about Trump and not about inflation, rising prices etc. The better they’ll do.

 

Biden distinctively spoke that he was against all forms of violence all forms

 

of course, cause it's sad people want to force women and little girls to have their rapists babies

in your example, that is called a c-section, and the baby survives most times

 

"Abortion is abortion"

yes, miscarriages are abortions too, just not medically induced, but still abortion and most women have had many of them, some without even knowing

 

There are a lot more elective abortions in the earlier terms. Late-term abortions are usually necessary for a medical reason. You can't pretend these situations are one and the same. You also can't pretend that you get to define how abortion should make a person feel and that they must be pretending if they feel differently. Speak as righteously as you want, all you're doing is mimicking the same sentiment that a pro-choicer may feel about the right to choose.

 

I think a lot of young women who might not have been that interested in voting ( I wasn't, when i was young ) now might be, at the urging of their parents, and older friends, to get on the voting band wagon. I think that is going to tip the scales, if not in 2022, it might in the senate races, and definitely in 2024.

 

LIke I said, you do not understand what 'results' means. It's not that simple, politics never is.

Understanding national politics is a far more complex thing that running a small business.

You apparently can't perceive the deeper dynamic forces that are in play. You understanding of the subject is simplistic, it's evidenced by your word choices, how you frame your arguments.

Not much I can do about it. I'm frankly exhausted trying to point complexities out to you. It's like, in one ear, out the other.

Later.

 

he calls out MAGA but not anyone else that is why the lying coward is getting crap for his comments and is walking the comments back

 

I’d say very poor general election quality candidates, Trump endorsed and chosen will let the Democrats retain the senate. Oz in Ohio, Budd in NC, Masters in AZ, Walker in GA, Vance in OH are but some of the poor quality candidates Trump has chosen. Abortion will probably get a lot of democrats off their butts to vote, but as for independents changing their minds over abortion, don’t look for that. The Trump factor plays a much larger role among independents. Gas prices coming down helps the democrats also.


I think if one looks at how independents plan on voting this November, on 25 June they planned on voting Republican 44-34 and on 25 July 45-35 a month after the abortion ruling. But today it’s 42-39 Republican. The timing of the movement shows in my opinion that it is the Trump factor and not abortion that was the major cause of the independent voter shift. As I stated, if it was abortion one would expect that shift to take effect immediately after the SCOTUS ruling. Not begin a month after when Trump became the number one news story. All the headlines about Trump just reinforced and reminded independents why and how much they disliked him.

 

And who is giving him this 'crap' of which you speak? Partisans only.

MAGA is President influenced. BLM is cops shooting unarmed blacks influenced.

In terms of the body politic, the former is far more significant, and worthy of a Presidential speech, the latter is filed in the general subject of riots, matter for DOJ's attention, and Biden's statement on violence is inclusive of all types of violence. of which BLM riots are but one. If he had to mention that one, he'd mention them all and have to go down a long list, (because, unless you are a partisan, why single one out over others?) and that is an impractical and thus unreasonable demand on a President's speech.

Your focus on it is very partisan and unreasonable conflation of BLM riots with a destructive President motivated political movement.

Your very word choices which I highlighted proves the above.

But, if facts mean anything to you, you'll have to drop the partisan lens to see it, because, know that the two are not equal.

 

partisan, I am not a fan of Trump, but I am also not a fan of the retard in office, I am an independent, you know the ones that decide elections and I see all the lies and hate coming from both sides, but the left is 2faced because they will not call out the other set of terrorists, we have been watching and we vote

 

You have taken a partisan position, and my comment stands.

Hate without reason is a sin.

Loathing for reason is just.

It appears you are unable to discern the difference.

I am a democrat, and I do not 'hate' Trump, I loathe him for good reason, and that's not a sin, nor a lie, it's just.

The MAGA movement has proven to be a destructive movement, given that it's fruition was observed on 1/6.

That is not a lie.

The BLM riots have nothing to do with politics, and have everything to do with a collective reaction to cops shooting unarmed blacks. That falls under the general heading of crime, and any general comment on being against crime is inclusive of all crime. If you want to make it a political issue that IS partisanship, independent or not.

So, when you say 'we vote', what are you saying? Are you saying you are going to vote for the guy who inspired 1/6 and racist cops shooting unarmed blacks?

That makes no sense.

 

I think there are incumbent extremists who are vulnerable. Jim Jordan is probably safe in a deep-red Trumpist district, but Scott Perry comes to mind as an incumbent who might be vulnerable due to his extremist views.

 

Well DUH but so what? Prove that late term are usually for the health and life of the mother. And do you believe they should be restricted for ONLY the life of the mother or serious permanent injury to her that cannot be prevented by any other means? Or do you believe a mother should be able to kill her unborn baby for any reason she chooses even up to the moment of birth?

 

What is the distinction you are trying to make between hating and to loathe?

Synonyms & Antonyms for hate
Synonyms: Noun

• abhorrence,
• abomination,
• detestation,
• execration,
• hatred,
• loathing

 

Yepp.

 

No they are not by any medical of scientific definition. But then your side constantly has to try and change the meanings of words in order to defend your position. Why is that?

 

Do you believe the moment before a baby who was the product of a rape is about to be born the mother should be able to decide to kill it instead? Do you put that human LIFE below your concerns for the mothers FEELINGS?

There is no requirement that a woman who is the victim of rape even become pregnant it is preventable and rape is 1% of all abortions.

Deal with the 99%

What does it say about us as a people/society when wanting to let mothers indiscriminately up to the moment of birth kill their unborn babies is what is giving them a lift?

 

If a compromise involved a late-term abortion ban that had exceptions for the mother's health and the discovery of any birth defects, I would be agreeable to it.