The WalkAway Campaign... will it reform the Democratic Party or....???

Andrew Yang though has began something that could increase a general level of cooperation between the Dems and President Trump????

ANDREW YANG FOR PRESIDENT 2020

 

Listening to this right now..... interesting....



Thousands Leaving Democrat Party in #Walkaway Movement

 

Being right of Hitler is nothing to take pride in.

 

President Trump has stuck up for the nation of Israel and for the Jewish people more than any President since Truman.

 

The Democratic Party is devoid of anything even remotely redeemable.

They are determined to destroy our economy, our Constitution, and our liberty.

 

The walkaway movement is where closet Republicans walk out of the closet and switch sides politically.

If I were to walk away from the Democratic party, which I'm not going to do but for the sake of argument, I would become an Independent. I wouldn't join the Republicans.

So, I vote: No..... it will have to raise up a different political party

 

I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would associate with the Democratic Party.

But since you do, and wouldn't become a Republican, would you switch to Green, Socialist, Libertarian, or something else??

 

I would switch to the "Independence Party of New York(http://www.independencepartyny.org/)," for independence. Which is basically meaningless, but it just means I won't be voting in any party's primary. Just the general election.

 

Oh, and I think we must disagree on many issues if you don't support the Democratic party but I do.

 

I've been a Libertarian for 30 years; so, no we wouldn't agree on much. I disagree with Republicans almost as much.

For me, and I would argue any rational person, it has to come down to liberty and limited government.

Neither Republicans nor Democrats care much about either, but in general Republicans are better on freedom and fiscal matters.

 

Are you kidding about Republicans being fiscal??? Republicans spend every cent they can squeeze out of the system, and drain the treasury with spending and tax cuts, and without revenue to pay for government programs, it falls on a Democrat to fix the mess in the next election cycle.

 

The Establishment Republicans and Democrats - there's no difference. The debt is deliberate, and they just squabble over who is getting paid off.

In general though, the government programs you're referring to are unconstitutional and a recipe for fiscal collapse.

It is why our Founders rejected democracy and gave us a republic. Democracy is a terrible form of government, and always collapses into chaos and violence.

The handful of people who understand that can only be found in the Republican Party.

As I said though, I'm a libertarian.

 

When a Democrat says they want to secure our democracy that's a code word for getting rid of the electoral college and instituting mob rule. I don't support that decision, but I'm a democrat none-the-less.

I'm aware that you're a libertarian, but I wanted to challenge your opinion of what a republican is with my own opinion of what a republican is. It's a great avenue of debate.

 

The Russians keep trilling the Democrats and the Democrats keep taking the bait...hook line and sinker.

 

What do you mean by republican??

Big R, or little r?? Because there's a difference.

As Americans, we should all be little r republicans.

As I said, however, I don't see anyone in the Democratic Party who cares about the rule of law and the Constitution.

The only Democrat I can even stand to listen to is Tulsi Gabbard, but even she has been bending to leftist pressure - which is too bad, b/c she really is the only reasonable person I've seen on that side of the aisle.

 

No it won't.. the leftists will beat them down.

 

No, no difference, irrelevant. The Democratic Party has been shrinking since JFK when it once made up 51% of the electorate or had 51% of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats. That was in the era of the big tent Democratic Party when it had both a liberal and conservative wing. When Reagan came into office the Democratic Party had shrunk to below 40%, then averaged 35% until Obama as as of today or 15 Sep 2019, 31% of Americans identify or affiliate themselves with the Democrats. Still they are larger than the Republican Party which had 29% as of 15 Sep.

https://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/

The GOP fell below the 30% mark right after Eisenhower and has basically average 26% since then with some ups and downs of a few points.

The Walk Away Program isn't a factor. At one time both major parties had their conservative and liberal wings. Since then the GOP kicked out its liberals, the old Rockefeller liberal Republicans of the Northeast and the Democrats kicked out their conservative south. Then both parties have concentrated on kicking out their moderates. Now each party have become an elitist home for the far right and left. The hard core ideologues is all that is left in each.

There is no political home or party for middle America anymore. I don't mean geographical, I mean ideological, philosophy wise. Independents now make up 40% of the electorate, a lot of them fall somewhere in-between the ideology of the GOP and Democrats, some support one party one some issues and oppose them on others. Some are either further left or right of the hard core left and right of each major party.

The walk away program isn't going to effect the hard core, those who have left or are leaving would have done so with or without that program.

 

I don't consider the core of the Republican Party to be "right wing". By definition they are not to the right.

Most of them are neocon, big-government liberals. The budgets they produce aren't much different than the dems. They are by definition, leftists.

The same goes for the dems.

The truth is that the leadership in both parties are committed to big government control of our society, and a warmongering, pro-war, pro-Military Industrial Complex foreign policy.

In short, they are, and always have been, representatives for the Establishment in the political class.

The only divergence in either party is that there is still a small number of libertarian, pro-Constitution, pro-freedom types in the Republican Party.

There aren't any pro-America, pro-liberty people left in the Democratic Party. Their factions are more aligned with socialism and communism.

 

I don't think it's going to reform the Democratic party. If anything, it's going to leave the Democrats even further left than they already are. Consider, if all the moderates in the Democratic party leave the party, that only leaves the far left behind. And from what I've seen of these #walkaway videos, nearly all of these people aren't going independent, they are going over to the Republican party. (Oddly, ironically, contradictorily, however you want to put it, that pushes the Republican party to the left.) So I don't anticipate any third party movement from it.

Of all the Democratic candidates, it certainly looks like Tulsi Gabbard would have the best shot at a 3rd party run, but even she would still lose, taking most of her votes from the Dem and leaving Trump mostly undamaged. No one else generates any interest among the Democratic moderates. For a while, it looked like the Starbucks guy was going to run 3rd party, but I haven't heard any more about that.

 

If you look at the history of the Democratic Party, they averaged roughly 45% of the total electorate from FDR until Reagan. That was when the democratic party was known as the big tent party which had conservatives, moderate and liberal wings. Along that timeline they shed their conservatives then averaging around 35% from Reagan until Obama when the democrats began shedding their moderates, now then have approximately 30% of the electorate identify with them today.

https://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/

Yes, this certainly has left a hard core of leftist. The Republican Party on the other had averaged only around 27% of the electorate from Eisenhower until today which they have that 27%. It's independents that has grown. From 15% under Truman, to 20% under JFK, hitting the 30% level under Reagan, 35% under Obama and if Gallup has it right 41% of the electorate today.

So independents has grown, the Democrats have shrunk, The Republicans have stay close to the same going up a couple of points and dropping a couple of points throughout the years since IKE.

 

ZERO evidence that ANYONE "walked away" from the DP in 2018 which was RECORD HIGH Midterm turnout and no sign of that happening in 2020 either.

 

2018 was decided by the independents vote which in 2016 voted for the Republican congressional candidates 51-47 allowing the GOP to retain control of the House. In 2018 independents switched to the Democratic congressional candidates by a 54-42 margin. That's a huge switch.

Turnout wise, the Democratic Party held a 3 point advantage over the Republicans in 2016 in turnout, a 4 point advantage in 2018. If one wants to look at party affiliation in Nov 2016 it was Republicans 27%, Democrats, 31%. In Nov 2018 it was 26% Republican, 30% Democratic. That's the same percentages Gallup puts party identification today or as of August 2019. What this means in short is the Republicans must win the independent vote or lose the election since the democratic party is the larger of the two major parties. The Democrats only have to keep the independent vote close.

 

With the Dems having a 4 point edge over Republicans in party they still need at least another 4% of Independents to overcome the gerrymandering and voter suppression just to break even.

However that 8% deficit is shrinking owing to legal challenges and the aging Boomers and now Millennials becoming engaged in voting.

I am anticipating that 2020 could become another Blue Wave if the SCOTUS upholds the LA abortion law and effectively overturns RvW. If that happens then the math needs to redone based upon gender rather than party affiliation because even women who would never have an abortion for themselves are not going to stand aside and allow a bunch of old white men deprive them of their reproductive rights.

If that doesn't happen then your party identification numbers and requirements WRT Independents will hold up for 2020.

 

I'm thinking you're reading too much into gerrymandering. The districts of today don't reflect those which were drawn after 2010. People move, die and new voters register. Remember the Republicans picked up 63 seats in the house in 2010, ten years after those lines were drawn after 2000 census. The Democrats picked up 40 in 2018, that's eight years after the 2010 census and drawings. Also remember the Democrats gerrymandered the heck out of New York and Illinois while the GOP did the same for North Carolina and Texas.

I don't know how abortion would fit into all of this, but probably not as much as you suspect. Women who are pro life are probably Republicans and women who are pro choice Democrats. You might see a swing of a few points or maybe not. Those who abortion is a hot issue or abortion decided their votes are already aligned with the parties. My take on it anyway. Those who don't give abortion much thought probably would continue to do so as they have other hot issues to them which top abortion.

I think we have a habit of calling every ruling or every event a game changer. Sure, it changes the needle a few points up or down, then two, three weeks to a month later, everything is right back where it was prior to the event happening. That's been my experience with these things anyway.

 

Let's take a look at significant "game changer" events instead.

The impeachment of Nixon was a "game changer" IMO and it ensured a Dem win regardless as to who was on the ticket however the next game changer was Inflation and draconian Federal Reserves measures. That altered the outlook of Americans and opened the door to the best Acting President this nation has ever had.

He was a contradiction in that he hated war and nuclear weapons but he was prepared to bankrupt the nation with military spending. The backlash from that Cold War spending gave rise to the next game changer who was Ross Perot. His warnings about NAFTA were biblical. However the tech boom game changer overshadowed the nefarious GOP shenanigans with fiscal deregulations that began during that time and would only be felt a decade and a half later.

The 9/11 terrorist attack was another game changer in significant ways because it opened the door to ruthless political exploitation of We the People and continued to hide the fiscal malfeasance policies right up to the end of the Bush/Cheney regime. It was during this period that the white nationalists came to power with their message of divisiveness. (Do you GOP or Terrorist?) When the 2008 economic collapse game changer occurred the political ramifications would not be felt for another 2 years.

However the election of Obama was a game changer that empowered those white nationalists to ramp up their divisive messaging and there was a massive increase in their numbers and their militancy. The 2010 game changer was the anger of We the People taken out on the Dems when it was the Republicans who were to blame for the fiscal malfeasance that caused the 2008 economic collapse. That was probably that single largest financial crime in the history of the world and not a single person has ever been indicted for it thanks to the GOP. There is another aspect to this fiscal malfeasance that will only result in a game changer later on.

The next game changer was the GOP being handed power they never deserved in 2010 and abusing it to the point of gerrymandering and voter suppression on an unprecedented scale. It caught the Dems out and they really did not react to it because they didn't understand the ramifications any better than they understood the ramifications of the fiscal malfeasance policies.

The GOP and the Wall Street Casino set up their power base behind the scenes and the only misstep was Mittless. They realized that mistake and began to set up the next game changer for 2016 with an utterly ruthless exploitation of Congressional Power to destroy Hillary as a viable candidate so that even someone as clueless as Mittless could be their puppet in the Oval office.

The 2016 primaries were a game changer but not because of who won but who lost. Bernie Sanders lost the nomination but began the Progressive Revolution game changer. With the BLOTUS their game changer almost failed but thanks to Voter Suppression in 2 states they just managed to rig their election in their favor.

Now is when the GOP game changer strategy starts to fall apart because they had not factored in the sheer incompetence of the BLOTUS. However the GOP's goal of seizing control over the SCOTUS was all that mattered and they had Pence as backup so they were not too worried.

Which brings us back to why abortion is a game changer. Three MILLION women took to the streets to protest the inauguration of the BLOTUS. The Dem party has FLOODED for VOLUNTEERS in January of 2017 and the Progressive Revolution began. Bernie's 2016 message that exposed the GOP fiscal malfeasance became the motivation for the Progressives.

Throughout 2017 the GOP margins in deep red states began to shrink dramatically in special elections and then the Dems won in Alabama and they wiped out a GOP legislative majority in Virginia. No one recognized this game changer but it was real. It powered through into 2018 and at the end of the midterms the Progressives had regained 40% of all seats lost to the GOP since 2010.

Women are sick and tired of being overworked, underpaid and having their rights obstructed. They are organized, motivated and not going to settle for less than equality. They are well aware of the ongoing threats to their reproductive rights, especially amongst the Millennials, and with the imposition of a shitstain like Kavanuagh to the bench that was perceived as a direct attack. With the court taking up the LA case it is clear that women understand that the GOP controlling the SCOTUS is bad for them long term. If the decision is rendered in favor of LA then nothing will stop them in 2020.

Your point about positions on abortion being baked into the party mix is largely accurate but it will be the Independents who decide this outcome. Women are the largest voting bloc and that makes the largest bloc of the Independents too. So let's just look at that math based upon Pew's data.

https://www.people-press.org/2019/03/14/political-independents-who-they-are-what-they-think/

Of the 13% of Independents who Lean-R 36% are women which comes to 4.7% of the electorate.

For the 11% that Lean-D 51% are women which comes to 5.61% of the electorate.

So what we have is a distinct advantage in terms of both numbers and age amongst Independents towards women.

Yes, you are correct that they are not single issue voters and these numbers are not exact predictions but when you combine these numbers with the results from 2017 and 2018 there is a distinct trend emerging.