November Election Thread

[_Kevin Graham]

I think not impeaching Trump out of political considerations, much like not prosecuting Bush-era architects of torture, corrupts the system and creates an incentive for future impeachable offenses from future presidents. I'd argue Nixon being pardoned already did that to an extent and we continue to pay a price for it. In the case of Trump, the way in which he has turned his presidency into cash-cow for his businesses needs to be stopped or we're never going to see the end of it. The public already seems numb to the Trump Org being set up to be a bribery machine. This will not end with Trump unless Trump is repudiated as harshly as possible.

There are a lengthy list of serious, impeachable offenses regarding the Trump admin. They do indeed start with matters related to Russia, but just as seriously extend into all manners of corruption that our government was literally designed to stop.

Full agreement here. Aren't Republicans always babbling about us being a nation of laws? Well, let's enforce them, right? Why go after the poor brown people who speak Spanish for one crime and then give the entitled white billionaire a pass on a multiplicity of offenses just because it isn't politically smart or what not? What does that say about us as a country>?

[_EAllusion]

The reason Democrats are doing as well as they are is that they ran on something positive: health care. They didn’t focus on being anti-Trump. If they take the House today, I think there is a good lesson to be learned there.

The main thing I'd fault Democrats with strategy wise over the past 25 years is a monomaniacal, short-term focus on winning the next major federal election while not appreciating the long-game and how that long-game determines what politicians and policies win out in the end. It's wise to take a slightly lower odds of winning in 2020 if it means you also lower the odds of another Donald Trump getting elected over the next 50 years. Trying to brush past it is how you end up being crushed under another Trump-esque presidency that has learned there is no political cost to abuse of public office for personal and political gain.

Health care is a better issue for Democrats to run on than Trump-corruption. For one, the news already does most of the campaigning on the latter for them, so focusing on that doesn't move the needle much. But doing the right thing, meaning creating as high of a cost as possible to committing impeachable offenses, will benefit them in the future.

[_EAllusion]

Disagreeing with US intelligence agencies isn't an impeachable offense. Trump's consistent running of interference for Russian aggression towards the US, however, is quite concerning and is a tell about his level of complicity in said aggression. The best case scenario is he does this because he likes Russian interference on his behalf and would prefer it to continue. But the best case scenario is almost certainly not the case.

[_EAllusion]

Health care is a better issue for Democrats to run on than Trump-corruption. For one, the news already does most of the campaigning on the latter for them, so focusing on that doesn't move the needle much. But doing the right thing, meaning creating as high of a cost as possible to committing impeachable offenses, will benefit them in the future.

I should add here that whether Democrats run on health care or Trump corruption as a primary messaging strategy will affect the actual outcome of the presidential election a little. Voter behavior doesn't deferentially move that much on that kind thing. Trump's likely either to win or lose regardless of that choice. It's a question of different risk profiles. And if Trump is going to lose, it is far better that the message the public has in mind about that is that Trump's impeachable behavior is unacceptable in a politician.

Because people who follow politics and the news closely are probably keenly aware of Trump corruption stories - though the sheer volume of them might challenge their ability to remember and keep them straight - it's easy to think the public knows about this stuff. But, the thing is, they really don't. Back in the real world, those stories just don't have that much penetrance yet. Our current state is like where Nixon was before the ball really started rolling against him. Democrats armed with the full investigative power of Congress can really start turning the screws on stories that could significantly shift just how much pressure Senators will feel to convict ahead of 2020.

Clinton was badly damaged by ginned up pseudo-scandals. It's not implausible that actual ones out of the Trump admin might matter more once there is Clinton-level intensity of coverage due to them being, you know, true and Democrats taking real action. I'm mostly curious about what it would take for Trump to be covered like Clinton was.

[_Kevin Graham]

I wish the Democrats had passed legislation making Gerrymandering more difficult if not impossible, when they had the power to do so. Like you said, they weren't playing the long game at all.

[_subgenius]

I wish the Democrats had passed legislation making Gerrymandering more difficult if not impossible, when they had the power to do so. Like you said, they weren't playing the long game at all.

It appears that you may misunderstand the consequences of gerrymandering, and how both parties, and voters ultimately, always benefit from it.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Oooo... Guam just elected its first female Governor:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing ... ed-in-guam

Is this the real Year of the Woman?

- Doc

[_Water Dog]

The game is on!

[_EAllusion]

I wish the Democrats had passed legislation making Gerrymandering more difficult if not impossible, when they had the power to do so. Like you said, they weren't playing the long game at all.

It appears that you may misunderstand the consequences of gerrymandering, and how both parties, and voters ultimately, always benefit from it.

Actually, cancer is good.

- a brain-genius.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Florida is giving me a heart attack with the Governor's race. Lol, the lead just switched to DeSantis. I kind of thought Gillum would lock this one down. We'll see if the metro areas can offset the rural areas.

- Doc