How the #Resistance Could Win the House for Democrats in 2018

Anti-Trump Resistance (William Fowler / Flickr / CC / Cropped)

Fans of the so-called “Resistance” received a subtle piece of good news on Friday. MSNBC, the furthest left of the cable news outlets, won the battle for prime time ratings on Thursday evening, and came a close second to Fox in overall viewers. (CNN was third in both categories.)

That is just one data point, but it is one more piece of evidence that the Democratic base is more active, more engaged, and more willing to sit through agitprop than Republicans.

Democrats defend some of their tactics — such as disrupting town hall meetings — by claiming that they are simply doing what the Tea Party did in 2009-10. That is hardly an accurate parallel. It would have been hard to find a Tea Partier who was paid to leave work to protest, or who attacked innocent people in a riot.

But they do share one thing with the Tea Party: the “Resistance” is a political force somewhat outside the party structure, and hence more effective.

Still, Democrats have a tough hill to climb. They must defend 25 Senate seats (including the two “independent” Senators), ten of which are in states that Donald Trump won. Republicans will only have to defend eight seats.

In the House, Democrats need 24 seats to bring Nancy Pelosi the Speaker’s gavel. But they are still competing on a map that was drawn after the 2010 Republican sweep, which included state legislators and governor’s mansions.

In 2010, Republicans were largely competing on home turf. Many of the Democrats they unseated were moderates, some of whom had been handpicked to run in 2006 by Rahm Emanuel. Unlike the Democrats’ present leadership, Emanuel understood that winning the House meant winning in conservative districts, which meant choosing more conservative Democratic candidates. But forcing them to vote for Obamacare left them vulnerable to the Tea Party.

In 2018, Democrats are not very competitive outside traditionally liberal districts. Their hysteria, and profanity, is alienating the moderate voters they need to reach.

The one place where Democrats may do well is in California, because it was one of the few states to draw its new, post-2010 districts in ways that benefited Democrats. (California used a supposedly non-partisan commission to draw its map, but Democrats found ways to game it.)

Democrats are targeting seven out of the state’s 14 Republican representatives, in districts won by Hillary Clinton. And they have momentum: the Los Angeles Times reports that 800 left-wing activists turned out this week for a “town hall” for Rep. Mimi Walters (R-CA), which was held in her absence.

There is no unifying theme to the “Resistance” yet, other than opposition to all things Trump. But that may be enough, unless Republicans can muster enough enthusiasm among their own base.

That may prove to be a challenge. Trump voters still support him, but many are decidedly less enthusiastic about supporting Republicans in Congress who have clashed with the White House, or who seem to be too eager to make “swamp”-like deals with the Democrats.

Rep Darrell Issa (R-CA) illustrates the general dilemma: he is seen as shifting left to counter a Democratic challenge, but may lose the core conservative voters he needs in the process. They may simply stay home.

Democrats are targeting 61 districts nationwide. They have not won a single special election since November, but they are moving closer.

To hold the House, Republicans will need to do more than remind voters of the danger of Pelosi returning to power. They will need to pass major bills on health care and tax cuts. And they will need President Trump to be in fighting form.

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/05/12/resistance-win-house...

Views: 24

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

ALERT ALERT

Bill and Hillary Clinton Brutally
Mocked After Defending

View image on Twitter

Crooked Bill and Hillary Clinton were brutally mocked Monday after defending the Clinton Foundation on social media.

The Clinton Foundation’s official Twitter account tweeted Saturday, “ICYMI: President @BillClinton wrote on Facebook this week about our work improving lives in the United States and around the world, from fighting climate change to combating the opioid crisis.”

Former President Bill Clinton’s Facebook post served to correct the record about so called fake news smearing the Clinton Foundation. Naturally, he linked to far left sites such as Snopes and Politifact to debunk the smears.

After touting all the charity the Clinton Foundation brings to hurricane victims, farmers in East Africa and combating Climate Change, Bill Clinton unleashed on Breitbart News for spreading conspiracy theories and false information about the Foundation.

Nevertheless, spreading false information about the Foundation continues, apparently as part of an ongoing strategy to distract attention from real problems and, over the long run, to completely erase the line between fact and fiction.

For example, just a few weeks ago on MSNBC, during a discussion of the President’s disparaging remarks about Haiti, his designated defender repeated the ridiculous assertion that I had taken money raised for Haiti for personal use and was responsible for the apparent suicide of a Haitian who knew all about it. Thankfully, the host cut her off, refusing to provide a forum for known false conspiracy theories. I’m proud of the work the Foundation and I have done in Haiti and will give you a more detailed report on that soon.

These attacks on the Foundation began in earnest with the 2015 publication of the Breitbart-inspired book, Clinton Cash. I thought the Foundation staff did a good job debunking the book’s charges, but they were published as written even in “mainstream” outlets, and even now the charges continue to be repeated online and in forums favorable to those who make them.

I have never responded personally to these charges, but out of respect for our donors, partners, and those who work at the Foundation, I think I should—because as we see, attacks, no matter how outrageous, can have a long life.

Bill Clinton also argued Chelsea’s wedding wasn’t paid for by Clinton Foundation donations nor do any of them receive salaries.

No, Foundation funds were not used to pay for Chelsea’s wedding. It’s not only untrue, it’s a personal insult to me, to Hillary, and to Chelsea and Marc. It was a wonderful day that Hillary and I were grateful to be able to pay for.

Clinton also argued the foundation was given 4 out 4 stars from Charity Navigator, Platinum from GuideStar, A from Charity Watch, and a 20 out of 20 score for meeting all of the Better Business Bureau’s good practice standards.

Hillary Clinton tweeted: Want to hear the real story of the @ClintonFdn? Read this: 

 Trump supporters savaged the Clintons.

How about when Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Oman donated MILLIONS to your foundation when you were Secretary of State and then you conducted official US business with them? 

What about how Haitian villages that you raised money for are STILL without the homes, schools and infrastructure you promised for them? Where did it go Hillary? Where's that money? Why did you plunder the great people of Haiti? 

  

Unless it explains

Benghazi 33,000 missing emails  Haiti  Destroyed electronics  Missing money
Uranium One Etc

Then no. Nope.  
Not on Presidents day.  

Care to tell us how much the Foundation pays out in salaries each year? 

 

Slush fund? Pay-to-play? Salaries for Sid Blumenthal?
Fraud in Haiti?  The vast majority of funds don't reach people in need?
That's the real story, right?   

 

YES PATRIOT STORE

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service