Poll: Americans don't believe Trump has received the message from the midterms

Shove your head in the sand and refuse to learn anything about your fellow American then, I dont give a **** if you wish to remain wilfully ignorant.

 

Bullshit. Trump did just fine. The Senate is solidified, and the only reason Democrats have won the Congress is because around 35 incumbent Republican Congressmen jumped the ship too early, putting their incumbent congressional seats up for grabs. So, there’s no message in the midterm elections, and Dems have nothing to be proud about.

Reps have nobody but themselves to blame.

 

There’s no lesson in 2018 for Trump to consider.

 

It isn't that you're electing Democrats. It's you being divisive.

 

No I understand funny about you you're incredibly enraged because Donald Trump was elected the office. Maybe you should be more understanding.

 

The Republicans in the House OBSTRUCTED the BIPARTISAN Senate bill on Immigration Reform.

 

I agree with all of the above except for you reason behind 2010. The ACA was what what motivated the Republicans but the economic collapse demotivated the Dem and motivated the Independents to vote "against the party in power". In essence the electorate punished the Dems for the GOP's economic malfeasance that caused the Great Recession.

The GOP was "rewarded" for collapsing the economy and exploited that reward with nationwide policies of minority voter suppression and blatant gerrymandering. That became a difficult hurdle to overcome for the Dems was partly responsible for their losing the EC in 2016 in spite of an overwhelming majority voting FOR Hillary over the BLOTUS.

2018 was a turning point where We the People decided that we have had enough of GOP malfeasance. Alt Blue and the Progressives came up with a different way to fund elections and a different message that was focused upon the needs of Americans. This victory for the Progressives will persist for at least the next two elections IMO.

 

The senate map was overwhelmingly unfavorable to Democrats. Democrats had 26 seats up for election, while Republicans had just nine. Moreover, 10 of those 26 seats were in states that President Trump won in 2016, including five states (West Virginia, North Dakota, Indiana, Montana, Missouri) where he won overwhelmingly.

According to Nate Silver, who is pretty great at this kind of thing, "the Senate map is simply very, very daunting for Democrats. In fact, it’s about as unfavorable a map as any party has faced in the Senate, ever."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...ate-but-democrats-have-two-paths-to-an-upset/

On top of that, Democrats won 60 million votes in the House, while Republicans only got 50 million!! That is a very serious blowout.

The problem for Democrats, and the thing that can make Republicans sleep well at night, is that while those sorts of electoral swings in congress are incredibly common in mid-term elections, they tend not to carry over into the presidential election two years later.

So Republicans have a lot to worry about, specifically that Trump is so consistently unpopular, but they can hope that mid-term elections continue to be poor predictors of the proceeding presidential election outcomes.

 

The BLOTUS would not "receive the message" even if it was a gold plated pit bull chewing on his YUUUGE orange ass.

The problem with appealing to the worst aspects of a subset of the population is that it only succeeds when the rest of the electorate is either too discouraged to vote or has their votes suppressed. Once a majority reject that "race to the bottom" there is nowhere else for the BLOTUS and his supporters to go. They dug their own deep hole and can't climb out of it.

 

You remind me of Democrats in 2016 who argued that Democrats had no lessons to learn from 2016, and that the only lessons were that Hillary really won because she won the popular vote and racism/sexism. They didn't want to hear about the Democratic party abandoning their working class constituents over 30 years and Trump taking advantage of that. They didn't want to hear about the fact that running a campaign based largely on identity politics and then taking the side of the minority may not be a great idea. Of course Trump played identity politics more than any candidate ever, but he at least had the savvy to take the side of the majority...

Anyways, there are huge lessons to be learned, but Republicans can't really learn them. They have hitched their brand to Trump and either he will drag them to victory in 2020, or his incredible dislikability will be an albatross around the neck of the party in 2020.

 

2018 has two significant events that will reverberate into the future.

The first was the rejection of corporate funding of election campaigns and the embracing of AltBlue and individual donor funding instead. This was so successful that it outraised corporate donor funding.

The second was the arrival of the Progressives with the messages that Bernie ran on in 2016. That RESONATED with the voters and resulted in the Blue Wave turnout nationwide.

Both AltBlue and the Progressive messaging are here to stay for the next two election cycles at least.

They will have an impact because the GOP has no alternative to either of those events and does not have the voter base to stop them even in a Presidential election year.

 

Both the 2006 and 2013 bills included sweeping amnesties, and it's equally true that the Senate never took up the House's versions of the bills that didn't include amnesty but did include stiffer border security measures. "Bipartisan" doesn't mean a dozen liberal Republicans joining the Democrats, bipartisan means both parties agree. And since the real Republicans didn't agree, it wasn't a bipartisan bill. Why those same Republicans couldn't agree to fund a border wall is beyond me.

 

The 2013 bill passed 68-32 and you are WRONG regarding the definition of the term bipartisan.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bipartisan

 

The Republicans didn't agree, did they?

 

Enough Republicans agreed to pass the Bill, yes? That is bi-partisan. xwssmithx is completely wrong on what bi-partisanship means.

 

I think you're overlooking how angry people, especially independents were at being ignored on the ACA. Here's the polls at the time the ACA was passed.

Below are the polls thanks to RCP of public opinion on the ACA when the Senate passed it in November of 2009

CNN/Opinion Research 12/2-12/3 36% for 61% Against/Oppose +25

Rasmussen Reports 11/29 - 11/29 41% for 53% Against/Oppose +12

Gallup 11/20-11/22 44% for 49% Against/Oppose +5

Ipsos/McClatchy 11/19 - 11/22 34% for 46% Against/Oppose +12

Rasmussen Reports 11/21 - 11/22 38% for 56% Against/Oppose +18

FOX News 11/17 - 11/18 35% for 51% Against/Oppose +16

PPP (D) 11/13 - 11/15 40% for 52% Against/Oppose +12


Below are the polls thanks to RCP of public opinion on the ACA when the House passed it in March of 2010

Bloomberg 3/19 - 3/22 38% for 50% Against/Oppose +12

CNN/Opinion Research 3/19 - 3/21 39% for 59% Against/Oppose +20

CBS News 3/18 - 3/21 37% for 48% Against/Oppose +11

Rasmussen Reports 3/19 - 3/20 41% for 54% Against/Oppose +13

Quinnipiac 3/16 - 3/21 36% for 54% Against/Oppose +18

Democracy Corps (D) 3/15 - 3/18 40% for 52% Against/Oppose +12

FOX News 3/16 - 3/17 35% 55% Against/Oppose +20

Now what you say, surely factored into it. No doubt. But looking at independents they voted for Obama in 2008 by a 52-44 margin over McCain. In 2010 independents switched to Republican congressional candidates by a 56-37 margin. Independents when from an 8 point margin for Obama to a 19 point margin for the Republicans in 2010. That was a huge switch which cost the Democrats the House. We seen a switch from a 4 point margin for Trump in 2016 by independents to an 12 point margin for the democratic congressional candidates in 2018.

Yes, a whole lot of factors have to come together for those huge swings. But when 55% of all Americans say no to a piece of legislation, yet get ignored. You can decide the importance. Probably thrown on top of what you added, the last piece of the cake.

What I noticed was 2010 was an issue related rejection, 2018 was a person related rejection. Being most Americans still like Obama as a person, he overcame the issues and won reelection. In 2018, most Americans don't like Trump as a person, I doubt he can overcome that dislike in 2020. Issues change, a person usually doesn't.

 

53 to 40 in Nov 2018 https://www.kff.org/interactive/kai...esponse=Favorable--Unfavorable&aRange=twoYear

When people realize that ACA is Obamacare, they say, "The GOP tried to hoodwink us."

 

Welcome back, btw. Haven’t see you in a while

 

Are you PRETENDING that there were only 32 Republicans in the Senate in 2013?

 

No, I'm pretending that there were 234 Republicans in the House that rejected the deal.

 

Most of those polls are rightwing biased so you can deduct 5 points from them. Secondly there was a deliberate disinformation campaign by the GOP against the ACA. The factual evidence for that can now be found in GOP representatives hiding away from the voters in their districts because they wanted to repeal the ACA. Those voters were Republicans who had experienced the ACA first hand and discovered that they had been LIED to by the GOP about the ACA.

However that was not apparent yet during the 2010 midterms. Yes, the ACA was ONE of the issues but it was NOT the only issue that decided the outcome. 2010 was an empty pocketbook election. Americans all across the political spectrum had been laid off by the millions because 20% of the workforce was unemployed and struggling to even find part time jobs. One of the reasons that Bush sr lost was because the recession on his watch. The electorate punishes politicians for recessions.

This is born out by the exit polls!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/03/us-midterm-election-results-tea-party

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/vot...-midterm-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=12003775

As far as your claims about Independents in the 2010 midterms the indepth exit poll analysis paints a different picture.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nyt...weekinreview/20101107-detailed-exitpolls.html

Based upon the LEAN within the ranks of Independents they split 50-50.

What made the difference is that amongst Independents at that time was a growing contingent of DISAFFECTED Republicans who had left the GOP during the GOP era. However they were still "likely voters" so they turned up while the moderate and left leaning Independents stayed home.

In essence you cannot claim that there was an Independent "swing" when when you are NOT dealing with the same number of voters and their political inclinations.

Instead it is more accurate to state that 2010 did see a depressed turnout amongst those on the left or lean left and an increased turnout by those on the right or who lean right. However that has been the case since the 1990's and it has remained that way until 2018.

Referencing your point about 2010 being an "issue related rejection" it appears as though the primary issue was the economy and the lack of jobs rather than the ACA.

 

Disingenuous moving of the goalposts duly noted for the record.

 

I didn't move the goalposts, I rejected your use of the term "bipartisan". Bipartisan means "both parties" and both parties clearly did not agree to the deal.

 

Trump has a nearly 60% disapproval rating. The reason is him.

 

Trump is the most divisive president in modern US history. When asked - about two months ago - what he could do to unify the country, his response was to talk about how great was his base of support.

He has employed an all-base, all-the-time strategy from day one. He has refused to adjust course even after losing a historic midterm election and being sent an explicit message to expand his base because his base is not enough.

**** him if you think I am going to adjust course by becoming "less divisive" when the person elected to represent every American refuses to do such.