Couldn’t even tell you the name of the Democrat running for the KY 4th CD seat if there is one…
…because of redistricting efforts…
In other words, gerrymandering.
The lone Republican from Oregon Idaho West™ says what?
I guess by list he means lost R seats in reverse vulnerability or some such. But I have a different kind of list for how it would go:
- T
- R
- U
- M
- P
The democrats taking the House is not the point. The GOP keeping the House is not the point. The POINT is that the GOP will have to spend LOTS more money DEFENDING the House than it normally would just because their nominee is a guy who looks like he has a dead animal on his head.
I’m really wondering if Sec. Clinton ran on an “inclusive America” platform if it could really help house races. Make it bigger than just a vote for her personally, but frame it as a decision between an inclusive America for all people vs. a xenophobic / prejudicial / misogynist America.
It’d fire up Millenials (and Bernie voters generally) who overwhelmingly favor an inclusive nation. And it could give real reason for Democratic voters in solid blue states to turn out to vote – “we need you to show up to send a strong message of what kind of America you want us to be!” It’s a message that could resonate better than 435 individual house campaigns. Every house campaign could easily tie into it and adapt what “inclusive” means in their particular setting.
“Walden remains assured that Republicans will maintain control, partly because of redistricting efforts that ‘locked’ certain districts in ways that benefit the GOP.”
NRCC Chair: “Of course we gerrymander!”
Roberts Court/Corporate Press/Washington Punditry: “Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.”
Republicans hate democracy.
And do everything in their power to undermine elections.
Shamelessly.
Publicly.
And without the slightest fear of being called out by the Very Serious People.
It’s his job to say that. Literally, it’s his job.
I seem to recall Nancy and Steny saying pretty much exactly the same thing at this point in 2010.
GOP Campaign Chief Not Worried About Losing Control Of House: ‘I Rule It Out’
…
Sorry but you don’t get to rule on anything. Who made you king anyway?
That is exactly what she’s doing.
Because of extreme gerrymandering coupled with odious voter ID laws plus the resurrection of voter purges done by partisan boards of elections and I’m afraid that Zippy the Pinhead is probably right - the House may not be in play until after the next census and the redrawing of congressional districts.
Luckily for the lazy Democrats, the next census happens to coincide with the next prez election, otherwise they’re just too busy/apathetic/disappointed - feel free to add an excuse - to show up to vote.
Well he’s not wrong. There is absolutely no chance of it happening. As @misterneutron pointed out, the “redistricting efforts” were too good.
“There’s a floor that we have that is better than we’ve ever had. It’s
well over 200,” Walden told The Hill. “They are locked and there are
people above that are fine. Does the DCCC have a straight-face list of
how they get to 218?”
They sure do. It’s called winning-the-majority-of-votes which only fails when folks like you bastardize our system of representative democracy.
Shorter Rethuglican House campaign chief: Our gerrymandering efforts have been so successful over the last decade that I am confident that Republicans will hold the majority in the House.
Represented by the firm of Obtuse & Frivolous.
Last evening, Lawrence O’Donnell ran what’s become a regular bit in a suddenly popular style that’s highly compatible with hand-held viewing, a little highlight reel of the political day. Usually the candidates and reporters are seen in straight-on face shots as they make soundbite. This one started with an extreme tight shot of Luke Russert saying something about nutty CapHill, moved on, then a shot of Luke questioning Speaker Ryan, reaction shots of Luke before a few other people then, a bit more Luke…strange. Are Luke and Lawrence dating?
She is, but it won’t flip the House. The problem is, we don’t have enough quality candidates that can seriously compete in enough places…particularly in some very red gerrymandered districts. He’s actually correct when he asks if the Democrats can produce a straight faced list of how they get to 218. We can pick 10…more a dozen…this time. We need 20 to hit 218. And I’ve not seen a single analysis that gets us there in 2016.
Resurrecting Reagan wasn’t enough so now they bring back Davy Crockett.