Posted on 01/29/2017 12:29:34 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
What happened to President Obama’s majority?
The surface-level answer to this question is simple. Donald Trump won over a supermajority of white working-class voters while holding on to many traditional Republicans, allowing him to win the Electoral College. At the same time, down-ballot Republicans built on their solid showings in 2010 and 2014, which helped them retain control of Congress and significant power in the states.
But there’s a deeper dimension to this question. For the past eight years, election wonks have been arguing about whether Democrats have an unassailable majority in presidential politics. The theory was straightforward: As the electorate becomes more racially diverse and educated, the Democratic base would grow and the party would build an invincible majority. The theory wasn’t just Democratic wishful thinking. Many good analysts from across the political spectrum bought into it at the time. So the question isn’t just why Democrats lost, but how such a widely respected theory went so wrong.
One way to tackle this question is to trace these arguments back to their source – a 2002 book called “The Emerging Democratic Majority” by John Judis and Ruy Teixeira. That work argued that Democrats could weld together a durable, winning coalition of minorities, professionals, working women and white working-class voters by championing a socially and fiscally liberal set of policies called “progressive centrism.” Many wonks read this book, saw the elections results in 2006, 2008 and 2012 and concluded that a durable Democratic majority had indeed arrived....
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
That’s what I was going to say. Run him in 2020 and let’s find out. LOL, that should be a hoot for sure.
His pecker took him out of the running.
Really?
The liberals are far, far more stupid than previously imagined.
Must.
Develop.
New.
Exponential notation.
To properly express progressive stupidity.
You beat me to it!
> Must.
Develop.
New.
Exponential notation.
To properly express progressive stupidity. <
Fortunately, math rides to the rescue with the googolplex.
Why? They needed another serial philanderer instead of the wife of one?
Who comes up with this goofy stuff?
The scandal didn’t surprise me, the fact that it was heterosexual did.
Under the current national divide in America brought about by the LEFT, I seriously doubt any RAT can save their party. They wrote off the WHITE MIDDLE CLASS WORKING segment of our population back in the second coming of #44 in 2012’s Presidential election.
Yes! John Edwards! Perfect! That’s the ticket! Run with that. Edwards/Kaine—can’t lose combo.
No way Trump/Pence would have a chance.
C’mon, democrats, you’ e got a winning ticket there.
I thought they were going to run Ms. Michael 0bama? They’re already beating the drums for s/he to go for it! ;)
John Edwards couldn’t even win North Carolina for John Kerry. He was a pretty boy from the South seen as the next coming of Bill Clinton.
Those days are over.
You mean, like he saved his marriage?
By “Someone like John Edwards” do they mean someone with the morals and ethics of a sea slug?
JOHN EDWARDS....
HMM. His haircuts would have to be a special budget item.
Yep, plus the fact that he was using his pecker to have an extra marital affair while his wife was terminally ill. POS
I just thought of a new word: cometrumppence. Like comeuppance but with Trump/Pence.
To the Democrats, if you don’t support whites be prepared for many more bad election nights!
Yes. Not a saving worth the compromise however. But he would have been better than the Hildabeast.
So yeah, his type would be just what democrats want - a liar with a press willing to kiss his butt.
It would be shameful but what can I say - - that's who democrats are... I assume David Byler is aware of all this...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.