“The Trump 80% and dems holding that seat smells of vote fraud.”
The district is historically Democrat and represented by socially conservative, pro-coal legislators for decades.
The prior RAT incumbent *ran unopposed* during the three most recent elections (including in 2016), so I don’t think that there was any need for “vote fraud” by the Democrats to keep him in office. Not every RAT win is due to vote fraud.
"The district is historically Democrat and represented by socially conservative, pro-coal legislators for decades."
Hmm wonder why they couldn't keep the district.
The large number Trump would seem to indicate that some dems got the message and voted for him
The eGOP seems to be too gutless to run a conservative in districts like this.
IIRC the republicans have flipped strong dem districts in the past 2 elections.
Thank again for your well researched comments.