House Incumbents Being Ousted at Record Rates; It's Worse for Republicans

Sitting members of Congress are being ousted from their seats at record rates, with Republicans constituting the majority of losses this election cycle.

With the 2022 primary season coming to a close, 15 members of Congress have lost their seats so far this year, representing the highest degree of turnover since the Obama administration, when the Tea Party revolution and an upswing in progressive activism led to 13 incumbents losing their primaries.

Though the defeats of New York Democratic Representatives Mondaire Jones and Carolyn Maloney in late August were the races that pushed the number into record-setting territory, the brunt of losses in Congress have been felt among Republican incumbents, several of whom supported the impeachment of former President Donald Trump over his role in the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The first election year after a redistricting cycle, according to historic election data, tends to see a higher level of incumbent turnover, often due to changing district dynamics or, like in Maloney's case, district boundaries that pit them against their fellow incumbents.

Trump's influence on the electoral environment, however, played a major factor. Of the more than a dozen incumbents to lose their primaries, nine were Republicans, with four among the few conservatives who voted to impeach the former president.

Others, like Illinois Representative Rodney Davis and West Virginia Representative David McKinley, lost to candidates backed by Trump as a result of other factors, including newly drawn district boundaries and the perception that they were too moderate to stand on the modern Republican platform.

The shift has been even more cataclysmic down the ballot. According to an analysis by Ballotpedia, 202 incumbents have lost their primaries this election cycle, eclipsing the previous 20-year high set in 2018 by nearly 60 members.

Young women who would have otherwise voted for our candidates (because of school loans, woke politics or fiscal issues) are going to be forced to vote for Democrats now!

Just like I always suspected,

Those very same persons who move to red states from blue states, and we wonder why they keep their voting pattern the same -- it's all about abortion.

Low taxes, ok, good schools, ok, able to defend yourself ok, but oh my, I gotta vote for the Dem because they support abortion.

Then the Dem gets in, and lo and behold, the high taxes, less freedom, etc. come in for the ride, along with their pro-abortion policies.

“You believe that you are making a point but you are not. Slavery was never seen as a fringe issue...”

Correct. People at the time rightly recognized it as a civilization-defining issue. As intelligent people today on both sides of the political spectrum recognize abortion as a civilization-defining issue, not a fringe issue. Which is why people on the both the right and the left are so violently passionate about it. You don’t think you would get away with telling Democrats that abortion is a “fringe” issue, would you?

“why are you asking me if I think it was a fringe issue?”

I’ve tried to explain that several times. Because abortion and slavery are both civilization-shaping issues on which no political compromise can ever be reached, and which will continue to be a point of heated conflict in our society until one side wins and one side loses, permanently. We resolved the one issue, but we are yet to resolve the other. But neither of them can be reasonably argued to be “fringe” issues.

Since you do recognize that slavery couldn’t be seen as a “fringe” issue, then perhaps you can ask yourself why it was not a “fringe” issue, and then you may realize why calling abortion a “fringe” issue is such an uninsightful comment on the matter.

“If the life of the mother is at risk...should the woman still be forced to birth the child?”

No. The right to self defense takes precedence there, as you are allowed to defend yourself against another person doing you harm, even if that person is not doing it intentionally or consciously.

“If the woman was a victim of raped...same question.”

That’s two questions, but I won’t hold it against you. I wouldn’t characterize it as her being “forced to birth the child” but rather “prevented from murdering the child”. Killing the child won’t unrape her; it won’t bring any justice either, as the child is innocent. She doesn’t have to raise the child, or bear any responsibility for it after it is born, but allowing a woman to kill an innocent child because she suffered a trauma is not morally justifiable as far as I’m concerned. Same goes for children who are the result of incest.

Ignore the trash talk: Republicans can and will win this November

Washington Examiner ^ | 9/1/2022 | Herschel Walker
Posted on 9/1/2022, 8:55:42 AM by whyilovetexas111

Trash talk is common in sports. Whether it’s lighthearted or nasty, the purpose is the same: to intimidate your opponent and make them lose focus and feel less confident in their ability to win.

Democrats and their friends in the media are engaging in their own form of trash talk when it comes to the midterm elections. They wave around some meaningless poll or quote an “expert” who would have us believe that Republican Senate candidates are weak, President Joe Biden has had some great successes, the Democrats’ fundraising numbers give them a huge advantage, and Republicans can’t possibly win back the Senate.

Rick Scott Savages Mitch McConnell For Trying To Sabotage GOP Senate Races
thefederalist.com ^ | 9/1/22 | Jordan Boyd
Posted on 9/1/2022, 11:50:08 AM by cotton1706

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Rick Scott wants DC Swamp creatures like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to know that his attempts to squash a GOP victory in the Senate this fall by throwing Republican candidates under the bus are “an amazing act of cowardice” and “treasonous to the conservative cause.”

In a short but fiery opinion editorial published on Thursday, Scott lambasted the “many of the very people responsible for losing the Senate last cycle” who are “now trying to stop us from winning the majority this time by trash-talking our Republican candidates” as “fools.”

“Giving anonymous quotes to help the Washington Post or the New York Times write stories trashing Republicans is the same as working with the Democratic National Committee,” Scott wrote. “If you want to talk about the need to raise more money to promote our candidates versus the Democrats’ terrible candidates, I agree. If you want to trash-talk our candidates to help the Democrats, pipe down. That’s not what leaders do. And Republicans need to be leaders that build up the team and do everything they can to get the entire team over the finish line.”

He never mentions McConnell’s name, but it’s clear from his writing that Scott is unhappy with the leader’s recent negativity towards his own party.

Scott’s rebuke comes just a couple of weeks after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell downplayed Republicans’ chances at winning back the upper chamber.

“I think there’s probably a greater likelihood the House flips than the Senate,” McConnell said. “Senate races are just different, they’re statewide. Candidate quality has a lot to do with the outcome.”

(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...

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.