PA-18 results thread

[canceled.2021.2]

The Republican should have won handily.

There is huge anti-Trump sentiment in the country, and you'll see it some more in the midterms. The left is completely energized, and the right - outside of Trump's hardcore base - is demoralized.

Gonna be a good year. You & Grind are the same; you both know next to nothing about politics, but beat your chest about your "knowledge" all the time to try to cover for that.

Why should the Republican have won "handily"? Because you say so? Because the pundits tell you?

I don't deny that there is energy on the left. It is to be expected after a stunning loss like you lefties received in 2016. The right was energized after Obama won. The winning side gets complacent. That is the normal ebb and flow of politics

I keep asking you for specific reasons and all you can do is regurgitate talking points which is emblematic of your limited political acumen.

I argue that the biggest reason the democrat won is because the democrat party ran a candidate who ran the complete opposite campaign of Hillary Clinton. He didn't call voters deplorables. He wasn't an effete east coast liberal like you. He ran like a traditional democrat back when there were Blue Dogs.

The real question is will he vote like one or is it a head fake.

As our resident virtue signaler PeePee pointed out, this has only been a Republican district since 2002. Before that it was a big time democrat party district. But, why would you focus on that little detail as it doesn't fit your narrative.

I get it, you despise and hate Trump so you are projecting your feelings upon every other voter

[Jarod]

Why should the Republican have won "handily"? Because you say so? Because the pundits tell you?

Because it is a very conservative district. Because Rump won by 25 points.

[canceled.2021.2]

Because it is a very conservative district. Because Rump won by 25 points.

Since you and Thingy are such great political experts. Why was it a democrat district prior to 2002? Why did they switch to the republican party?

Any thoughts?

Or are you just so simplistic you think everyone went to the polls to cast a vote for or against Donald Trump?

[evince]

gerrymandering

[evince]

the republican party has cheated in elections for decades

after the 2000 census they cheated their asses off gerrymander all the states they could


remember Tom Delay

[evince]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_DeLay#Controversies

[evince]

Controversies[edit]
Campaign finance activities[edit]
Main article: Tom DeLay campaign finance trial
Following petition drives by citizens and organizations asking that DeLay be removed from office[29] and official admonishments by the United States House Committee on Ethics,[30] DeLay was charged in 2005 with money laundering and conspiracy charges related to illegal campaign finance activities aimed at helping Republican candidates for Texas state office in the 2002 elections. The indictment was sought by Ronnie Earle, the Democratic former District Attorney of Travis County (which includes the state capital of Austin). A first grand jury rejected Earle's indictment attempt, but a second grand jury issued an indictment for one count of criminal conspiracy on September 28, 2005. On October 3, a third grand jury indicted DeLay for the more serious offense of money laundering.[31]
An arrest warrant was issued on October 19, 2005, and DeLay turned himself in the next day to the Harris County Sheriff's Office in Houston.[32] In accordance with House Republican Conference rules, DeLay temporarily resigned from his position as House Majority Leader. On January 7, 2006, after pressure from fellow Republicans, he announced that he would not seek to return to the post. On June 9, 2006, he resigned from Congress.[33]
After two judges recused themselves, the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court assigned Senior District Judge Pat Priest, a San Antonio Democrat, to preside over the trial.[34]
DeLay moved to dismiss all charges. Judge Priest dismissed one count of the indictment alleging conspiracy to violate election law but allowed the other, more serious charges of money laundering and conspiracy to engage in money laundering to proceed. He also refused to allow a change of venue from Travis County, which the defense argued could not be the site of an impartial trial, to Fort Bend County, in which DeLay resided. The trial began on October 26, 2010, in Austin.[35]
On November 24, 2010, DeLay was found guilty by a Travis County jury on both counts. The range of possible sentences was probation to between 5 and 99 years in prison and up to $20,000 in fines, though the judge could have chosen probation.[36] On January 10, 2011, after a sentencing hearing, the judge sentenced DeLay to three years in prison on the charge of conspiring to launder corporate money into political donations. On the charge of money laundering, he was sentenced to five years in prison, but that was probated for 10 years, meaning DeLay would serve 10 years' probation. Dick DeGuerin is DeLay's defense attorney. DeLay appealed his conviction to the Texas Court of Appeals for the Third District at Austin, which heard oral arguments on October 10, 2012.[37]
On September 19, 2013, a ruling by the Court of Appeals overturned his convictions and entered an acquittal. Justice Melissa Goodwin, a Republican, wrote in the majority opinion that
Rather than supporting an agreement to violate the election code, the evidence shows that the defendants were attempting to comply with the Election Code limitations on corporate contributions.
She was joined in the opinion by visiting Justice David Galtney, also a Republican. Chief Justice J. Woodfin Jones, a Democrat, dissented, writing, "I disagree with the majority's conclusion that there was legally insufficient evidence to support a jury finding that the corporate contributions at issue here were the proceeds of criminal activity." The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted the prosecution's petition for discretionary review on March 19, 2013, agreeing to review the decision of the Texas Court of Appeals Third District.[38][39][40] In an 8–1 decision, DeLay's acquittal became final on October 1, 2014. He has three years from that date to file any lawsuits for wrongful action.[41]
Contributions from Russian oil executives[edit]
In December 2005, the Washington Post reported that, in 1998, a group of Russian oil executives had given money to a nonprofit advocacy group run by a former DeLay staffer and funded by clients of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, in an attempt to influence DeLay's vote on an International Monetary Fund bailout of the Russian economy.[42] Associates of DeLay adviser Ed Buckham, the founder of the U.S. Family Network, said that executives from the oil firm Naftasib had offered a donation of $1,000,000 to be delivered to a Washington, D.C.-area airport to secure DeLay's support. On June 25, 1998, the U.S. Family Network received a $1 million check via money transferred through the London law firm James & Sarch Co. This payment was the largest single entry on U.S. Family Network's donor list. The original source of the donation was not recorded.[43] DeLay denied the payment had influenced his vote. Naftasib denied it had made the payment and that it had ever been represented by James & Sarch Co. The now-dissolved law firm's former partners declined to comment due to "confidentiality requirements".[citation needed]
The K Street Project[edit]
See also: K Street Project
DeLay's involvement with the lobbying industry included a pointed effort on the part of the Republican Party to parlay the Congressional majority into dominance of K Street, the lobbying district of Washington, D.C. DeLay, Senator Rick Santorum, and Grover Norquist launched a campaign in 1995 encouraging lobbying firms to retain only Republican officials in top positions. Firms that had Democrats in positions of authority, DeLay suggested, would not be granted the ear of majority party members. In 1999, DeLay was privately reprimanded by the House Ethics Committee after he pulled an intellectual property rights bill off the House floor when the Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA) hired a former Democratic Congressman, Dave McCurdy.[44] Firms initially responded to the campaign, but it waned during 2004, when the possibility of Senator John Kerry's winning the presidency gave lobbying firms some incentive to hire Democrats.[45]
Cuban cigar photo[edit]
DeLay has long been a strong critic of Cuban leader Fidel Castro's regime, which DeLay has called a "thugocracy", and a supporter of the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba. However, in April 2005, Time Magazine published a photo from a government-funded July 2003 trip to Israel, in which DeLay is seen smoking a Cuban cigar.[46] The consumption or purchase of Cuban cigars was illegal in the United States at the time (but was legal for U.S. citizens abroad). In September 2004, the U.S. Treasury Department's enforcement of the law toughened it to forbid consumption (smoking) or purchase of Cuban cigars by U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, but this ban was partially lifted by President Obama in October 2016.
Ethics admonishment for misuse of federal agency resources[edit]
During the Texas redistricting warrant controversy, several Democratic members of the Texas House of Representatives went to Oklahoma to prevent the House from establishing a quorum of members, thereby preventing the House from acting on any legislation, including a proposed redistricting plan. Although not a member of the Texas legislature, DeLay became involved, by contacting several federal agencies in order to determine the location of the missing legislators. DeLay's staff contacted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for assistance in tracking down a plane that one of the legislators was flying to Oklahoma, an action that the FAA believed to be a result of safety concerns about the aircraft.[47] A review by the U.S. Department of Transportation found that a total of thirteen FAA employees spent more than eight hours searching for the airplane.[48]
Members of DeLay's staff asked the FBI to arrest the missing Democrats but a Justice Department official dismissed DeLay's and his staff's request as "wacko".[47] DeLay also contacted United States Marshal and United States Attorney's offices in Texas, as well as the Air and Marine Interdiction Coordination Center, an agency that deals with smuggling and terrorism.[49] U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-Connecticut) requested an investigation into DeLay's involvement in the requests, and asked that any White House involvement be reported. The House Ethics Committee admonished DeLay for improper use of FAA resources, and for involving federal agencies in a matter that should have been resolved by Texas authorities.[50]
Terri Schiavo[edit]
See also: Government involvement in the Terri Schiavo case
DeLay called the Terri Schiavo case "one of my proudest moments in Congress".[9] DeLay made headlines for his role in helping lead federal intervention in the matter. On Palm Sunday weekend in March 2005, several days after the brain-damaged Florida woman's feeding tube was disconnected for the third time, the House met in emergency session to pass a bill allowing Schiavo's parents to petition a federal judge to review the removal of the feeding tube. DeLay called the removal of the feeding tube "an act of barbarism". DeLay faced accusations of hypocrisy from critics when the Los Angeles Times revealed that he had consented to ending life support for his father, who had been in a comatose state because of a debilitating accident in 1988.[51]
DeLay was accused of endorsing violence in the wake of a series of high-profile violent crimes and death threats against judges when he said, "The men responsible [for Terri Schiavo's death] will have to answer to their behavior". DeLay's comments came soon after the February 28, 2005, homicide of the mother and husband of Chicago Judge Joan Lefkow, and the March 11, 2005, killing of Atlanta Judge Rowland Barnes. DeLay's opponents accused him of rationalizing violence against judges when their decisions were unpopular with the public. Ralph Neas, President of People for the American Way, said that DeLay's comments were "irresponsible and could be seen by some as justifying inexcusable conduct against our courts".[52]
Settlement in civil suit[edit]
In early 1999, The New Republic picked up a story, first reported by Houston-area alternative weeklies, alleging that DeLay had committed perjury during a civil lawsuit brought against him by a former business partner in 1994.[53]
The plaintiff in that suit, Robert Blankenship, charged that DeLay and a third partner in Albo Pest Control had breached the partnership agreement by trying to force him out of the business without buying him out. Blankenship filed suit, charging DeLay and the other partner with breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, wrongful termination, and loss of corporate expectancy. While being deposed in that suit, DeLay claimed that he did not think that he was an officer or director of Albo and that he believed that he had resigned two or three years previously.[54] However, his congressional disclosure forms, including one filed subsequent to the deposition, stated that he was either president or chairman of the company between 1985 and 1994. Blankenship also alleged that Albo money had been spent on DeLay's congressional campaigns, in violation of federal and state law. DeLay and Blankenship settled for an undisclosed sum. Blankenship's attorney said that had he known about the congressional disclosure forms, he would have referred the case to the Harris County district attorney's office for a perjury prosecution.[54]
Jack Abramoff scandal[edit]
See also: Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal
DeLay was the target of the Justice Department investigation into Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff's actions. Abramoff allegedly provided DeLay with trips, gifts, and political donations in exchange for favors to Abramoff's lobbying clients, which included the government of the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Internet gambling services, and several Native American tribes.[55] Two of DeLay's former political aides, Tony Rudy and Michael Scanlon, as well as Abramoff himself, pleaded guilty in 2006 to charges relating to the investigation. Political columnist Robert Novak reported that Abramoff "has no derogatory information about former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and is not implicating him as part of his plea bargain with federal prosecutors."[56]
According to ABC's 20/20 television program and NPR, Abramoff lobbied DeLay to stop legislation banning sex shops and sweatshops that forced employees to have abortions in the Northern Mariana Islands when Abramoff accompanied DeLay on a 1997 trip to the U.S. commonwealth.[57] While on the trip, DeLay promised not to put the bill on the legislative calendar.[58]
In 2000, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a worker reform bill to extend the protection of U.S. labor and minimum-wage laws to the workers in the Northern Mariana Islands. DeLay, the House Republican Whip, stopped the House from considering the bill.[59] DeLay later blocked a fact-finding mission planned by Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) by threatening him with the loss of his subcommittee chairmanship.[58]
DeLay received gifts from Abramoff, including paid golfing holidays to Scotland, concert tickets, and the use of Abramoff's private skyboxes for fundraisers. In May 2000, ARMPAC received the free use of one of Abramoff's private skyboxes to host a political fundraiser. At the time, campaign finance laws did not require the use of the skybox, valued at several thousand dollars, to be disclosed or for Abramoff to be reimbursed for its use.[60]
Later that month, the DeLays, Rudy, another aide, and Abramoff took a trip to London and Scotland. Abramoff paid for the airfare for the trip, and lobbyist Ed Buckham paid for expenses at a hotel at St. Andrews golf course in Scotland.[61] Abramoff was reimbursed by The National Center for Public Policy Research, the nonprofit organization that arranged the trip. On the day that the trip began, The National Center received large donations from two of Abramoff's clients, internet lottery service eLottery, Inc., and the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians. Both organizations denied that they had intended to pay for DeLay's trip.[62]
House rules forbid members to accept travel expenses from lobbyists, and require that members inquire into the sources of funds that nonprofits use to pay for trips. DeLay denied knowing that lobbyists had paid for travel expenses. In July 2000, DeLay voted against a bill that would have restricted Internet gambling. Both eLottery and the Choctaws opposed the bill.[62] Rudy, who was then DeLay's deputy chief of staff, doomed the bill by engineering a parliamentary maneuver that required a two-thirds majority vote, rather than a simple majority, for the bill to pass. Rudy's actions on behalf of Abramoff's clients during this time were mentioned in Abramoff's guilty plea in January 2006.[63]
In January 2006, The Associated Press reported that in 2001, DeLay co-signed a letter to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft calling for the closure of a casino owned by the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas. Two weeks earlier, the Choctaws had donated $1,000 to DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC). A DeLay spokesman denied that the donations had influenced DeLay's actions.[64] Currently, and at the time of the letter, casinos or other private gambling establishments are illegal in Texas, even on Indian reservations.[65]
Scanlon, who became Abramoff's lobbying partner, pleaded guilty in November 2005 to conspiracy charges.[66] Abramoff pleaded guilty to fraud, tax evasion, and conspiracy charges on January 3, 2006, and agreed to cooperate with the government's investigation. His cooperation may have forced DeLay to abandon his efforts to return to his position as House Majority Leader,[63] a decision DeLay announced only a few days after Abramoff's plea bargain. Rudy pleaded guilty on March 31, 2006, to illegally acting on Abramoff's behalf in exchange for gifts.[67] Abramoff referred clients to Ed Buckham's Alexander Strategy Group (ASG), a lobbying firm. In addition, Abramoff clients gave more than $1.5 million to Buckham's U.S. Family Network, which then paid ASG more than $1 million.[68]
From 1998–2002, ASG paid Christine DeLay a monthly salary averaging between $3,200 and $3,400. DeLay's attorney, Richard Cullen, initially said the payments were for telephone calls she made periodically to the offices of certain members of Congress seeking the names of their favorite charities, and that she then forwarded that information to Buckham, along with some information about those charities. In early June 2006, Cullen said the payments were also for general political consulting she provided to her husband. In all, Christine DeLay was paid about $115,000 directly by ASG, and got another $25,000 via money put into a retirement account by the firm.[69] Her work with ASG has been the subject of an inquiry by the Department of Justice.[55][70]
In August 2010, the government ended a six-year investigation of his ties to Abramoff, according to DeLay's lead counsel in the matter, Richard Cullen. A state case continued in Te

[Minister of Truth]

Will the excuses for this major republican defeat ever end?

November.

[Minister of Truth]

Because it is a very conservative district. Because Rump won by 25 points.

So, wouldn't you say that this is more evidence of people voting against Crooked Hillary, rather than for Douchebag Donald?

[Cancel 2020.1]

Why should the Republican have won "handily"? Because you say so? Because the pundits tell you?

I don't deny that there is energy on the left. It is to be expected after a stunning loss like you lefties received in 2016. The right was energized after Obama won. The winning side gets complacent. That is the normal ebb and flow of politics

I keep asking you for specific reasons and all you can do is regurgitate talking points which is emblematic of your limited political acumen.

I argue that the biggest reason the democrat won is because the democrat party ran a candidate who ran the complete opposite campaign of Hillary Clinton. He didn't call voters deplorables. He wasn't an effete east coast liberal like you. He ran like a traditional democrat back when there were Blue Dogs.

The real question is will he vote like one or is it a head fake.

As our resident virtue signaler PeePee pointed out, this has only been a Republican district since 2002. Before that it was a big time democrat party district. But, why would you focus on that little detail as it doesn't fit your narrative.

I get it, you despise and hate Trump so you are projecting your feelings upon every other voter

You say you're smart politically. What happened to that district in 2002?

[canceled.2021.2]

You say you're smart politically. What happened to that district in 2002?

Let me guess, you are going to blame it all on redistricting? Is that your argument?

You sure you want to go there?

[Cancel 2020.1]

Let me guess, you are going to blame it all on redistricting? Is that your argument?

You sure you want to go there?

Yeah - you're right. Redistricting by one party rarely tilts the advantage in favor of that party.

And spare me the enrollment #'s. It's an old, coal-mining district - the GOP knew exactly what it was doing.

This was a bad election for Trump. He & the GOP know it, even if you don't.

[katzgar]

Let me guess, you are going to blame it all on redistricting? Is that your argument?

You sure you want to go there?

Trump and the Republicans got their ass whooped it's that simple

[canceled.2021.2]

Yeah - you're right. Redistricting by one party rarely tilts the advantage in favor of that party.

And spare me the enrollment #'s. It's an old, coal-mining district - the GOP knew exactly what it was doing.

This was a bad election for Trump. He & the GOP know it, even if you don't.

I have yet to see any proof that this was a complete referendum on Trump. That people specifically went to the polls to vote AGAINST Trump. You haven't provided it.

I think it more likely that the democrats ran a candidate that you liberals have eschewed the last 10 years because you thought you had the spics, women and negro all wrapped up in a tiny bow and they would deliver you lefties electoral victories forever and ever. You and your democrat party deliberately walked away from white voters. 2016 was a wake up call that you can't run Nancy Pelosi types and win in certain parts of the country

For fucks sake the guy had to say he wouldn't vote for her as Speaker to win. But, hey if you want to make it about Trump because you hate him so much then so be it.

PS I have not claimed that this isn't a loss for the GOP. I have long since believed that the GOP was playing it too safe in passing a conservative agenda and that it would cost them electorally. But, you probably weren't paying attention due to your blinding Trump rage

[Leonthecat]

Poor Don is steamed at this, isn't he!