14 yrs, 4 wars, 2 presidents & pelosi says~she only one who can bring Dems back

if the sanders wing is in charge for 2018 they will take the blame for it. 2018 is an unwinnable fight. You want the clinton wing in charge for that one to take the bullet for you.

note this is not partisan purely strategic

How is it "unwinnable?"

The Senate #'s look daunting, but I'd bet the Democrats still hold serve. And that alone would be devastating for the GOP in an election w/ so many Dem seats on the table.

The House is going to be a tsunami.
 
2006 dems gained

va RI PA OH MT MO

If you win these now your just at +0. Its very different.

With the Trump disaster at the helm, there is no telling how many seats democrats could gain .. especially given that Clinton won more than 2 million more votes than Trump.

You have no mandate .. and if you think you do, you're deluding yourself.
 
With the Trump disaster at the helm, there is no telling how many seats democrats could gain .. especially given that Clinton won more than 2 million more votes than Trump.

You have no mandate .. and if you think you do, you're deluding yourself.

the places where you gained the vote are not voting.
 
How is it "unwinnable?"

The Senate #'s look daunting, but I'd bet the Democrats still hold serve. And that alone would be devastating for the GOP in an election w/ so many Dem seats on the table.

The House is going to be a tsunami.

whats your definition of hold serve? +0 ?
 
with the bernie wing in charge what do you think the result will be in 2018?
I don't think the Bernie wing is in charge. I think their influence has grown but they don't represent a majority of the Democratic party. At least not yet. That could come to pass.
 
whats your definition of hold serve? +0 ?

I could see it, or maybe a 1 or 2 seat gain - which, again, would be devastating for the right given the logistics.

There are already millions who have buyer's remorse w/ Trump - people who were so focused on their distaste or hate for Hillary that they didn't really think about an actual Trump Presidency. '18 has the potential to be for Dems what '94 was for the GOP. The left is more energized than I think I've ever seen them right now.
 
I could see it, or maybe a 1 or 2 seat gain - which, again, would be devastating for the right given the logistics.

There are already millions who have buyer's remorse w/ Trump - people who were so focused on their distaste or hate for Hillary that they didn't really think about an actual Trump Presidency. '18 has the potential to be for Dems what '94 was for the GOP. The left is more energized than I think I've ever seen them right now.

-2 is a disaster for the GOP. I think I already mentioned it here in this very thread but given the contests involved +2 would be an unqualified disaster for the GOP.
 
She's an exceptional fundraiser which goes far in retaining political power.
There's no doubting her political skills but I don't see any good coming from her remaining as minority leader in the House. I have no confidence of her focusing on issues that are important to middle America.
 
I disagree. Now is the time for democrats to divest themselves from the Clinton's. Now is the time to harness the anger and shape it into movement.

If team Trump fails as I expect they will. 2018 is not unwinnable, and in fact could become the midterms of 2006.
If Trump fails to get noticeable results and Democrats embrace change then that would be a big opportunity for Democrats. Those are two pretty big ifs. The Democrats leadership isn't going to passively lay down and hand off leadership. No major party does that.
 
With the Trump disaster at the helm, there is no telling how many seats democrats could gain .. especially given that Clinton won more than 2 million more votes than Trump.

You have no mandate .. and if you think you do, you're deluding yourself.
None of which means anything to Democrats if the don't working on expanding their base from it's Urban/Suburban center. To do that, they need new ideas and a commitment to policies that will help small town and rural folks substantively. Some ideas I would recommend Democrats making priorities are;

#1. Investment in education but not carte-blanch. Democrats have to understand why central planning on education is so unpopular in small town/rural America. Small town schools represent the center of social life in most small towns. They play a large roll in building the community and community relationships. We need to fund these schools, with strings attached, so that they are not only strengthened but will provide jobs skills of tomorrow and not yesterday. Some reforms that would help is more community colleges with no tuition (just like high school) that can not only provide the first couple years of a traditional liberal arts education but technical, computer, manufacturing trades, allied health jobs, etc. Another important reform is to create majors at the high school level so that we don't have so many young students in academic flux who have no idea where they want to go and do. We need education tracks that can steer students who want to learn the modern skills needed to succeed in manufacturing, construction, traditional trades, health care, liberal arts, STEM fields, computer programing, etc. This would not only prepare students better for higher education and skills training but will point them in the direction of where the jobs are.

#2. Invest in expanding IT infrastructure into rural America. How can those who live in small towns compete with large urban areas when they don't have the IT infrastructure? Developing our IT infrastructure so that we have nation wide access no matter where you live is going to play a seriously critical role in re-invigorating small town economies. It would help end the youth and talent drain so many small towns see as the infrastructure isn't available locally and they need to go where the opportunities are. It would also help create entrepreneurial opportunities in these regions of the nation. To give you an idea of what I mean. I can do my work from outside my office as long as I have the IT access. I can easily do that in my suburban home as I have access to modern IT resources. In the small farm town I grew up in those resources don't exist. Therefore that opportunity doesn't exist. Also without access to IT resources how can entreprenuers, professionals and businessmen integrate into national and global supply chains that are critical these days for business success? They can't. Dems could gain a lot of rural/small town voters by beating the drums for a national IT infrastructure.

#3. Stop means testing social programs. This one really alienates rural folks. The best social programs are the ones that benefit everyone like SS and Medicare. Why should rural folk support social programs that only help the means tested in urban areas and do nothing for them.

#4. Quite by passing small towns on infrastructure projects. Building the new high way in a straight line from Big City A to Big City B and by passing all the small towns in between is a death threat to small town economies. Having that high way pass by your town with a clover leaf can mean the difference between economic growth and stagnation. Stop by passing small towns in infrastructure planning would do more than just provide temporary jobs in these regions. They are also the economic arteries of the life blood of trade.

Those are just some examples of how if Democrats would not only address these regions needs and concerns and actually do something consequential about it that they can restore their political footprint in these communities.
 
None of which means anything to Democrats if the don't working on expanding their base from it's Urban/Suburban center. To do that, they need new ideas and a commitment to policies that will help small town and rural folks substantively. Some ideas I would recommend Democrats making priorities are;

#1. Investment in education but not carte-blanch. Democrats have to understand why central planning on education is so unpopular in small town/rural America. Small town schools represent the center of social life in most small towns. They play a large roll in building the community and community relationships. We need to fund these schools, with strings attached, so that they are not only strengthened but will provide jobs skills of tomorrow and not yesterday. Some reforms that would help is more community colleges with no tuition (just like high school) that can not only provide the first couple years of a traditional liberal arts education but technical, computer, manufacturing trades, allied health jobs, etc. Another important reform is to create majors at the high school level so that we don't have so many young students in academic flux who have no idea where they want to go and do. We need education tracks that can steer students who want to learn the modern skills needed to succeed in manufacturing, construction, traditional trades, health care, liberal arts, STEM fields, computer programing, etc. This would not only prepare students better for higher education and skills training but will point them in the direction of where the jobs are.

#2. Invest in expanding IT infrastructure into rural America. How can those who live in small towns compete with large urban areas when they don't have the IT infrastructure? Developing our IT infrastructure so that we have nation wide access no matter where you live is going to play a seriously critical role in re-invigorating small town economies. It would help end the youth and talent drain so many small towns see as the infrastructure isn't available locally and they need to go where the opportunities are. It would also help create entrepreneurial opportunities in these regions of the nation. To give you an idea of what I mean. I can do my work from outside my office as long as I have the IT access. I can easily do that in my suburban home as I have access to modern IT resources. In the small farm town I grew up in those resources don't exist. Therefore that opportunity doesn't exist. Also without access to IT resources how can entreprenuers, professionals and businessmen integrate into national and global supply chains that are critical these days for business success? They can't. Dems could gain a lot of rural/small town voters by beating the drums for a national IT infrastructure.

#3. Stop means testing social programs. This one really alienates rural folks. The best social programs are the ones that benefit everyone like SS and Medicare. Why should rural folk support social programs that only help the means tested in urban areas and do nothing for them.

#4. Quite by passing small towns on infrastructure projects. Building the new high way in a straight line from Big City A to Big City B and by passing all the small towns in between is a death threat to small town economies. Having that high way pass by your town with a clover leaf can mean the difference between economic growth and stagnation. Stop by passing small towns in infrastructure planning would do more than just provide temporary jobs in these regions. They are also the economic arteries of the life blood of trade.

Those are just some examples of how if Democrats would not only address these regions needs and concerns and actually do something consequential about it that they can restore their political footprint in these communities.

if they do this wouldnt trump get the credit :P
 
I could see it, or maybe a 1 or 2 seat gain - which, again, would be devastating for the right given the logistics.

There are already millions who have buyer's remorse w/ Trump - people who were so focused on their distaste or hate for Hillary that they didn't really think about an actual Trump Presidency. '18 has the potential to be for Dems what '94 was for the GOP. The left is more energized than I think I've ever seen them right now.

Leftists don't show-up to vote when there is no presidential race on the ballot. It's all they believe in or comprehend anymore.
 
Back
Top