Democrats lost over 1,000 seats under Obama

anatta

100% recycled karma
President Obama claims he could have won a third term if he had been allowed to run – but even if he's right, his coattails haven’t done much for the rest of his party.

While Obama’s tireless campaigning, broad demographic appeal and message of “hope” and “change” helped propel him to two terms in the White House, his skills on the stump haven’t translated down the ballot.

The Democratic Party suffered huge losses at every level during Obama’s West Wing tenure.

The grand total: a net loss of 1,042 state and federal Democratic posts, including congressional and state legislative seats, governorships and the presidency.

The latter was perhaps the most profound example of Obama's popularity failing to translate to support for his allies. Hillary Clinton, who served as secretary of state under Obama, brought the first family out for numerous campaign appearances. In September, Obama declared that his “legacy’s on the ballot.”

Less than two months later, Americans voted for Donald Trump.

OBAMA: I COULD HAVE WON THIRD TERM

But 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue wasn’t the only locale to see a big partisan change since Obama took office in January 2009, according to figures from Ballotpedia.

Democratic U.S. Senate seats fell from 55 to 46. Their share of the House plummeted from 256 seats to 194. Republicans still control both chambers going into the next session.

Democratic governerships also became a rarity during this eight-year period, slipping from 28 to 16.

The Obama years, which saw the rise of the Tea Party as well as a new movement form around Trump that is still being defined, coincided with a loss of 958 state legislative seats for Democrats.

Still, Obama said in an interview which aired Monday that, if he were allowed to run for a third term, he would have been victorious.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/27/democrats-lost-over-1000-seats-under-obama.html
 
they lost me. I voted for Republican president for the first time in my life -and that includes George McGovern.

They got no message -and I give them credit for Health care, but even that was becoming "unaffordable" ACA
 
Still, Obama said in an interview which aired Monday that, if he were allowed to run for a third term, he would have been victorious.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/27/democrats-lost-over-1000-seats-under-obama.html[/QUOTE]

No doubt he would have won a third term, Russia would have found it harder to hack his correspondences, FBI would have been more jurisprudential about releasing implied imformation, and if nothing else, those Democrats that sat out the election would have turned out in droves, it would have been a landslide, but it's here nor there

On supposedly losing seats, it's called gerrymandering, proof being a bad Democrat with outside forces working against her still got close to three million more Americans voting for her than the other guy. Plus, the GOP legislators in places as Mass and NY are more attuned with their State Democrat Party than that of the National GOP, generalizing all of them in one group is misleading, FOX style "news"
 
nobody thought Clinton would lose. She was a particularly bad candidate - but there is no guarantees Obama would have won either.

Gerrymandering can't be blamed for everything. Here in Florida we have "fair districts" and the court didmake the Republican legislature re-write the Congressional map. I'm sure there are some similar efforts in other states

The Senate was expected to be a tie or go Dem. it didn't.

Most worrisome for the Dems ( whenever they get out of their state of denial) are the governors and statehouses.
They really have nothing to point to. They got the cities/coasts, but are now losing the midwest too.

They have a demographic advantage but even that doesn't seem to help
 
nobody thought Clinton would lose. She was a particularly bad candidate - but there is no guarantees Obama would have won either.

Gerrymandering can't be blamed for everything. Here in Florida we have "fair districts" and the court didmake the Republican legislature re-write the Congressional map. I'm sure there are some similar efforts in other states

The Senate was expected to be a tie or go Dem. it didn't.
Most worrisome foe the Dems ( whenever they get out of their state of denial) are the governors and statehouses.
They really have nothing to point to. They got the cities/coasts, but are now losing the midwest too.

They have a demographic advantage but even that doesn't seem to help

Clinton was a bad candidate, but prior to the election, no one knew the extent of Russian and FBI involvement especially how it played in perfectly with the right wing media's overt efforts to work against Clinton

And as I noted, a number of those State officials are Republican, but hardly Republican in the mold of Southern State Governments

And, as a lot of conservatives seemingly ignore to recognize, those big cities are made up of Americans who votes are suppose to count just as much as any other American's, and they are growing everywhere in the Nation.

No matter which party loses a National election, the talk always arises about the demise of that Party, happened to GOP back in 2008
 
Still, Obama said in an interview which aired Monday that, if he were allowed to run for a third term, he would have been victorious.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/27/democrats-lost-over-1000-seats-under-obama.html

No doubt he would have won a third term, Russia would have found it harder to hack his correspondences, FBI would have been more jurisprudential about releasing implied imformation, and if nothing else, those Democrats that sat out the election would have turned out in droves, it would have been a landslide, but it's here nor there

On supposedly losing seats, it's called gerrymandering, proof being a bad Democrat with outside forces working against her still got close to three million more Americans voting for her than the other guy. Plus, the GOP legislators in places as Mass and NY are more attuned with their State Democrat Party than that of the National GOP, generalizing all of them in one group is misleading, FOX style "news"

Think of it as a war. Your side won one coast and half of another. Their side won half a coast, the gulf of Mexico, and everything in between.

Losing isn't as hard as you make it out to be, and besides, it's all over.
 
Clinton was a bad candidate, but prior to the election, no one knew the extent of Russian and FBI involvement especially how it played in perfectly with the right wing media's overt efforts to work against Clinton

And as I noted, a number of those State officials are Republican, but hardly Republican in the mold of Southern State Governments

And, as a lot of conservatives seemingly ignore to recognize, those big cities are made up of Americans who votes are suppose to count just as much as any other American's, and they are growing everywhere in the Nation.

No matter which party loses a National election, the talk always arises about the demise of that Party, happened to GOP back in 2008
FBI "involvement?" - you mean conducting a valid criminal investigation? Comey could have easily indicted her -she only got away with "extreme carelessness" because of some phantom reading of intent -otherwise she violated many classification procedure.
Russia only hacked the DNC and Podesta..the ClintonEmails were Clinton's own doing -released by the State Dept.

But look at the bigger picture/map: the Republicans are not just the Southern states anymore -both on the national and state levels.
Sure there is always blame after an POTUS election loss -this goes a lot deeper.
 
President Obama claims he could have won a third term if he had been allowed to run – but even if he's right, his coattails haven’t done much for the rest of his party.

Immature hypothetical statement. Sounds like schoolboy playground talk.
Reinforces his petulant midnight regulations.
This and the hollywierd celebrities holding their elitist concert celebrating the loss of hrc along with their losses in congress and state governorships and legislators over the past 8 years guarantees republican success when 33 dems come up for reelection in 2018.
Never saw such stupidity by a collective group of people . Instead of Nero fiddling while Rome burns, it's the whole bunch of them doing it while watching their own party become irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
FBI "involvement?" - you mean conducting a valid criminal investigation? Comey could have easily indicted her -she only got away with "extreme carelessness" because of some phantom reading of intent -otherwise she violated many classification procedure.
Russia only hacked the DNC and Podesta..the ClintonEmails were Clinton's own doing -released by the State Dept.

But look at the bigger picture/map: the Republicans are not just the Southern states anymore -both on the national and state levels.
Sure there is always blame after an POTUS election loss -this goes a lot deeper.

Suck that be Trump dick anatta, slurp it up.
 
President Obama claims he could have won a third term if he had been allowed to run – but even if he's right, his coattails haven’t done much for the rest of his party.

Immature hypothetical statement. Sounds like schoolboy playground talk.
Reinforces his petulant midnight regulations.
This and the hollywierd celebrities holding their elitist concert celebrating the loss of hrc along with their losses in congress and state governorships and legislators over the past 8 years guarantees republican success when 33 dems come up for reelection in 2018.
Never saw such stupidity by a collective group of people . Instead of Nero fiddling while Rome burns, it's the whole bunch of them doing it while watching their own party become irrelevant.
:good4u:
 
President Obama claims he could have won a third term if he had been allowed to run – but even if he's right, his coattails haven’t done much for the rest of his party.

While Obama’s tireless campaigning, broad demographic appeal and message of “hope” and “change” helped propel him to two terms in the White House, his skills on the stump haven’t translated down the ballot.

The Democratic Party suffered huge losses at every level during Obama’s West Wing tenure.

The grand total: a net loss of 1,042 state and federal Democratic posts, including congressional and state legislative seats, governorships and the presidency.

The latter was perhaps the most profound example of Obama's popularity failing to translate to support for his allies. Hillary Clinton, who served as secretary of state under Obama, brought the first family out for numerous campaign appearances. In September, Obama declared that his “legacy’s on the ballot.”

Less than two months later, Americans voted for Donald Trump.

OBAMA: I COULD HAVE WON THIRD TERM

But 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue wasn’t the only locale to see a big partisan change since Obama took office in January 2009, according to figures from Ballotpedia.

Democratic U.S. Senate seats fell from 55 to 46. Their share of the House plummeted from 256 seats to 194. Republicans still control both chambers going into the next session.

Democratic governerships also became a rarity during this eight-year period, slipping from 28 to 16.

The Obama years, which saw the rise of the Tea Party as well as a new movement form around Trump that is still being defined, coincided with a loss of 958 state legislative seats for Democrats.

Still, Obama said in an interview which aired Monday that, if he were allowed to run for a third term, he would have been victorious.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/27/democrats-lost-over-1000-seats-under-obama.html

The pendulum swings....
 
The pendulum swings....

it do.....
Pit_And_Pendulum.jpg
 
It's staggering the damage he inflicted that they were perfectly happy to bend over for.
They come away with a dead brand and no leadership to to try and find any sort of path forward.
It's really funny!
 
Still, Obama said in an interview which aired Monday that, if he were allowed to run for a third term, he would have been victorious.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/27/democrats-lost-over-1000-seats-under-obama.html

No doubt he would have won a third term, Russia would have found it harder to hack his correspondences, FBI would have been more jurisprudential about releasing implied imformation, and if nothing else, those Democrats that sat out the election would have turned out in droves, it would have been a landslide, but it's here nor there

On supposedly losing seats, it's called gerrymandering, proof being a bad Democrat with outside forces working against her still got close to three million more Americans voting for her than the other guy. Plus, the GOP legislators in places as Mass and NY are more attuned with their State Democrat Party than that of the National GOP, generalizing all of them in one group is misleading, FOX style "news"[/QUOTE]

how do you gerrymander gubernatorial and senatorial seats?
 
Back
Top