NOTE: Apparently I forgot to post this... It will inevitably be buried by my next post, but if you're curious, this is up now.
If you're a Democrat, the win sure sounds exciting: Unknown Democrat beats well-funded Republican in a (gerrymandered-to-be) heavily red district. The intimation is that if this district can turn blue, so can a lot of/most of/many less red districts across the country. I'm not so sure it'll be that easy, but there are a few lessons we can take away.
Candidates matter, to a point. Let's tie in the Alabama Senate special election here. Republicans, even in safe seats, are vulnerable with scandals. Roy Moore had his scandal, and it cost him. The only reason the Pennsylvania 18th was up for election at all is because the pro-life GOP incumbent was caught telling his mistress to have an abortion. The GOP put up their candidate and the Democrats put up theirs, but the GOP had been tainted. The Democrats put up a candidate who opposes abortion personally but doesn't think it's the government's place to get involved (a nuanced view shared by Tim Kaine and Joe Biden) and is for gun regulation but not gun control (also nuanced). The GOP candidate Saccone said in the final days that Democrats hate Donald Trump (probably true), America (absolutely false) and God (maybe some, but not nearly true). In short: Saccone was a bad candidate dragged down by his predecessor, and the Democrats had a perfectly OK candidate.
Unions can matter, to a point. Saccone also made a point of announcing anti-union positions. This was dumb in a district that is heavily unionized. Roughly 20 percent of the workers in the district are unionized. The unions endorsed the Democrat Lamb and put energy behind him. That said, not every suburban/rural district has a heavy union presence. Those union-heavy conditions in Pennsylvania's 18th are unlikely to be found in Iowa or Arkansas or Kentucky.
Republicans are in trouble. There have been eight special elections for Congress since 2016. Seven have been in "red states" (a term I dislike, but that's another story). There has been a swing in the margin of those elections (partisan lean compared to actual results) to the Democrats in every one of those eight races. In six of the eight, the swing has been double digits. The average swing has been about 17 percentage points. Even if you take out the horrible candidates of the Alabama and Pennsylvania races, the average has been 13 points. This Pennsylvania race even had higher turnout than the last midterm in 2014. The short version: Democrats are energized and flipping the House may be a greater possibility.
Retraction
I'd like to make a retraction of sorts. When I said that Michael Wolff's Fire and Fury book seemed to have truth to it, I think that's correct in the parts that have been supported by outside interviews. I also think the Bannon-related stuff is correct, as I have heard no denials. However, I'm more and more disappointed by how exposed Wolff has been in his desire to be sensationalist. He pumped up talks of a Trump affair in the media, then played coy and tried to let the media "connect the dots." At different times he seemed to indicate Trump's affair was with Hope Hicks (I could believe it) and then Nikki Haley (I could never believe this). Either way, when called out, he embarrassed himself. At one point, he claimed earpiece issues, and the host then replayed what Wolff had heard, and it showed no problems at all. In short: I am sorry for giving Wolff any endorsement at all when the proper reporting has been done by more reputable sources. But the more I think about it, this is how journalism works. Reporting — good or bad — will be able to stand up over time. Reporting by the Washington Post and New York Times stands up well over time. Michael Wolff's reporting has been embarrassing to all.
Summary Judgments
I thought this was an interesting story explaining the old law that's been a thorn in Trump's side. It further explains that Obama's administration fell victim to the law, too, but it was almost entirely late in the administration after Congressional avenues and other methods had been blocked. Fascinating contrast. • • • • • • We watched Mulan last weekend. I stand by my assessment that it doesn't meet the Nash-del test. The romance angle is entirely tacked on and ruins the "this isn't about romance" stuff that had been the theme of the rest of the movie. Better movie than I remembered, but still doesn't quite meet my test. • • • Good story on pro wrestling, and the legacy of father to son. • • • Grrr... This is why other countries are stepping up in leadership. When there is a leadership vacuum, other countries will step in. I don't think that's a move in the right direction for the U.S.
No comments:
Post a Comment