Wednesday, January 31, 2018
‘The End of Russia-gate?…’
On Tuesday [January 30, 2018], Jamarl Thomas uploaded an interesting video, on YouTube, titled “The End of Russia-gate? Republicans Release Memo They Claim Will Clear Trump’s Name.” It is interesting for Jamarl Thomas’s take on why this Blame Russia narrative was created, in 2016, and that it continues to be pushed even now, here in 2018. The duration of this video is just over fifteen minutes. It is worth one’s time.
Monday, January 29, 2018
Related and Unrelated Notes
Hello, to all! I don’t have a focused topic for today. But, there are a few things, not all related to each other, that I will share.
I avoided the Grammy Awards last night. This is good. Due to getting older (the opposite obviously does not happen), I have lost touch with keeping track of popular music. And I am good with that. This is three hours for which I did not give it my time. Come to think—I can actually relate this to Bonnie Raitt’s “Nick of Time,” the title track from the 1989 Grammy winner for Album of the Year, with these insightful words: “Life gets mighty precious when there is less of it to waste.” (Video, not the best quality, follows. I love the song!)
Binge-watching a 15-year-old series. Due to closeness with my Aunt, the sister of my late mother, who lives in Colorado, I will be visiting her for her 75th birthday this coming June. This blog will note it when the time comes. (Posting comments will still be available.) But, I have her to thank for getting me into watching a television series I ignored for years: CBS’s NCIS. It’s a Top 5-watched series—it finished three times within the last five seasons at No. 1—that needs no describing other than noting this simple fact: The good guys usually win; and the government is, for the most part, good. I have a good time with such fiction. It’s healthy to get away from real-world shit from time to time. I’m streaming it, from Season #01 going forward, on Netflix (which I resumed, just last week, thanks to comedian Dave Chappelle’s recent specials). I did not see NCIS, which premiered in 2003, for the first time until 2010, for an episode titled “Mother’s Day.” It guest-starred the great Gena Rowlands as the former mother-in-law of Mark Harmon’s lead character, hell bent on getting some justice for the killings of both her daughter (his wife) and her granddaughter (his daughter). (Episode-related video follows.) I watched the series in recent seasons. So, I won’t need to stream so many. But many I will need to stream. NCIS is the type of series that, unlike so many of the acclaimed, Emmy-recognized fare, doesn’t required deep thought, with episode-to-episode following and viewing (which is what I wouldn’t want; that can feel like a job!), and I don’t stress over missing an episode as if I missed too much. (I got lost with Lost, which was on ABC from 2004 to 2010, thanks to this. So, no thanks to the can’t-miss-an-episode nonsense anymore.) By the way: None of this, for me, is a waste.
Late-night Jimmy Dore Show videos. During the late night, I came across two YouTube-uploaded videos that felt appropriate to wait until today for posting. So, I will close this entry with two videos from Jimmy Dore. Subject matters are very interesting. In fact, I have set up a feature comment asking for feedback to a question I have related to the first video. And, after all this, I wish everyone a good week.
I avoided the Grammy Awards last night. This is good. Due to getting older (the opposite obviously does not happen), I have lost touch with keeping track of popular music. And I am good with that. This is three hours for which I did not give it my time. Come to think—I can actually relate this to Bonnie Raitt’s “Nick of Time,” the title track from the 1989 Grammy winner for Album of the Year, with these insightful words: “Life gets mighty precious when there is less of it to waste.” (Video, not the best quality, follows. I love the song!)
Binge-watching a 15-year-old series. Due to closeness with my Aunt, the sister of my late mother, who lives in Colorado, I will be visiting her for her 75th birthday this coming June. This blog will note it when the time comes. (Posting comments will still be available.) But, I have her to thank for getting me into watching a television series I ignored for years: CBS’s NCIS. It’s a Top 5-watched series—it finished three times within the last five seasons at No. 1—that needs no describing other than noting this simple fact: The good guys usually win; and the government is, for the most part, good. I have a good time with such fiction. It’s healthy to get away from real-world shit from time to time. I’m streaming it, from Season #01 going forward, on Netflix (which I resumed, just last week, thanks to comedian Dave Chappelle’s recent specials). I did not see NCIS, which premiered in 2003, for the first time until 2010, for an episode titled “Mother’s Day.” It guest-starred the great Gena Rowlands as the former mother-in-law of Mark Harmon’s lead character, hell bent on getting some justice for the killings of both her daughter (his wife) and her granddaughter (his daughter). (Episode-related video follows.) I watched the series in recent seasons. So, I won’t need to stream so many. But many I will need to stream. NCIS is the type of series that, unlike so many of the acclaimed, Emmy-recognized fare, doesn’t required deep thought, with episode-to-episode following and viewing (which is what I wouldn’t want; that can feel like a job!), and I don’t stress over missing an episode as if I missed too much. (I got lost with Lost, which was on ABC from 2004 to 2010, thanks to this. So, no thanks to the can’t-miss-an-episode nonsense anymore.) By the way: None of this, for me, is a waste.
Late-night Jimmy Dore Show videos. During the late night, I came across two YouTube-uploaded videos that felt appropriate to wait until today for posting. So, I will close this entry with two videos from Jimmy Dore. Subject matters are very interesting. In fact, I have set up a feature comment asking for feedback to a question I have related to the first video. And, after all this, I wish everyone a good week.
Friday, January 26, 2018
Open Weekend
This “Open Weekend” thread is a regular thing for Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
Midterm Elections 2018
A recent The Intercept report, “The Dead Enders,” is about the Democratic Party Establishment, like DCCC, is conniving to get only corporatists nominated with the 2018 primaries. I will also provide a link to the report: The Dead Enders. (I posted it, in the comments, in the previous thread.) Here are videos, in response, from The Jimmy Dore Show and Secular Talk.
More Phoniness
I came across this tweet. It pokes fun at a particular b.s. movement. It is pretty good.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
Midterm Elections 2018
A recent The Intercept report, “The Dead Enders,” is about the Democratic Party Establishment, like DCCC, is conniving to get only corporatists nominated with the 2018 primaries. I will also provide a link to the report: The Dead Enders. (I posted it, in the comments, in the previous thread.) Here are videos, in response, from The Jimmy Dore Show and Secular Talk.
• UPDATE • Friday, 01.26.2018, at 07:15 p.m. ET: Here is a video about this from The Real News.…
More Phoniness
I came across this tweet. It pokes fun at a particular b.s. movement. It is pretty good.
My resistance workout is just pushing a cart with a severe right swerve through the grocery store for an hour.— SpacedMom (@copymama) January 24, 2018
• SPECIAL • Grammy Weekend
This Sunday [January 28, 2018] is the 60th Grammy Awards on CBS.
I mentioned recently not feeling up to live-viewing awards ceremonies.
But, I present this special “Grammy Weekend” thread to salute some really good music. Grammy nominations and/or wins are not required. This may be appreciated by people here at Progressives Chat.
My blog thread entry singles out my favorite winner, in a top category, from the 1980s.
The 1984 Grammy nominees for Record of the Year (for a single recording) were: “Dancing in the Dark” by Bruce Springsteen; “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” by Cyndi Lauper; “Hard Habit to Break” by Chicago; “The Heart of Rock & Roll” by Huey Lewis and the News; “What’s Love Got to Do with It” by Tina Turner.
The winner: “What’s Love Got to Do with It” by Tina Turner. It also won for Song of the Year, awarded to the songwriters, Terry Britten and Graham Lyle. It is terrific—both sexy and smart. (For a guide, here is the page from Wikipedia for the referred category: Record of the Year .)
Here is the video:
I mentioned recently not feeling up to live-viewing awards ceremonies.
But, I present this special “Grammy Weekend” thread to salute some really good music. Grammy nominations and/or wins are not required. This may be appreciated by people here at Progressives Chat.
My blog thread entry singles out my favorite winner, in a top category, from the 1980s.
The 1984 Grammy nominees for Record of the Year (for a single recording) were: “Dancing in the Dark” by Bruce Springsteen; “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” by Cyndi Lauper; “Hard Habit to Break” by Chicago; “The Heart of Rock & Roll” by Huey Lewis and the News; “What’s Love Got to Do with It” by Tina Turner.
The winner: “What’s Love Got to Do with It” by Tina Turner. It also won for Song of the Year, awarded to the songwriters, Terry Britten and Graham Lyle. It is terrific—both sexy and smart. (For a guide, here is the page from Wikipedia for the referred category: Record of the Year .)
Here is the video:
Wednesday, January 24, 2018
Politicians and Awards
Nominations for the 90th Academy Awards were announced Tuesday [January 23, 2018]. The 60th Grammy Awards are next Sunday [January 28].
My thoughts have given some focus to the fact that the mainstream entertainment industry have awarded politicians with nominations—and, in some case, statues—while normal thought would be for politicians and the entertainment industry to not mix so much.
I came across a list of those politicians with experience with the Grammy Awards. This includes Barack Obama and both Bill and Hillary Clinton. And Bernie Sanders is a current nominee. Here is a source: Grammys and Politicians.
From Oscar, the 2006 winner for best documentary feature was An Inconvenient Truth, which was about Al Gore on his efforts to educate the citizenry on global warming. (The above video is that Oscar presentation and the 45th vice president’s speech.)
Current president of the United States Donald Trump has been on the receiving end as well. After NBC’s The Apprentice premiered during the 2003–04 television season, Trump and the series were nominated for the Emmy for outstanding reality-competition program. Trump actually did win the 1990 Razzie Award for worst supporting actor in Ghosts Can’t Do It, a film starring Bo Derek. (The Golden Raspberry Awards [dis-] honors the worst in movies for a given year. They are held the day before the Academy Awards.)
Now, if mentioning Trump doesn’t fit with the narrative, because his experience came before his first-term election to the presidency of the United States, let us keep in mind that Ronald Reagan—who is so many proud conservatives’s ideal of the perfect president—was the president of the Screen Actors Guild of America. Twice.
The only major awards I can think of which has not awarded nominations—or, in any cases, statues—to any politicians is the Tony Awards. But, that may be due to the American Theatre Wing specifying the eligibility requirement of location—Broadway! (Trump should have considered that.)
What to make of all this?
I don’t know exactly. But, the term starfucking springs to mind. We could just call it politicianfucking.
Monday, January 22, 2018
Why not Donald Trump?
This past Saturday marked the one-year anniversary of Donald Trump having become the 45th president of the United States. It was official [Friday,] January 20, 2017 at 12:00 p.m. ET.
After Election 2016, and with Trump in office, plenty of progressives figured it would be necessary to fight Donald Trump for bad policies and leadership.
I cannot say I disagree with them. However, I disagree with trying to tell people what or where their focus should be. For example, I disagreed with Benjamin Dixon, and later videos from him, saying that people who are too focused on the corrupt, corporate, establishment Democrats—while not balancing that with going after Trump—were not making the right choice. I don’t think that is a clear understanding.
Why don’t I tend to post topic threads about Donald Trump? (Especially ones critical and/or opposed to Trump?) Well…
What Election 2016 told us—that is, the primaries before the general election—is that the No. 1 enemy of progressives are not conservatives and the Republican Party. The No. 1 enemy of progressives—and I mean actual progressives—are the corporate Democratic Party Establishment. That is why I don’t spend time lashing out at the Republicans or Trump. The Democratic Party—those in control of how it operates as a whole—cannot be trusted. It is the Democratic, not the Republican, Party which had a rigged 2016 presidential primary. Once that becomes so obvious and that it becomes too obvious…all this lashing out that I could otherwise be doing against Trump and the Republican Party would be pointless.
Kshama Sawant, shown in the first video below, had it correct: That the Democratic Party Establishment, in 2016, found it more urgent not so much to defeat Donald Trump but to defeat the agenda of the working people. If that isn’t telling the truth to all people who normally prefer the Democrats over the Republicans—and give them clarity of being able to recognize their political enemies—than those particular people who assure themselves it is best to automatically prefer the Democrats over the Republicans are not interested in the truth. They want their illusions. (In 2010, Ralph Nader described President Barack Obama as a “con man.” Link: Nader—Obama is a ‘con man’ . I now apply the word con artists to this corrupt, corporate Democratic Party Establishment.)
I also leave another video from The Jimmy Dore Show which is funny but should not be spoiled with a detailed explanation. (Let’s just say that it helps to also explain why I never supported with any of my votes the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.) Enjoy that, too, if you will.
Friday, January 19, 2018
Troubleshooting
Hello, Everyone!
Friday 01.19.2018 @ 01:30 p.m. ET: I am having a problem with Disqus not appearing on my iPhone 6 Plus. (I often use that to post and/or respond to comments.)
My thread comments today, on “Open Weekend,” have been made from my iMac. That has generated the Disqus comments.
Looking at previous days’ threads, also from my iPhone, Disqus comments does not appear.
Below images show what appears on my iPhone. It shows no appearance of Disqus comments.
If anyone can respond, I would appreciate it. (Again—for the time being, I can only post in comments from my iMac.)
Thank you!
—Candy83
Friday 01.19.2018 @ 01:30 p.m. ET: I am having a problem with Disqus not appearing on my iPhone 6 Plus. (I often use that to post and/or respond to comments.)
My thread comments today, on “Open Weekend,” have been made from my iMac. That has generated the Disqus comments.
Looking at previous days’ threads, also from my iPhone, Disqus comments does not appear.
Below images show what appears on my iPhone. It shows no appearance of Disqus comments.
If anyone can respond, I would appreciate it. (Again—for the time being, I can only post in comments from my iMac.)
Thank you!
—Candy83
Open Weekend
This “Open Weekend” thread is a regular thing for Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
After 01:00 a.m. ET, on Friday, January 19, 2018, I came across this YouTube-uploaded video from The Jimmy Dore Show. I am featuring it here in this blog entry for this “Open Weekend” thread.
Entertainment Weekend
“Entertainment Weekend” threads invite you to share anything—including content—on movies, television, and music on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Wednesday, January 17, 2018
‘“Progressive” vs. “Liberal” Redux’
Marked January 6, 2018, there was an interesting podcast on Ralph Nader Radio Hour.
This was in nailing down what it is really with those from the Hillary Clinton and those from the Bernie Sanders wings of the Democratic Party.
One thing I like about what Ralph Nader, who turns 84 next month, said was to be on alert the Democratic Party Establishment is trying to make the term progressive mean nothing.
Here is the recent podcast.
The episode description: “Ralph talks to legendary progressive lawyer and former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, about the conflicts in the Middle East. And we continue our discussion about the difference between ‘progressives’ and ‘liberals’ and why the distinction is important. Plus more listener…”
The focus from this blog topic is at the mark of 33:33.
This was in nailing down what it is really with those from the Hillary Clinton and those from the Bernie Sanders wings of the Democratic Party.
One thing I like about what Ralph Nader, who turns 84 next month, said was to be on alert the Democratic Party Establishment is trying to make the term progressive mean nothing.
Here is the recent podcast.
The episode description: “Ralph talks to legendary progressive lawyer and former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, about the conflicts in the Middle East. And we continue our discussion about the difference between ‘progressives’ and ‘liberals’ and why the distinction is important. Plus more listener…”
The focus from this blog topic is at the mark of 33:33.
Monday, January 15, 2018
Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
 |
| MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. 01.15.1929–04.04.1968 |
Today, Monday, January 15, 2018, is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.
He would have been 89 years old.
April 4, 2018 will mark the 50th anniversary of the assassination of the Civil Rights leader.
Pat_Shackleford wrote something, over the weekend, which really stood out: “We’re about at the annual MSM loveliest with [Martin Luther King, Jr.] where they make sure NOT to mention how vocally anti-war he was. That’s his most power speech I think (‘Beyond Vietnam’), but you won’t hear public officials quoting or mentioning THAT one.”
I appreciate this, Pat. It is sad how people seem to be so unaware.
Friday, January 12, 2018
Open Weekend
This “Open Weekend” thread is a regular thing for Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
Entertainment Weekend
“Entertainment Weekend” threads invite you to share anything—including content—on movies, television, and music on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Tuesday, January 9, 2018
President Oprah Winfrey
After delivering her well-received speech at the 75th Golden Globes on Sunday [January 7, 2018], Oprah Winfrey has been the subject of talk for who the Democrats’ 2020 presidential nominee should be. Some say, Why not Oprah Winfrey?
This has caused many to respond. Articles. Videos. But, my attitude is: After the Republicans got a former actor (and ex-president of the Screen Actors Guild of America), as well as a billionaire businessman and reality-competition television host, nominated and elected to the presidency of the United States…well, of course the Democrats can run Oprah Winfrey.
In 2017, there was talk that maybe the Democrats’ 2020 nominee should be someone who is also wildly popular in entertainment, like Beyonce.
Why the fuck not?
Let’s not pretend the people of the United States have rigid standards for just who may or may not be president.
Let’s not pretend we have lofty standards.
Ronald Reagan.
Donald Trump.
Both, prior to their nominations and their elections, were laughed at and dismissed as virtually impossible.
Both 40th U.S. president Ronald Reagan and 45th U.S. president Donald Trump come from the Republican Party.
Is there any reason to say that the Democratic Party is not allowed to deliver their established, showbiz superstar to the presidency of the United States?
Okay…
None of this has to do with what a President Oprah Winfrey would offer. It doesn’t say anything about her politics. Well, let me correct myself. After her speech, some took quickly to writing or talking about her politics notably from her past—especially while she still had her talk show—and even ABC News ran a report on whether Oprah Winfrey may run.
In 2007, Oprah Winfrey embraced and endorsed Barack Obama on her nationally syndicated talk show (1986–2011). Many figured she was a key influencer to Obama eventually upsetting Hillary Clinton to win the 2008 Democratic nomination and later getting elected the 44th president of the United States. That Obama’s campaign was really put on the map with that good-as-gold Oprah Winfrey endorsement.
Let me mention this: I am not seriously thinking about Election 2020 as many political junkies are. I like this crazy notion of taking elections one cycle at a time. It doesn’t mean I don’t at all think ahead to 2020. But, we just entered the year 2018. We have midterm elections. Included in that are not just the 435 congressional seats and about one-third the U.S. Senate but also 36 states—including the Top 10 most-populous—which are holding their gubernatorial elections. So, I’m not excited to want to jump ahead to 2020. With what went down in 2016, particularly on the Democratic side with their rigged presidential primaries, and my distrust of the party apparatus, I am not interested in getting myself excited for the Democrats. I am not wanting to go there. What happened in 2016 affects my perception of this political party, which is very negative, and it does impact how I will handle my votes going forward. But, just for the sake of a discussion, and it is harmless to have one here on Progressives Chat, and whether I want to take this President Oprah Winfrey speculation seriously…I would have no problem with her actually running. Presidents Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump are the reasons why. Would I actually vote the nomination to Oprah Winfrey? At this point, and with what information I have, I would estimate the chances are 95 percent or more that I would not.
I usually post new threads on Mondays and Wednesdays, and with weekend threads on Fridays. But, due to the timing of this, I am making an exception with this “President Oprah Winfrey” blog entry here on Tuesday [January 9, 2018]. There will be no new topic on Wednesday [January 10]. I wanted to cover this without waiting an extra day. (Next week will be a return to normal schedule. Comments are good seven days from a topic’s posting.) And, besides, Jimmy Dore does have a response. As does others appearing below.
Monday, January 8, 2018
Congratulations! Celebrate Without Me!
Last night [Sunday, January 7, 2018] was the 75th Golden Globe Awards on NBC.
The Golden Globes are really given attention for the fact that, routinely, at least two of the four performances which later win Oscars had also won at the Golden Globe Awards. Often, it is three-for-four. In some years, it is all four. So, showbiz loves the Golden Globe Awards just for that.
The 60th Grammy Awards are scheduled for [Sunday,] January 28, 2018 on CBS. This is one week before the Super Bowl on NBC. So, the Grammys and CBS knew to avoid the same night.
The 90th Academy Awards are scheduled for [Sunday,] March 4, 2018 on ABC.
We are in a period where awards season is upon us.
Congratulations on these milestone anniversaries and to the winners, yes, but more importantly to me for preferring to not watch them live.
I’m tired. I don’t feel like putting up with three-hour awards ceremonies live. And I don’t want to endure the spirit of the humor brought to these festivities by celebrities who lash out at President Donald Trump when they haven’t done the same at the Democratic Party Establishment and the 2016 bomb of a nominee they forced down U.S. citizens’s throats named Hillary Clinton. (I was reminded of this with live-watching only the first half-hour of last year’s prime-time Emmy Awards, hosted by Stephen Colbert, on CBS.) I don’t want to be told by these in-the-bubble celebrities that Hillary Clinton is the angel and Donald Trump is the monster—yet so many of them have stayed at that monster’s hotels throughout the many years.
So, in the spirit of awards season, I once again congratulate these people on their achievements. But, I would prefer to grab the winners’ list, from the Internet, while live-viewing something—or just about anything—else.
Friday, January 5, 2018
Open Weekend
This “Open Weekend” thread is a regular thing for Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
Please take this Progressives Chat to wherever you may want it to go.
Entertainment Weekend
“Entertainment Weekend” threads invite you to share anything—including content—on movies, television, and music on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays.
Wednesday, January 3, 2018
A 2018 Blue Wave
The midterm elections of 2018 appear to have the characteristics of a wave that will benefit the White House opposition party, the Democratic Party.
This is due to the Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump’s job-approval polls consistently in the 30s percentile range. So, if 2018 turns out to be a midterm wave for the Democrats, Donald Trump will be the No. 1 reason why Republicans will lose as much as the U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and the majority number of governorships.
A December 4, 2017 report from Gallup showed Trump at 72 percent approval from self-identified Republicans, 7 percent from self-identified Democrats, and just 32 percent from self-identified independents. (Sample size from each was not exactly the same. Had they been, that would put Trump at 37 percent. Gallup had him at 35 percent.) The numbers are bad most obviously coming from independents. But, for Trump to be at 72 percent approval from Republicans is nowhere near the typical, say, 88 to 92 percent a presidential nominee and/or winner will garner nationally from same-party voters. It means, heading into 2018, self-identified Republicans do not appear to have the backs of Trump and their political party. It means the independents will, for the most part, cast their general-election votes for the Democrats. It means the Democrats, more motivated to participate in voting than Republicans, will generate a host of pickups—and I think it would be to a point of winning over majorities for U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and Governor.
08:00 p.m. ET
• Florida: #18 (Brian Mast); #26 (Carlos Curbelo); #27 (Open; Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, retiring)
• Illinois: #06 (Peter Roskam); #12 (Mike Bost); #13 (Rodney Davis); #14 (Randy Hultgren)
• Pennsylvania: #06 (Ryan Costello); #07 (Pat Meehan); #08 (Brian Fitzpatrick); #15 (Open; Charles Dent, retiring); #16 (Lloyd Smucker); #18 (Open; left vacant by resignation of Timothy Murphy)
• New Jersey: #02 (Open; Frank LoBiondo, retiring); #03 (Tom MacArthur); #07 (Leonard Lance); #11 (Rodney Freylinghuysen)
• Maine: #02 (Bruce Poliquin)
09:00 p.m. ET
• Texas: #07 (John Culberson); #21 (Open; Lamar Smith, retiring); #23 (Will Hurd); #32 (Pete Sessions)
• New York: #01 (Lee Zeldin); #11 (Daniel Donovan); #19 (John Faso); #22 (Claudia Tenney); #23 (Tom Reed); #24 (John Katko)
• Michigan: #11 (Open; Dave Trott, retiring)
• Arizona: #02 (Martha McSally)
• Wisconsin: #01 (U.S. House speaker Paul Ryan); #06 (Glenn Grothman)
• Minnesota: #02 (Jason Lewis); #03 (Erik Paulsen)
• Colorado: #06 (Mike Coffman)
• Kansas: #02 (Open; Lynn Jenkins, retiring); #03 (Kevin Yoder)
• Nebraska: #02 (Don Bacon)
• New Mexico: #02 (Open; Steve Pearce, retiring to run for Governor)
10:00 p.m. ET
• Iowa: #01 (Rod Blum); #03 (David Young)
• Utah: #04 (Mia Love)
• Montana: At-Large (Greg Gianforte)
11:00 p.m. ET
• California: #10 (Jeff Denham); #21 (David Valadao); #25 (Steve Knight); #39 (Ed Royce); #45 (Mimi Walters); #48 (Dana Rohrbacher); #49 (Darrell Issa)
• Washington: #08 (Dave Reichert)
U.S. SENATE
The screen shot of the U.S. Senate map shows which states are on the schedule for the 2018 midterm elections. Those in white are not scheduled.
The color key is red for Republican hold, blue for Democratic hold, and light shade indicates a pickup. Since a midterm wave—going against the party of the incumbent U.S. president—is largely one-sided, there will be no light red for Republican pickup; just light blue for Democratic pickup. (In the midterm waves for the Republicans of 1994 and 2014, and 2006 for the Democrats, they lost no seats going as the minority prior to winning over a new majority.) Those in beige, which should be in yellow (not an available color-coding option from 270toWin.com) are potential tossups. (If it gets worse for the Republicans.)
With the special 12.12.2017 election in Alabama, resulting in a Democratic pickup for Doug Jones (over Republican nominee Roy Moore), the Democrats will have 49 seats going into 2018. Their path to flipping majority control is first holding all current seats and then flipping Nevada (Dean Heller) and, as it would be the tipping point state, Arizona (Open; Jeff Flake, retiring). At the presidential level, Nevada has been emerging from bellwether to Lean Democratic. (It votes like New Mexico, which is no longer a bellwether state.) And Arizona, which has carried Republican in all but 1996 since 1952, is trending away from Republican to a new bellwether (likely to be flipped in the next Democratic presidential pickup year). Next in line would be Tennessee (Open; Bob Corker, retiring); Texas (Ted Cruz, in a state trending away from the GOP); and Nebraska (Deb Fischer, a Republican pickup winner from 2012).
A twist, which I have considered, could involve Arizona because of John McCain. It is not a pleasure to mention. But, if his condition is one that has him leave the U.S. Senate, in 2018, his Republican-held seat would go on the schedule as a special election, giving the Democrats another pickup opportunity.
GOVERNORS
The Democrats, who flipped the governorship of New Jersey in 2017, go into the 2018 midterm elections with 16 vs. the 33 for the Republicans. Alaska, which is a tossup, appears on the map for 2018. For a new majority count of at least 26, the Democrats need a pickup of +10. My map has them gaining +9 for 25. The rest of the states, which appear in beige (again, 270toWin.com should have allowed an option of yellow for tossup), are the rest of the path.
Setting aside 2017 New Jersey, eight of the 20 states carried in 2016 by losing Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton have Republican governors. A new majority-count pickup should be heavily concentrated among those eight. In a midterm wave for the Democrats, they should be flipping Maryland and Massachusetts to go along with Illinois. And five of the six states—Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin—which flipped Republican to elect Donald Trump president of the United States. (Florida is the most difficult because, frankly, because the Democrats have been terrible in that state. But, it is a growing state with more congressional districts. So, it is on the radar.)
A lot of this is going to depend on specific candidates. But one thing to keep in mind is this. After Bill Clinton unseated George Bush in 1992, in a Democratic pickup of the presidency, the midterm election wave for the Republicans in 1994 saw that party have the U.S. House from 1995 to 2006 and 2011 to, so far, 2018. Only during the four consecutive years of 2007 to 2010 did the Democrats have the majority with the U.S. House. The majority count of governorships runs parallel to those years. The Republicans had majority counts for governorships from 1995 to 2006 and 2011 to, so far, 2018. The Democrats had majority counts for governorships only during the four years of 2007 to 2010. This is why I mention not just the U.S. House and U.S. Senate but also Governors.
If the midterm elections of 2018 result in a Democratic wave in which Team Blue wins over majorities with the U.S. House and U.S. Senate—and to a level dramatic enough that the Democrats outnumber the Republicans in votes cast, in a D-vs.-R contest, plus with independents (preferring D to R)—that would bring in a sufficient number of Democratic pickups for a new majority of Governors.
This is due to the Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump’s job-approval polls consistently in the 30s percentile range. So, if 2018 turns out to be a midterm wave for the Democrats, Donald Trump will be the No. 1 reason why Republicans will lose as much as the U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and the majority number of governorships.
A December 4, 2017 report from Gallup showed Trump at 72 percent approval from self-identified Republicans, 7 percent from self-identified Democrats, and just 32 percent from self-identified independents. (Sample size from each was not exactly the same. Had they been, that would put Trump at 37 percent. Gallup had him at 35 percent.) The numbers are bad most obviously coming from independents. But, for Trump to be at 72 percent approval from Republicans is nowhere near the typical, say, 88 to 92 percent a presidential nominee and/or winner will garner nationally from same-party voters. It means, heading into 2018, self-identified Republicans do not appear to have the backs of Trump and their political party. It means the independents will, for the most part, cast their general-election votes for the Democrats. It means the Democrats, more motivated to participate in voting than Republicans, will generate a host of pickups—and I think it would be to a point of winning over majorities for U.S. House, U.S. Senate, and Governor.
Where will the Democrats win their pickups? I am going to do some estimating. And I will break it down into separate categories: U.S. House; U.S. Senate; and Governors.
One thing I do want to make certain to mention: None of this influences how I will handle my voting. I am anticipating that the Democratic Party Establishment will get most (or all) of their corporate Democratic incumbents re-nominated; that the newbies who get nominated will be a good number of corporate Democrats; and that there will be slim pickings (if any) of true progressives nominated. I would like to be wrong. So, what this would require of me is to research. But, it can also play out that, should what I mention materialize, I may make a point of denying the Democrats in every office on my general-election ballot.
Let’s say the Democrats do win back the Congress. What will happen after that? They will continue to do everything they can to get Donald Trump re-elected in 2020. And if that happens, the people will be surprised are the sheeple.
The point of this blog entry is awareness for what appears to be taking shape, yes, and for what may play out. It is, most of all, anticipation.
U.S. HOUSE
The screen shot maps from 270toWin.com shows two perspectives on competitive U.S. House races. Those in light shades of red are districts which have a Republican partisan advantage not quite deep as those in solid red (indicated on the first map; the second map grays out those solid red districts as not competitive).
There are just over 60 Republican-held seats—seven of them from California (including Darrell Issa) and six each from New York and Pennsylvania—which are vulnerable. The Democrats need an overall pickup of +25. (Prior to Michigan’s John Conyers retiring, and his seat now vacant, it was +24. But, Michigan #13 is Strongly Democrat.)
The amount of states with competitive U.S. House races are 26. An average of one Democratic pickup for each state are a net gain of +27. An average of one and a half for each state are a net gain of +40. An average of two pickups for each state are a net gain of +54. From those numbers, you can see how these can really add up sufficiently for Democrats to flip the U.S. House.
So, here is the list (going in order of states’s polls’ closing times):
07:00 p.m. ET
• Georgia: #06 (Karen Handel)
• Virginia: #02 (Scott Taylor); #05 (Tom Garrett); #07 (Dave Brat); #10 (Barbara Comstock)
• Indiana #02 (Jackie Walorski)
One thing I do want to make certain to mention: None of this influences how I will handle my voting. I am anticipating that the Democratic Party Establishment will get most (or all) of their corporate Democratic incumbents re-nominated; that the newbies who get nominated will be a good number of corporate Democrats; and that there will be slim pickings (if any) of true progressives nominated. I would like to be wrong. So, what this would require of me is to research. But, it can also play out that, should what I mention materialize, I may make a point of denying the Democrats in every office on my general-election ballot.
Let’s say the Democrats do win back the Congress. What will happen after that? They will continue to do everything they can to get Donald Trump re-elected in 2020. And if that happens, the people will be surprised are the sheeple.
The point of this blog entry is awareness for what appears to be taking shape, yes, and for what may play out. It is, most of all, anticipation.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
U.S. HOUSE
The screen shot maps from 270toWin.com shows two perspectives on competitive U.S. House races. Those in light shades of red are districts which have a Republican partisan advantage not quite deep as those in solid red (indicated on the first map; the second map grays out those solid red districts as not competitive).
There are just over 60 Republican-held seats—seven of them from California (including Darrell Issa) and six each from New York and Pennsylvania—which are vulnerable. The Democrats need an overall pickup of +25. (Prior to Michigan’s John Conyers retiring, and his seat now vacant, it was +24. But, Michigan #13 is Strongly Democrat.)
The amount of states with competitive U.S. House races are 26. An average of one Democratic pickup for each state are a net gain of +27. An average of one and a half for each state are a net gain of +40. An average of two pickups for each state are a net gain of +54. From those numbers, you can see how these can really add up sufficiently for Democrats to flip the U.S. House.
So, here is the list (going in order of states’s polls’ closing times):
07:00 p.m. ET
• Georgia: #06 (Karen Handel)
• Virginia: #02 (Scott Taylor); #05 (Tom Garrett); #07 (Dave Brat); #10 (Barbara Comstock)
• Indiana #02 (Jackie Walorski)
• Kentucky: #06 (Andy Barr)
07:30 p.m. ET
• Ohio: #01 (Steve Chabot); #12 (Open; Patrick Tiberi, retiring)
• North Carolina: #02 (George Holding); #09 (Robert Pittenger)
• West Virginia: #03 (Open; Evan Jenkins, retiring to run for U.S. Senate)
07:30 p.m. ET
• Ohio: #01 (Steve Chabot); #12 (Open; Patrick Tiberi, retiring)
• North Carolina: #02 (George Holding); #09 (Robert Pittenger)
• West Virginia: #03 (Open; Evan Jenkins, retiring to run for U.S. Senate)
08:00 p.m. ET
• Florida: #18 (Brian Mast); #26 (Carlos Curbelo); #27 (Open; Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, retiring)
• Illinois: #06 (Peter Roskam); #12 (Mike Bost); #13 (Rodney Davis); #14 (Randy Hultgren)
• Pennsylvania: #06 (Ryan Costello); #07 (Pat Meehan); #08 (Brian Fitzpatrick); #15 (Open; Charles Dent, retiring); #16 (Lloyd Smucker); #18 (Open; left vacant by resignation of Timothy Murphy)
• New Jersey: #02 (Open; Frank LoBiondo, retiring); #03 (Tom MacArthur); #07 (Leonard Lance); #11 (Rodney Freylinghuysen)
• Maine: #02 (Bruce Poliquin)
09:00 p.m. ET
• Texas: #07 (John Culberson); #21 (Open; Lamar Smith, retiring); #23 (Will Hurd); #32 (Pete Sessions)
• New York: #01 (Lee Zeldin); #11 (Daniel Donovan); #19 (John Faso); #22 (Claudia Tenney); #23 (Tom Reed); #24 (John Katko)
• Michigan: #11 (Open; Dave Trott, retiring)
• Arizona: #02 (Martha McSally)
• Wisconsin: #01 (U.S. House speaker Paul Ryan); #06 (Glenn Grothman)
• Minnesota: #02 (Jason Lewis); #03 (Erik Paulsen)
• Colorado: #06 (Mike Coffman)
• Kansas: #02 (Open; Lynn Jenkins, retiring); #03 (Kevin Yoder)
• Nebraska: #02 (Don Bacon)
• New Mexico: #02 (Open; Steve Pearce, retiring to run for Governor)
10:00 p.m. ET
• Iowa: #01 (Rod Blum); #03 (David Young)
• Utah: #04 (Mia Love)
• Montana: At-Large (Greg Gianforte)
11:00 p.m. ET
• California: #10 (Jeff Denham); #21 (David Valadao); #25 (Steve Knight); #39 (Ed Royce); #45 (Mimi Walters); #48 (Dana Rohrbacher); #49 (Darrell Issa)
• Washington: #08 (Dave Reichert)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
U.S. SENATE
The screen shot of the U.S. Senate map shows which states are on the schedule for the 2018 midterm elections. Those in white are not scheduled.
The color key is red for Republican hold, blue for Democratic hold, and light shade indicates a pickup. Since a midterm wave—going against the party of the incumbent U.S. president—is largely one-sided, there will be no light red for Republican pickup; just light blue for Democratic pickup. (In the midterm waves for the Republicans of 1994 and 2014, and 2006 for the Democrats, they lost no seats going as the minority prior to winning over a new majority.) Those in beige, which should be in yellow (not an available color-coding option from 270toWin.com) are potential tossups. (If it gets worse for the Republicans.)
With the special 12.12.2017 election in Alabama, resulting in a Democratic pickup for Doug Jones (over Republican nominee Roy Moore), the Democrats will have 49 seats going into 2018. Their path to flipping majority control is first holding all current seats and then flipping Nevada (Dean Heller) and, as it would be the tipping point state, Arizona (Open; Jeff Flake, retiring). At the presidential level, Nevada has been emerging from bellwether to Lean Democratic. (It votes like New Mexico, which is no longer a bellwether state.) And Arizona, which has carried Republican in all but 1996 since 1952, is trending away from Republican to a new bellwether (likely to be flipped in the next Democratic presidential pickup year). Next in line would be Tennessee (Open; Bob Corker, retiring); Texas (Ted Cruz, in a state trending away from the GOP); and Nebraska (Deb Fischer, a Republican pickup winner from 2012).
A twist, which I have considered, could involve Arizona because of John McCain. It is not a pleasure to mention. But, if his condition is one that has him leave the U.S. Senate, in 2018, his Republican-held seat would go on the schedule as a special election, giving the Democrats another pickup opportunity.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
GOVERNORS
The Democrats, who flipped the governorship of New Jersey in 2017, go into the 2018 midterm elections with 16 vs. the 33 for the Republicans. Alaska, which is a tossup, appears on the map for 2018. For a new majority count of at least 26, the Democrats need a pickup of +10. My map has them gaining +9 for 25. The rest of the states, which appear in beige (again, 270toWin.com should have allowed an option of yellow for tossup), are the rest of the path.
Setting aside 2017 New Jersey, eight of the 20 states carried in 2016 by losing Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton have Republican governors. A new majority-count pickup should be heavily concentrated among those eight. In a midterm wave for the Democrats, they should be flipping Maryland and Massachusetts to go along with Illinois. And five of the six states—Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin—which flipped Republican to elect Donald Trump president of the United States. (Florida is the most difficult because, frankly, because the Democrats have been terrible in that state. But, it is a growing state with more congressional districts. So, it is on the radar.)
A lot of this is going to depend on specific candidates. But one thing to keep in mind is this. After Bill Clinton unseated George Bush in 1992, in a Democratic pickup of the presidency, the midterm election wave for the Republicans in 1994 saw that party have the U.S. House from 1995 to 2006 and 2011 to, so far, 2018. Only during the four consecutive years of 2007 to 2010 did the Democrats have the majority with the U.S. House. The majority count of governorships runs parallel to those years. The Republicans had majority counts for governorships from 1995 to 2006 and 2011 to, so far, 2018. The Democrats had majority counts for governorships only during the four years of 2007 to 2010. This is why I mention not just the U.S. House and U.S. Senate but also Governors.
If the midterm elections of 2018 result in a Democratic wave in which Team Blue wins over majorities with the U.S. House and U.S. Senate—and to a level dramatic enough that the Democrats outnumber the Republicans in votes cast, in a D-vs.-R contest, plus with independents (preferring D to R)—that would bring in a sufficient number of Democratic pickups for a new majority of Governors.
Monday, January 1, 2018
Happy New Year!
I want to wish everyone a Happy New Year for this new year of 2018!
May it be a good one for you.
(This blog thread is launched on Monday, January 1, 2018 at 12:00 a.m. ET.)
—Candy83
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)