Do we have a 2018 congressional election thread yet?

[Crackpot]

link

Trott to exit Congress after two terms. Get ready for an expensive race to replace him.
By RICK PLUTA & STEVE CARMODY • 13 HOURS AGO
Tweet
Share
Google+
Email

Dave Trott.
CREDIT STEVE CARMODY/MICHIGAN RADIO
U.S. Rep. Dave Trott, R-11th District, says he will not seek reelection next year and will retire after four years in Congress.

Trott says he always intended for his congressional career to be brief. He said in a written statement he’s ready to return to the private sector and spend more time with his family. But he possibly faced a tough reelection bid next year, and The New York Times reported over the weekend that Trott was growing increasingly frustrated with President Trump. He recently advised Trump in a tweet to spend more time on the golf course and stay away from microphones.

Trott’s decision will set off a scramble among Republicans and Democrats to find nominees to replace him. Michigan’s 11th District leans Republican, but even Republicans acknowledge it’s possible for a Democrat to take it.

“The way it’s looking right now, residents of the 11th District can probably prepare to see a lot of political advertisements," said Craig Mauger, executive director of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network.

“If this is the seat that is the one that Democrats and Republicans both view as the most up in the air, in terms of who’s going to win, and there’s some indications now that that’s how both sides view the seat, this could be a very expensive race," Mauger said.

Tweet
Share
Google+
Email

[RayThom]

And the headlines will read: Capitol Hill... Too Hot For Trott.

[Sue U]

And the headlines will read: Capitol Hill... Too Hot For Trott.

Only in the NY Daily News. But that's a good one -- just their style.

[Big RR]

Or the NY Post, but that headline may be a little too sophisticated for it.

[Lord Jim]

Mr. Trott is not the only one trotting off:

Yet Another House Republican Is Retiring From Politics. It's a Sign of the Trump Era

(WASHINGTON) — Veteran Republicans are bailing on Congress in growing numbers, as GOP control of Washington fails to produces the unity or legislative successes party leaders wished for.

With President Donald Trump willing, if not eager, to buck fellow Republicans and even directly attack them, a number of lawmakers no longer wish to be involved.

The latest is two-term congressman Dave Trott of Michigan, who says in a statement that he's decided after careful consideration that the best course for him is to spend more time with his family and return to the private sector.

The decision by Rep. Trott followed retirement announcements last week by Reps. Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania and Dave Reichert of Washington, three members Democrats planned to try to unseat next year.

Though all would have been difficult incumbents to defeat, the districts are likely to be much more competitive for Democrats as open races. Several nonpartisan handicappers immediately switched Trott’s district to a “tossup” after his announcement.

http://time.com/4936723/republican-cong ... ave-trott/

[Crackpot]

Quote from a local political analyst:

"The other day, when Congressman Dave Trott said he would retire at the end of next year, I felt there was a real threat that children would be trampled by politicians rushing to run for his job."

Just found that funny

[Lord Jim]

Steve Bannon goes to work for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee:

Steve Bannon’s Dubious Plan to Purge Senate Republicans

Stephen Bannon may have lost the trappings of governmental power upon leaving the White House in August. But he’s living large and apparently having fun in his new role as Mitch McConnell’s nemesis and the scourge of Establishment Republicans in the Senate. After taking a lot more of the credit for Roy Moore’s win in Alabama than he deserves, Bannon is now semi-publicly making plans to back as many as 15 Senate candidates next year, including primary challenges to as many as six of the seven Republican incumbents up for reelection.

According to Bloomberg News, Ted Cruz is the only 2018 incumbent GOP senator who doesn’t have to worry about a Bannon-backed challenger. Jeff Flake and Dean Heller are already in the crosshairs. John Barrasso, Deb Fischer, and Orrin Hatch could be next. And in many open races or contests to choose challengers to incumbent Democrats, Bannon will apparently identify a true conservative/populist favorite (e.g., Marsha Blackburn in Tennessee, and if John McCain has to leave his seat before 2018, Paul Gosar in Arizona).

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... icans.html

So in a year when continued GOP control of the Senate should be as close to a dead cert as anything can be in American politics no matter what happens in the House, (The Democrats have more seats to defend in states Trump carried then the Republicans have seats to defend total; 10 versus 8. ) Steve Bannon is hell bent for leather to give the Democrats every possible chance, by trying to replace popular mainstream Conservative Republican Senators with a bunch of moon bat Todd "voluntary rape" Aiken clones...

The DNC should hold a Salute To Steve Bannon appreciation dinner...

[rubato]

Trotter couldn't make the pace eh?


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Some interesting numbers:

Here's why Republicans are in deep trouble in 2018

(CNN)There's a wave building in the country -- one that looks likely to threaten the Republican House majority come November 2018.

The signs are everywhere you look.

President Trump is at 37% approval nationwide
Democrats have a massive edge in the generic ballot, including a 14-point lead in the new CNN national poll
Deep divisions exist within the GOP between the Trump wing and the establishment wing

Political prognosticators are starting to take notice.

On Monday, the Cook Political Report, a non-partisan handicapping tip sheet, moved 11 Republican-held seats into more vulnerable territory, a reflection, wrote House editor David Wasserman, of the quality Democratic candidates drawn to run by what looks like a very favorable national political environment.

"Based on recent developments in races and conversations with candidates and operatives on both sides of the aisle, many races have the potential to become more competitive," Wasserman concluded.

(Sidebar: For all the talk about how the political environment today doesn't dictate what that environment will be come November 2018, it does have a major impact. Today's political conditions help/hinder recruitment; good candidates win, bad ones don't.)

The Cook report now rates 61 Republican-held seats as potentially competitive -- compared with 20 competitive Democratic seats.

Inside Elections, another political tip sheet, run by Nathan Gonzales, lists 48 GOP held seats and just 14 Democratic seats in its competitive House race rankings.

The political models -- an attempt to forecast what the outcome of the 2018 House elections will be based on a series of objective factors that have proved influential in past elections -- are also beginning to point to increased odds of Democrats picking up the 23 seats they need to retake the majority.

The Decision Desk HQ House model now gives Democrats a 46% chance of winning the majority, up from a less than one-in-three chance earlier this fall. (Some of that change, it's worth noting, is due to a change in the model; read more about that here.)

Both the political prognosticators and the modelers are driven by the underlying numbers that historically have predicted which party will win elections -- particularly midterm elections. If those numbers change, the models shift and the political handicappers often adjust their predictions too.

Which is of course possible! It's only October 17, after all.

That said, the underlying numbers are daunting for Republicans.

The generic ballot test -- if the election was held today, would you vote for the Democrat or the Republican for Congress? -- is generally regarded as a sort of weather vane to judge how strongly the wind is blowing and toward which party.

And at the moment, the winds have shifted in Democrats' favor. Among all adults in the new CNN poll, 51% say they would vote for a Democratic candidate while 37% say they would choose a Republican one. Among registered voters, a narrower sample of those more likely to vote, the margin is even larger: 54% Democratic, 36% Republican.

Democrats tend to have a three-to-five point edge on the generic ballot question. And yes it, is early. But such a wide margin in the generic ballot looks similar to October 2005 when Democrats had an eight-point edge; the party went on to pick up 30 seats and capture the majority from Republicans. It's also worth noting that Democrats' generic ballot edge in the CNN poll has never been below nine points since Trump became President.

Then there is presidential approval. As Gallup has documented, midterm elections are always difficult for the president's party but especially so when the president is under 50% approval. Since 1946, the president's party loses an average of 14 House seats when the president is over 50%; the party loses an average of 36 seats when the president is below 50%.

Trump's approval in both the CNN survey and the latest Gallup daily tracking poll is 37%. Trump's approval in Gallup data has never been at 50% or higher during his time in office. The closest Trump came was 46% in the January 24 Gallup tracker.

Those numbers paint a dire picture for Republicans -- particularly when you consider what a Democratically-controlled House might mean for Trump's White House.

To be clear: The numbers can change. And the polarization in the country when combined with the GOP-led congressional redistricting process after the 2010 census makes it tough for Democrats to make major gains without winning comfortably Republican seats.

Waves -- especially big ones -- can wipe out places that were once considered impregnable. There looks to be a major wave building out in the political ocean right now. It could fizzle out before it reaches shore. But make no mistake: It's coming this way.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/17/politics/ ... index.html

[Crackpot]

Mind you that is against "generic" democrats and I never underestimate the patties ability to shoot itself in the foot. In a time like this when the country is nearing an existential crisis I don't believe all the squawking about political "purity" I've been hearing from "Democrats". Not to mention the large number of them that have gone into full on Trump derangement mode and have become downright hostile to anyone who doesn't dog whistle thier leftist credentials.

[Big RR]

Who is doing that? I see most democrats as centrist. sure Bernie and a few are pushing a left of center agenda, but most are not signing on and are more aligned with Obama or Hillary (hardly leftists).

[Crackpot]

Just what I have been hearing.

[Econoline]

I think CP is talking about generic "Democratic" voters (speaking of "generic")—probably more accurate to call them generic leftists—rather than potential or actual Democratic candidates or Democratic office-holders. If that's what he means, yeah, I've seen it too (think of all those who still say that Bernie would've won if Hillary hadn't "stolen" the nomination ).

Considering the demonstrable effect of their political purity in 2016, I tend to think that most of the generic lefties will vote for the generic Democrats this time around (even if they're grumbling under their breath while doing so). *IF* they bother to vote at all: that's the big problem.

[Crackpot]

It to mention the vast majority of independents both parties in Michigan have a long history of putting up candidates that make the independents sick to thier stomach but the State Democratic Party has raised it to an art.

[RayThom]

[Big RR]

Considering the demonstrable effect of their political purity in 2016, I tend to think that most of the generic lefties will vote for the generic Democrats this time around (even if they're grumbling under their breath while doing so). *IF* they bother to vote at all: that's the big problem.

More likely because there will be a choice, either making things worse with the same team garnering as much or more power, or possibly making things better. As one who voted against Trump to a much larger degree than for Hillary, I can understand the reluctance to perpetuate the republicrat status quo, but Trump et al have changed things for the worse, and a Congress more aligned with him will make that downhill slide steeper and faster IMHO. That cannot be lost on the group you're calling "generic lefties" (although there may be a small, more radical fringe that says let them wreck everything and then we'll come in a put a new system in place).

[Crackpot]

But at the same time the dwindling amount of Republican moderates have done a good job at stopping The worst of Trumps policies. If that doesn't change and the the Democats put up a bunch of extremists or insider hacks can very easily sour the positive attitude that the generic Democrat has when it becomes an actual person.

[Sue U]

Democratic Party "extremists"???? Give me a giant fucking break. The Democratic Party has at best a center-right orientation, with a minority wing of centrist "liberals." It is an enthusiastically pro-capitalism, pro-duopoloy party. There's not anything even remotely "leftist," let alone "extremist," about the party or ANY of its candidates.

The "extremists" in government are all on the GOP side, and they are determined to destroy what few protections the law currently provides against the ravages of the "free market," the greed of the 1 percent and the retrograde social policy of the religious right wrong.

[Big RR]

sue, you're forgetting, the republicans can write the definitions of the terms (not sure why, but even the dems let them do it); if Trump or pence is a centrist (or even right of center), then even Hillary and Obama are far left. Not that this makes any sense, but it appears to be the way the media views them.

[Crackpot]

link

This link and its comments accurately describes what I'm talking about.

(Comments on FB article).