|
financially racist posted:i swear to god if the dems don't properly take advantage of the kind of attitudes that are leading to poo poo like this race being as close as it is i am done with the party. they absolutely have to keep doing with other dems what they are doing with ossoff even if it's a district they likely won't win. I think the fact that they dumped this much effort and money into it shows they'd going on the offensive. The real questions are: 1. If they lose will they have the will power to keep putting oressure in solid red districts and 2. Will they use this as an excuse to ignore the leftist part of the party (yes)
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
financially racist posted:i swear to god if the dems don't properly take advantage of the kind of attitudes that are leading to poo poo like this race being as close as it is i am done with the party. they absolutely have to keep doing with other dems what they are doing with ossoff even if it's a district they likely won't win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:if the party isn't gonna support it from washington, then people are gonna have to run themselves. luckily there are a lot of pissed off people in super red states yeah this is true, i just hope they stay pissed. relying on dem voters is, uh, well it's as bad a strategy as relying on the party itself tbh
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
financially racist posted:yeah this is true, i just hope they stay pissed. relying on dem voters is, uh, well it's as bad a strategy as relying on the party itself tbh if the national level party doesn't support them then they should get chewed out by every state and local level party regardless of outcome
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
Does anyone with experience or insight know if throwing ten bucks to this guy will help him in the election? I have no idea, maybe he already has enough money to run all the ads he needs and now he just needs door knockers. I'd like to help.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
 will just sentence you to endless dnc fundraising emails
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Agreed. Right now he needs phone bankers and door knockers more than a bit of cash he probably wont have time to spend (unless it goes to a runoff which it probably will so it doesnt hurt either)
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
As far as the DNC overall goes, thus far Perez has been spitting fire and blood--though the Ossoff race is the only game in town to prove anything. If they win this one (especially outright on the first go) it'll be interesting to see how many races the GOP will be unopposed in. 2016 had 24(!) unopposed seats. Coincidentally, that's the number needed to retake the majority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
lol at being so lazy and incompetent you don't even contest a seat even if its unlikely to be a win
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
It's pretty interesting that there are a lot of Dan Moody ads right now in Atlanta and I don't think I've seen any for Handel. I guess her campaign just knows she's a safe bet and doesn't need to bother buying ads until after the primary?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
tadashi posted:It's pretty interesting that there are a lot of Dan Moody ads right now in Atlanta and I don't think I've seen any for Handel. I guess her campaign just knows she's a safe bet and doesn't need to bother buying ads until after the primary? Sounds like a familiar strategy. Where have I heard it before? :think:
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Jose posted:lol at being so lazy and incompetent you don't even contest a seat even if its unlikely to be a win I would love to know the story behind each of them, as I wonder how many were something like "after we told them they'll be getting no financial or organizational support from the national or state parties, the only people who still wanted to run were so bad that we think they might become a statewide (if not national) embarrassment if allowed to run with a "D" next to their name". I don't mean that they have unpopular opinions, more "known alcohol problem, already has 3 DUIs and would likely get a 4th during the campaign" or "is known to frequent high-end escorts" or "kills drifters to get an erection" kind of embarrassment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:I would love to know the story behind each of them, as I wonder how many were something like "after we told them they'll be getting no financial or organizational support from the national or state parties, the only people who still wanted to run were so bad that we think they might become a statewide (if not national) embarrassment if allowed to run with a "D" next to their name". if you do that last two enough you can be president though ok, if you frequent high-end escorts a lot and "allegedly" kill a drifter to get an erection
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Much more banal, I'd imagine--the majority of them are in deep red shitholes like alabama, louisiana, and oklahoma. A few in Texas and Utah. So the story is probably less "only guy available is the one the town drunk looks down on" and more "the state party has been utterly abandoned by the DNC and has zero resources."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
I'm just a know-nothing retard but it seems to me like the Democrats have a solid liberalized foothold in the coastal, populous side of states like California and Washington, and have had for decades and most likely will continue to have one for years, so maybe the smart thing would have been working on all the red states people like to poo poo on to make the Democrat wings there powerful and well-known. It seems like when it comes to boosting red Dems they sort of accept the status quo and it makes them always look weak and worthless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Cobweb Heart posted:I'm just a know-nothing retard but it seems to me like the Democrats have a solid liberalized foothold in the coastal, populous side of states like California and Washington, and have had for decades and most likely will continue to have one for years, so maybe the smart thing would have been working on all the red states people like to poo poo on to make the Democrat wings there powerful and well-known. It seems like when it comes to boosting red Dems they sort of accept the status quo and it makes them always look weak and worthless. The dnc dumb as hell and tries to appeal to moderate republicans instead of the real majority in red states: people who don't vote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
one of the big problems in southern states is the realignment process downticket was much more gradual which left what remained of the old dem money machines fighting over dwindling resources and where they've sprung up fighting with the new dem coalitions over policy and direction instead of preparing for the current situation
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:Much more banal, I'd imagine--the majority of them are in deep red shitholes like alabama, louisiana, and oklahoma. A few in Texas and Utah. So the story is probably less "only guy available is the one the town drunk looks down on" and more "the state party has been utterly abandoned by the DNC and has zero resources." I think these areas go uncontested once there aren't even down-ballot races that a losing campaign could at least theoretically help with, so people looking for candidates can't even say "sure you may lose, but you'll at least help people win down-ballot."
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Jose posted:lol at being so lazy and incompetent you don't even contest a seat even if its unlikely to be a win It's such terrible strategy. They should learn some lessons from the advertising world. Unlikely (or impossible) to win seats are the best chance the DNC has to run on 100% pure undiluted messaging: we care about people and we have a plan for prosperity and safety. The Republicans will cut the good things out of your life. They won't win the election but they'll win a few hearts and minds in every district and that goes a long way towards building a national brand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:It's such terrible strategy. They should learn some lessons from the advertising world. Unlikely (or impossible) to win seats are the best chance the DNC has to run on 100% pure undiluted messaging: we care about people and we have a plan for prosperity and safety. The Republicans will cut the good things out of your life. It also forces the Republicans in those races to take actual stances on issues that they can be held to later.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Just thinking about it gets me worked up. The Dems need to nominate a 65-year old funny, gruff, charismatic war veteran (or the relevant equivalent) in every single one of those districts. Political experience? Familiarity with the system? Fundraising potential? Who gives a poo poo. People are shallow. Branding and identity matter. Your candidate won't win, but people will have a new identity to associate with your party. Make some silly old man jokes on Twitter/Youtube and call the Republicans a bunch of carpetbagging greedy bosses. Represent. Maybe I should apply for a job at the DNC. I don't know what the gently caress kind of strategists they're hiring. the black husserl has issued a correction as of 22:31 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
I too would like to know how the Democratic party let things get so dire that "contest every seat in congress" seems to be a novel idea. I can understand how poo poo like 9/11 or the Tea Party movement can blindside strategists, but it just seems so baffling that a national organization could allow it's infrastructure to atrophy to such an extent and over such a long a period. Although to be fair I can't tell you the last time someone ran for Mayor of Chicago as a Republican, so 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:Just thinking about it gets me worked up. The Dems need to nominate a 65-year old funny, gruff, charismatic war veteran (or the relevant equivalent) in every single one of those districts. Political experience? Familiarity with the system? Fundraising potential? Who gives a poo poo. People are shallow. Branding and identity matter. Your candidate won't win, but people will have a new identity to associate with your party. Make some silly old man jokes on Twitter/Youtube and call the Republicans a bunch of carpetbagging greedy bosses. Represent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:I too would like to know how the Democratic party let things get so dire that "contest every seat in congress" seems to be a novel idea. I can understand how poo poo like 9/11 or the Tea Party movement can blindside strategists, but it just seems so baffling that a national organization could allow it's infrastructure to atrophy to such an extent and over such a long a period. it's not novel, recruiting a viable candidate is just really difficult. like most people can't take a year of their lives off to go campaign for a congressional seat they're definitely going to lose.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:I too would like to know how the Democratic party let things get so dire that "contest every seat in congress" seems to be a novel idea. I can understand how poo poo like 9/11 or the Tea Party movement can blindside strategists, but it just seems so baffling that a national organization could allow it's infrastructure to atrophy to such an extent and over such a long a period. there's not one democratic party, there's the national party that's mostly concerned with fundraising for the presidency and the dscc/dccc that deal with congressional fundraising then there's the 50 state parties and however many county and city orgs that recruit candidates, along with various individual donors and related groups. some of them are in good shape, others not so much. and that's why you get a lot of uncontested races
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:it's not novel, recruiting a viable candidate is just really difficult. like most people can't take a year of their lives off to go campaign for a congressional seat they're definitely going to lose. That said, candidates can make a big difference, look at Collin Peterson in MN-7, who is basically the House equivalent of Joe Manchin, winning as a rural populist, but his district is "only" R+6. There's 25 districts that are +20 or more Republican, and only 2 are in states that were competitive in 2016, AZ-4 and FL-1. With dollars being limited, even with SuperPACs in play, why run an ad in one of those 25 districts, when you could focus on ads in one of the 52 districts currently Republican that are between R+4 and Even. Democrats absolutely need to play offense in more Republican areas, but going into those +20-30 and spending any money running a candidate just for the sake of contesting every election is insane. Focus on getting good candidates in solid red but winnable districts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:it's not novel, recruiting a viable candidate is just really difficult. like most people can't take a year of their lives off to go campaign for a congressional seat they're definitely going to lose. See, that's thinking based in a pre-internet age. They don't need to "campaign" for a year. They need an intern with a camera, a Twitter/Youtube account, and a loving personality. That's it. It's about building a national brand, not turning the liberal 20% of nowheresville, MO into a winning majority. quote:Democrats absolutely need to play offense in more Republican areas, but going into those +20-30 and spending any money running a candidate just for the sake of contesting every election is insane. Focus on getting good candidates in solid red but winnable districts. What makes you think you need to spend any money at all to build a presence in people's minds? I know 13 year olds with youtube channels who do it for zero bucks. "Zero budget" is a terrible excuse for not launching a campaign of ANY sort in 2017. The tools are all free now. the black husserl has issued a correction as of 03:00 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:See, that's thinking based in a pre-internet age. They don't need to "campaign" for a year. They need an intern with a camera, a Twitter/Youtube account, and a loving personality. That's it. It's about building a national brand, not turning the liberal 20% of nowheresville, MO into a winning majority. what % of people in a district do you think read twitter or youtube? like virtually 0, even in this brave internet age. if you want to reach voters, you have to spend money. if you want money, you have to do stuff and prove you are actually going to put up a real campaign instead of a vanity operation. a candidate that does nothing during their campaign but put out snarky tweets is a waste of time at best and a liability at worst. the reason why we need a candidate in every district is 1. to suck up money from safe seats so incumbents have to spend on themselves 2. to build a bench for future runs, either in district or statewide, and 3. build a local base of activists who are professionally trained and understand how to win elections. just putting a face on the ballot doesn't help at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:what % of people in a district do you think read twitter or youtube? like virtually 0, even in this brave internet age. if you want to reach voters, you have to spend money. if you want money, you have to do stuff and prove you are actually going to put up a real campaign instead of a vanity operation. Obviously this line of discussion is purely academic because none of us are the DNC but let's do it anyway, it's fun. You're off about internet usage and frankly it's weird to have the opinion "the internet doesn't matter in political messaging" in the age of Trump and Twitter. 80+ percent of the population uses the internet and the remaining percentage might as well because national online media now drives local offline media completely. The local news station? It's 100% influenced by what's happening on Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube.....and it doesn't care if the online sensation is driven by clicks from Sweden or Mississippi, as long as its relevant to their locality. It's not about making snarky tweets. It's about "wow, this salty ol' Vietnam vet in bumfuck Alabama is calling Trump a warmongering rear end in a top hat! And he's running for the local house seat as a democrat!! Watch this Facebook video of him really giving it to them!!" It becomes a minor online sensation (200,00 viewcount, not hard to achieve with this type of content) and then you know what happens? It gets featured on the local news. And suddenly the liberal 20% and independent 5% of the county are charged up and ready to fight because they actually have a candidate/brand representing them. Yeah, you don't win the house election but you do better than you should have and the tide starts to shift, especially for the nationwide election. You do not have to spend money to reach voters. Trump should have taught us all that. You probably have to spend money to win. But we're not trying to win these elections, we're trying to get our names out there. the black husserl has issued a correction as of 03:38 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
if this video gets 1,000 likes i'll add "singlepayer" to my platform
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:See, that's thinking based in a pre-internet age. They don't need to "campaign" for a year. They need an intern with a camera, a Twitter/Youtube account, and a loving personality. That's it. It's about building a national brand, not turning the liberal 20% of nowheresville, MO into a winning majority. Also, if you're a left-leaning person with a personality and an ability to use Twitter/Youtube, why in the hell would you want to run a losing race somewhere that you have no hope of ever winning ever and not instead take those talents and put them to use for a candidate in an area that actually has a chance of winning? As red as most places are, there's usually a large enough town nearby to have a few blue state legislators at least if not a House Rep who would kill for someone with that skillset.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:Even in solidly red areas, there are local and state legislature races that can absolutely be hosed up by an embarrassing campaign immediately above them on the ballot. If the campaign turns into an embarrassment or a farce, you risk driving down voters for winnable down-ballot races. But we went ahead and ran Hillary anyway
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
logikv9 posted:if this video gets 1,000 likes i'll add "singlepayer" to my platform
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 09:30
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:This is only correct if you assume that a candidate, at worst, can do no harm, and that's just plain not true. Even in solidly red areas, there are local and state legislature races that can absolutely be hosed up by an embarrassing campaign immediately above them on the ballot. If the campaign turns into an embarrassment or a farce, you risk driving down voters for winnable down-ballot races. it's also why the DNC get rightfully shat on by other democrats, since it doesnt matter what your local parties staces are, a lot people will look at the national level and immediately associate their idiocy with whoever has a D next to their name
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
Republicans are pulling out the big guns, releasing a series of ads recently. "Ossof is one of ... THEM" they say loudly, claiming he is an ISIS rioter that supports the terrible NANCY PELOSI Here's one of them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr4RYY7Mpw4 Another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH-VTBqzgN8 GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 19:36 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
if the DNC were smart, they'd realize that they made gains in Georgia, Texas, and Arizona in 2016 and figure out ways to mine dissatisfaction with the GOP there
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:if the DNC were smart, they'd realize that they made gains in Georgia, Texas, and Arizona in 2016 and figure out ways to mine dissatisfaction with the GOP there i already see a problem with this plan
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:if the DNC were smart, they'd realize that they made gains in Georgia, Texas, and Arizona in 2016 and figure out ways to mine dissatisfaction with the GOP there yes, clearly no one has thought of this before
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Why does it seem some districts were created in 2012 in georgia that previously didn't exist? Like the district samantha bee did a special on. https://ballotpedia.org/Georgia_House_of_Representatives_District_131 How many of there like these are there?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
The debate is happening now. They are in the middle of a 7 minute break, but 2nd round begins shortly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXtGGjXJRkA
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 23:17
|
|
