Republican Karen Handel Wins Georgia House Special Election

[Fenton]

First major victory in the Trump era?

Since and including the 2010 midterm elections Dem have lost over 90% of all local, state, and national elections.

Their only major victory in the last 6 -7 years was getting Obama reelected. Like with Hillary's so called popular vote lead there is lots of evidence that voter/election fraud played a huge part in that.

I think there is a good chance the Democrat party is looking at extinction.

Yup !
I linked to CNN because the thread was being posted in Mainstream Media breaking news section of the forum.

CNN had some looong faces on their panel last night...LOL ! and tried to spin this as win everyway they could ( unsuccessfully, theyre fooling no one )

This candidate was hand picked by the Democrats, a millenial who was super sympathetic to this coalition of victims the Democrat party has built.

He pandered and ran on a platform of identity politics and anti-Trump, anti -
GOP rhetoric and still lost.
The Democrats are claiming this was close and that in itself is a win ?

Lol...Yea right, they didnt spend 22 million to come in a close second.

 

[Ikari]

The Democrats spending on this election broke records.

They gave it everything they had, 22 million dollars, a handpicked millenial who was overly sympathetic to needs of the coalition of victims they pandered to, and they still came up short.

This was ofcourse after the 24/7 Trump attacks and Russian collusion conspiracy theories that major news outlets have devoted themselves too

They desperately wanted a win and didnt spend 22 million to come in a close second.

How much did the GOP spend, because wasn't the total amount upwards of 50 million? If true, it would seem the GOP spent similarly to only win by 5 in a district they controlled so handily before.

And of course they didn't spend that to come in a close second, but I'm also not surprised they couldn't win there, that district usually goes Republican by like 20%. It's going to take more than Trump to overturn it. There are likely places of Dem strongholds that couldn't be breached by Republicans without some very significant issue arising with the DNC.

I don't think the DNC has really made good choices this election cycle. They rigged their elections for Hillary, couldn't get her through, and even though Donald Trump is the most embarrassing President ever, and his administration has been bogged down in controversy since before it began, and he is largely inept at his job; they thought that Trump alone would condemn the GOP to such levels that well entrenched strongholds would be vulnerable.

On some front, it's a testament given the exorbitant spending on BOTH sides, that they got so close. But the hyper-partisan nature of America is not going to broken by just Trump.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

In a sense you are correct, but party rhetorical spin aside, the Dems really needed this victory. More so than they'll admit publicly. Politics is just as much about perception as anything else. And they need the perception that they are 1) still relevant and in touch, and 2) that Trump and the Reps are self-destructing. They got neither here.

What the Democrats need is a positive message. Their strategy seems to be more focused on getting people to vote against Republicans rather than for them.

Bernie Sanders actually put forth a positive message. I disagreed with it but at least he stood FOR something.

 

[Fenton]

Maybe it is time for the Democrats to stop blaming the Russians and Trump collusion for their problems and start looking to their own people and agenda? They are 0 for 4 in contested special elections even with the disunity within the Republican Party and a President with very high unfavorables.

Exactly ! Truth is they KNOW they cant run on the successes of the last 8 years, on ObamaCare, on the economy, on foreign policy, so they chose to follow Obama off the cliff instead of doing what was needed, putting distance between their party and the Obama administration.
So theyre backed into a corner, building a coalition of victims, playing identity politics and attacking Trump and throwing money at the problem.

Its not working, theyre 0 - 4.

 

[apdst]

Genuine question here from a foreigner who would like some feedback to understand the significance of this and what difference it may make.

Republicans already control the House, Senate, and Presidency. They've already won.

A Democrat victory could be a sign of future Republican defeats.

 

[apdst]

What the Democrats need is a positive message. Their strategy seems to be more focused on getting people to vote against Republicans rather than for them.

Bernie Sanders actually put forth a positive message. I disagreed with it but at least he stood FOR something.

It's all they have, because they know that they can't get people to vote for their agenda.

 

[Plus Ultra]

Handel:

"What happened on that ballfield was a terrible tragedy and we need to all continue to lift up Steve and the others who were injured that day," Handel said. "And we need to also lift up this nation so that we can find a more civil way to deal with our disagreements. Because in these United States of America, no one —no one— should ever feel their life threatened over their political beliefs and positions. And I say that ladies and gentlemen in regards to both sides of the political aisle."

 

[Trippy Trekker]

The Democrats spending on this election broke records.

They gave it everything they had, 22 million dollars, a handpicked millenial who was overly sympathetic to needs of the coalition of victims they pandered to, and they still came up short.

This was ofcourse after the 24/7 Trump attacks and Russian collusion conspiracy theories that major news outlets have devoted themselves too

They desperately wanted a win and didnt spend 22 million to come in a close second.

Desperate? Come now, I can speak as a democrat. I donate a lot more money to DP than to any Congressional race. I felt a little disappointment last night... and not at all today. Nilly provided a much more detailed breakdown of monies received on behalf of both candidates. The candidate you supported won. My heartfelt congratulations to Handel, her supporters and, specifically, you!

As usual, the rest of your narrative transcends reality and ventures into wishful thinking. I have asked before if you have submitted any of your Political Fiction for publication?

 

[MTAtech]

The excerpt you quoted suggests that Trump has 'failed to follow through on his campaign promises'. That is just plain wrong but what I have come to expect from Politico.

The reason his base is hanging in there with him is that President Trump has methodically and systematically followed through on his campaign promises.

The fact that the media refuses to report it or mischaracterizes it and the Democrats continue to obstruct on everything and the dishonest and malicious hate speech continues unabated does not change the fact that he is staying on message. If he varies or backs up to change tactics or goes to a Plan B in the least way, the haters immediately jump on it as evidence he isn't doing or accomplishing anything and/or is failing. And that is just plain dishonest.

In the first 100 days:
https://newhampshirereview.com/donald-trump/president-donald-trump-accomplishments/

That link doesn't work for me.

In any case, how is that Mexican wall that Mexico is going to pay for coming along?

On health care, Trump promised “We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” the plan would have “lower numbers, much lower deductibles.” The “philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it”? Trump insisted that “that’s not going to happen with us.” The plan that the House passed and Trump endorsed is the exact opposite of that promise and the Senate version is at least as bad.

 

[Fenton]

How much did the GOP spend, because wasn't the total amount upwards of 50 million? If true, it would seem the GOP spent similarly to only win by 5 in a district they controlled so handily before.

And of course they didn't spend that to come in a close second, but I'm also not surprised they couldn't win there, that district usually goes Republican by like 20%. It's going to take more than Trump to overturn it. There are likely places of Dem strongholds that couldn't be breached by Republicans without some very significant issue arising with the DNC.

I don't think the DNC has really made good choices this election cycle. They rigged their elections for Hillary, couldn't get her through, and even though Donald Trump is the most embarrassing President ever, and his administration has been bogged down in controversy since before it began, and he is largely inept at his job; they thought that Trump alone would condemn the GOP to such levels that well entrenched strongholds would be vulnerable.

On some front, it's a testament given the exorbitant spending on BOTH sides, that they got so close. But the hyper-partisan nature of America is not going to broken by just Trump.

Hyperpartisan is major news outlets devoting most of their programming to pushing impeachment narratives and hyper partisan is the Left trying to undermine the agenda of a duly elected President

Obama had the House and the Senate for the first two years of his Presidency and sure, he had his detractors but there wasnt a concerted intra-Governmental effort to undermine his agenda

No one was trying to tie him to crimes or pushing for impeachment.

As a Conservative I sure wasnt pleased, but I also knew there would be major Political consequences down the road for his policies and his healthcare law.

And there was. If Trump and the GOPs policies are as bad as the Left claims, then they will pay the price too, its how it works in a Democracy.

The Dems and the media are doing everything to undermine that process, and its not lost on the average American voter.

 

[Nilly]

Then why are the numbers drastically different???

My source is only showing 'outside groups' (inc the DCCC and NRCC).

 

[radcen]

Maybe it is time for the Democrats to stop blaming the Russians and Trump collusion for their problems and start looking to their own people and agenda? They are 0 for 4 in contested special elections even with the disunity within the Republican Party and a President with very high unfavorables.

The Dems have serious issues, no doubt. And with the Rep's dysfunction the Dems have the perfect opportunity just waiting to be taken... and they're too stubborn and blind to see the wide open door.

 

[Gill]

My source is only showing 'outside groups' (inc the DCCC and NRCC).

You're hopeless. My post and link indicated only the total amount of expenditures by outside groups also.

 

[radcen]

The excerpt you quoted suggests that Trump has 'failed to follow through on his campaign promises'. That is just plain wrong but what I have come to expect from Politico.

The reason his base is hanging in there with him is that President Trump has methodically and systematically followed through on his campaign promises.

The fact that the media refuses to report it or mischaracterizes it and the Democrats continue to obstruct on everything and the dishonest and malicious hate speech continues unabated does not change the fact that he is staying on message. If he varies or backs up to change tactics or goes to a Plan B in the least way, the haters immediately jump on it as evidence he isn't doing or accomplishing anything and/or is failing. And that is just plain dishonest.

In the first 100 days:
https://newhampshirereview.com/donald-trump/president-donald-trump-accomplishments/

"There are no American infidels in Baghdad. Never!"
~ Baghdad Bob

 

[Perotista]

From Matt Vespa at Townhall:

"It will be interesting to see if Ossoff did get 15 percent of GOP voters, while tallying how many voters who sat out the April 18 election only to show up and vote tonight. On paper, they number in the tens of thousands. Those voters reportedly trended conservative on the issues. Overall, it was a depressing night for Democrats. They lost this race and the special election in SC-05, which was held to fill the vacancy left by Rep. Rick Mulvaney, who is now The Director Of The Office of Budget and Management. The Left got an upper cut in South Carolina, followed by a haymaker in Georgia. Still, we have a long way to go until the 2018 midterms, but it seems the GOP base in GA-06 came home, despite not being the most enthusiastic Trump supporters. It was a good night for the GOP." https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...n-ossoff-in-georgia-special-election-n2344170

Special elections this far out from the midterms aren't any indication that might happen next year. Especially when this one cost 50 million dollars between the two camps. I think numbers wise, the important ones are 1. Senate: 25 Democratic seats up for re-election next year vs. 9 Republican seats. As of today I would say the Democrats have two seats at risk switching, Indiana and Missouri with all the rest fairly safe. The Republicans also have two seats at risk, Arizona and Nevada with the rest safe. Don't look for the senate to switch hands next year or for the republicans to gain a lot of seats. Which they should, but won't.

The House, the Democrats need a net gain of 24 seats to recapture control of the House. That is possible, but still a long shot as of today. As of today, being the key phrase. The way I read the house is the Republicans have 25 at risk or competitive seats that could switch, the Democrats 10. In a normal election year, if there is such a thing, that would translate into around a 10 seat gain for the Democrats. But the midterms aren't held today, those figures are dynamic and will change constantly. We don't know who is going to retire or how many open seats there will be on either side. Open seats are much easier to win or switch.

If I were to look into my crystal ball, with the numbers I have dealing with party affiliation, Trumps approval rating, direction of the country, historical trends which show the party that held the white house since FDR has lost seats in the house with the lone exception of Bush in 2002, I think the Democrats have a real good shot at those 24 seats.

Now I will not begin my official forecasts until toward the end of the year or beginning of the next.

 

[Fenton]

Desperate? Come now, I can speak as a democrat. I donate a lot more money to DP than to any Congressional race. I felt a little disappointment last night... and not at all today. Nilly provided a much more detailed breakdown of monies received on behalf of both candidates. The candidate you supported won. My heartfelt congratulations to Handel, her supporters and, specifically, you!

As usual, the rest of your narrative transcends reality and ventures into wishful thinking. I have asked before if you have submitted any of your Political Fiction for publication?

Which narratives transcend reality ? The Democrats coalition of victims ? Their devotion to identity politics above substantive issues and policies ?

The fact that Ossoff was hand picked to fit a specific profile ? Thats all on the money

This was a well organized strategy put forth by the Democrats.

You dont blow through 22 million on a whim, they wanted this win bad.

They needed something with substance that they could build upon, something better than tin hat conspiracy theories and obstrucion charges they could use to build momentum, and now theyre 0 - 4.

 

[AlbqOwl]

That link doesn't work for me.

In any case, how is that Mexican wall that Mexico is going to pay for coming along?

On health care, Trump promised “We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” the plan would have “lower numbers, much lower deductibles.” The “philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it”? Trump insisted that “that’s not going to happen with us.” The plan that the House passed and Trump endorsed is the exact opposite of that promise and the Senate version is at least as bad.

He campaigned on repealing and replacing Obamacare. So far nobody has specifically said WHY people would lose their coverage. The truth is that a large portion of that would be left to the states to decide who and how to cover because the federal government would be backing out of controlling our lives to that extent. Those saying people losing coverage are assuming the states would take it away from people instead of using their block grants to cover the uninsured.

And it isn't a done deal yet either as Congress has not passed it and we don't KNOW what they will do. And they are wisely keeping the planning process out of the media eyes as the media tend to greatly distort the truth of just about everything related to President Trump, Republicans, or the right in general.

Obamacare, that nobody read before passing it, also had some serious problems that damn sure didn't fit the glowing sell job Obama himself put out there. Two wrongs don't make a right, but I am not ready to say that Trump reneged on his campaign promise.

 

[celticwar17]

If you think that the Democratic Party is "Socialist," you have no idea what you are talking about or, you are so far to the right that everything to the left looks like the same dots on the horizon. The Democrats are indeed a "pro-American party," as they are the only major American party that consistently fights for the average American and the average working person, while the Republicans are consistently fighting for the rich and the corporations.

That's a myth... more rich people vote democrat... the "average working American" actually votes republican. The Rich and the Poor vote democrat and the lower middle class to middle vote republican.

 

[Harshaw]

If you think that the Democratic Party is "Socialist," you have no idea what you are talking about or, you are so far to the right that everything to the left looks like the same dots on the horizon. The Democrats are indeed a "pro-American party," as they are the only major American party that consistently fights for the average American and the average working person, while the Republicans are consistently fighting for the rich and the corporations.

That's ridiculous. The Democrats haven't been that party for some time. They're the party of wealthy urban elites, those who want to be wealthy urban elites, and grievance minorities. Their contempt for, and sneering at, "average Americans" has been growing more and more open over the last couple of decades.

 

[AlbqOwl]

The Dems have serious issues, no doubt. And with the Rep's dysfunction the Dems have the perfect opportunity just waiting to be taken... and they're too stubborn and blind to see the wide open door.

What open door? When your only purpose for existence is some kind of fuzzy, self-righteous ideological concept and absolutely zero goals or objectives to accomplish anything, they have no door to go through. Obamacare is imploding as we speak, the economy remains sluggish though it has been helped by President Trump's executive orders and hope for Congress to do something significant to help, 90 million people are out of the work force who would be working if there were good permanent full time jobs, and the Democrats have nothing to offer other than more and more spending--they call it investment--that has utterly failed so far to accomplish much of anything lasting or beneficial.

 

[ibelsd]

How much did the GOP spend, because wasn't the total amount upwards of 50 million? If true, it would seem the GOP spent similarly to only win by 5 in a district they controlled so handily before.

And of course they didn't spend that to come in a close second, but I'm also not surprised they couldn't win there, that district usually goes Republican by like 20%. It's going to take more than Trump to overturn it. There are likely places of Dem strongholds that couldn't be breached by Republicans without some very significant issue arising with the DNC.

I don't think the DNC has really made good choices this election cycle. They rigged their elections for Hillary, couldn't get her through, and even though Donald Trump is the most embarrassing President ever, and his administration has been bogged down in controversy since before it began, and he is largely inept at his job; they thought that Trump alone would condemn the GOP to such levels that well entrenched strongholds would be vulnerable.

On some front, it's a testament given the exorbitant spending on BOTH sides, that they got so close. But the hyper-partisan nature of America is not going to broken by just Trump.

The Democrats spent about $8M more than the GOP candidate. So, while both sides spent obscene amounts, the Dems were all in. I think it was something along the lines of $21M for Ossoff and $13M for Handel. The crazy thing is that Ossoff's money mostly came from out of state. Something like 95% of all his money came from outside of GA. In particular, lots of the money came by way of CA. Perhaps, that's one reason why Ossoff lost. It was too easy to portray him as a puppet of Pelosi, Hollywood, and the West Coast liberals who I don't think play as well in the South as they do in the Bay Area of Northern CA.

This election told me one thing. The Democrats are still fighting for their own identity among their own party members. Will they be driven by identity politics, alienating white folk and blue collar workers outside the largest metropolitan areas? Will they return to their labor roots and focus on working class economic issues? Will they find some creative way to blend both of these factions together? We saw the Republican party go through this sort of evolution several times over the last 50 years. First, during the late 60's when the Goldwater wing and the Dixicrats fought for control of the party. It took Reagan to ably bring unify these factions under the umbrella of what some in his admin and in Congress called compassionate conservatism.

We saw it again as the social Republicans, led by the evangelical wing sought to control the party, but were countered by the Tea Party movement. I think, we have been witnessing a GOP which has shown a willingness to compromise on some of the social issues which were dragging the party down. Hence, we have a GOP President who is fairly ambivalent on the social issues typically front and center in a GOP administration. I think it will be interesting to see whether the Sanders/Pelosi/Warren wings win out over the more moderate working class wing.

 

[MTAtech]

That's ridiculous. The Democrats haven't been that party for some time. They're the party of wealthy urban elites, those who want to be wealthy urban elites, and grievance minorities. Their contempt for, and sneering at, "average Americans" has been growing more and more open over the last couple of decades.

Which party raised taxes on the wealthy during Obama's Administration? The Democrats.
Which party wanted the Bush tax-cuts on the wealthy made permanent? The Republicans.
Which party wants to cuts taxes on the wealthy now? The Republicans.
Which party wants to raise the Social Security retirement age? The Republicans.
Which party is resisting raising the Social Security retirement age? The Democrats.

What the Republicans are good at doing is pandering to the down-on-their-luck worker; promise them that they'll get their high-paying coal and manufacturing jobs back, and then do nothing substantive. Republicans are good at painting Democrats as "elite." By now there’s a whole genre of media portraits of working-class Trump supporters (there are even parody versions). You know what I mean: interviews with down-on-their-luck rural whites who are troubled to learn that all those liberals who warned them that they would be hurt by Trump policies (e.g. slashing Health Care; cutting Medicaid; cutting training programs) were right, but still support Mr. Trump, because they believe that liberal elites look down on them and think they’re stupid. Hmm....

Those coal jobs are never coming back. The Democrats see new technology, such as solar, that employs 10X more workers than coal, as the solution.

Oh, on exporting jobs. Which party stood in the way of Democratic action to stop subsidies for exporting jobs? Hint: The Hill: Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing

 

[trouble13]

After another recent special election that also went to the Repub candidate, it was actually argued that a close race within a certain percentage point margin was really a Dem victory. If losing elections is indeed the new definition of "winning" for Dems then I wish them many more such victories. :mrgreen:

Imteresting sidenote that i heard on atlanta radio

The dems went to court to allow new voter registrations to vote in the run off. They won the motion. So not only did they massivly spend they also signed up new voters to try and defeat Handel but still lost.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Harshaw]

Which party raised taxes on the wealthy during Obama's Administration? The Democrats.
Which party wanted the Bush tax-cuts on the wealthy made permanent? The Republicans.
Which party wants to cuts taxes on the wealthy now? The Republicans.
Which party wants to raise the Social Security retirement age? The Republicans.
Which party is resisting raising the Social Security retirement age? The Democrats.

What the Republicans are good at doing is pandering to the down-on-their-luck worker; promise them that they'll get their high-paying coal and manufacturing jobs back, and then do nothing substantive. Republicans are good at painting Democrats as "elite." By now there’s a whole genre of media portraits of working-class Trump supporters (there are even parody versions). You know what I mean: interviews with down-on-their-luck rural whites who are troubled to learn that all those liberals who warned them that they would be hurt by Trump policies (e.g. slashing Health Care; cutting Medicaid; cutting training programs) were right, but still support Mr. Trump, because they believe that liberal elites look down on them and think they’re stupid. Hmm....

Those coal jobs are never coming back. The Democrats see new technology, such as solar, that employs 10X more workers than coal, as the solution.

Oh, on exporting jobs. Which party stood in the way of Democratic action to stop subsidies for exporting jobs? Hint: The Hill: Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing

Not a word of this addressed a thing I said.

 

[MTAtech]

That's a myth... more rich people vote democrat... the "average working American" actually votes republican. The Rich and the Poor vote democrat and the lower middle class to middle vote republican.

That's not what the data says. More people from incomes less than $75,000 voted for Obama than Romney and above $100,000 a year voted for Romney over Obama.

What we is an education divide.

In table form, we can see that more wealthy people vote Republican; the middle-class ($0-99K) are even and below $40K are more Democrats: