How many times did you leave forevah

[Jon Miller]

There were definitely big ones for Bush II. People seem to have short memories. Same for Reagan. As for Bush I and Ford, there were lots of issues for Ford especially regarding the pardoning, but he was the replacement for Nixon so he doesn't really count. Bush I, over the first Iraq war.

I admit that I don't remember Reagan well enough, but I don't remember any push for Reagan. I don't remember reading about any push for Reagan.

I agree that there was a push, from back benchers, for Bush 2. But I mentioned that as the one example between Nixon and Trump.

There was nothing against Bush 1 for the first Iraq war. I remember that one.

JM
( Wasn't alive for Ford.)

[Ben Kenobi]

Door - Lost
Forest - Lost
Lincoln - Lost
Price - Lost
Sawyer - Lost
Dunn - Lost
Pepin - Lost
Buffalo - Lost
Trempealeau - Lost
Jackson - Lost
Vernon - Lost
Crawford - Lost
Richland - Lost
Grant - Lost
Juneau - Lost
Adams - Lost
Racine - Lost
Kenosha - Lost
Columbia - Lost
Sauk - Lost
Marquette - Lost
Winnebago - Lost



Douglas - Held 11,357 9,661 14,863 7,705 D-3.5k R+2k
Bayfield - Held 4,953 4,124 6,033 3,603 D-1k R+500
Ashland - Held 4,226 3,303 5,399 2,820 D-1k R+500
Eau Claire - Held 27,340 23,331 30,666 23,256 D-3k R even
La Crosse - Held 32,406 26,378 36,693 25,751 D-4k R-500
Portage - Held 18,529 17,305 22,075 16,615 D-3.5k R+700
Menominee - Held 1,002 267 1,191 179 D-200 R+100
Iowa - Held 6,669 4,809 8,105 4,287 D-1.5k R+600
Green - Held 9,122 8,693 11,206 7,857 D-2k R+1k
Rock - Held 39,339 31,493 49,219 30,517 D-10k R+1k

Milwaukee - Held 288,822 126,069 332,438 154,924 D-50k R-28k
Dane - Held 217,697 71,697 216,171 83,644 D+1.5k R-12k


Similar to Minnesota, despite losing 40k votes in Milwaukee and Dane, Trump picked up gains everywhere else. Hillary lost 50k in Milwaukee and that did her in. 22 Counties tho. Bro that's the fabled Hill-slide.

[Aeson]

The problem with your analysis BK, is you’re presuming a zero sum game, when it obviously is not a zero sum game. It’s not possible to tell from vote totals alone how many Obama voters voted for Trump. An increase in votes or decrease can come from or go to the pool of non-voters, or other parties, not just from the other side.

This is especially true with a candidate like Trump, who wasn’t simply conforming to Rs, but rather appealing to anti-establishment types.

[Ben Kenobi]

Digging through the Democrat archives.

I admit that I don't remember Reagan well enough, but I don't remember any push for Reagan. I don't remember reading about any push for Reagan.

You probably weren't around for it. Conyers D-Michigan called for impeachment of Reagan after Grenada, in 1983. In 1984, Jesse Jackson called for impeachment over Nicaragua. The whole Iran-Contra affair with Henry Gonzalez and six other Democrats wanted him impeached for that in 1987.

There was nothing against Bush 1 for the first Iraq war. I remember that one.

Henry Gonzalez R-TX called for his impeachment over the First Iraq War.

Now I'm sure everyone here wants to say, "it's different", but it's honestly not. If you read the actual events as they transpired, it actually draws the opposite conclusion. What war has Trump started? He didn't intervene in Libya, or in Iraq. Or in Syria. Those aren't even being mentioned as justifications this time around. No, the issue is that Democrats lost an election that they thought they had in the bag. Iran Contra were much more serious allegations than anything since.

[Jon Miller]

Looking up, I see that Bush 1 did have an impeachment resolution filed by a D congressperson for Iraq War but no one was interested in it.

And it was the impeachment resolution for Iran Contra that led to the special prosecutor for Reagan.

Ford and Carter had no impeachment resolutions filed.

Clinton was impeached.

For the Iraq war, there was an effort about impeaching Bush 2, but it did not get past the hearing stage.

For using Drones, there was an impeachment resolution filed by a R congressperson but no one was interested in it.

I stand by my position that the current interest in impeaching Trump is greater than any past president since Nixon. Although I think that impeachment is only 50/50 since the D leadership is currently uninterested (only times D or R leadership have been interested was Nixon and Clinton). The resolution for impeachment of Trump was tabled with 364 to 58. That is a lot of Ds.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Now I'm sure everyone here wants to say, "it's different", but it's honestly not. If you read the actual events as they transpired, it actually draws the opposite conclusion. What war has Trump started? He didn't intervene in Libya, or in Iraq. Or in Syria. Those aren't even being mentioned as justifications this time around. No, the issue is that Democrats lost an election that they thought they had in the bag. Iran Contra were much more serious allegations than anything since.

The issue is Obstruction of Justice, Election Fraud, Emoluments.

That even ignores Russia and the attacks on the Media/Justice/State departments.

Show me where any president since Nixon (excepting maybe Reagan) has had any of those things.

JM

[Ben Kenobi]

The problem with your analysis BK, is you’re presuming a zero sum game, when it obviously is not a zero sum game. It’s not possible to tell from vote totals alone how many Obama voters voted for Trump. An increase in votes or decrease can come from or go to the pool of non-voters, or other parties, not just from the other side.

The real answer is much more complicated. You're looking at two different voter bases from 2012 and 2016. You simply can't assume those who voted in 2012 are going to be there in 2016, and furthermore in 2020. To argue that Trump won because 'Democrats stayed home', yes, Hillary lost overall voters, but if we go back further, to, say 2000, we see a different pattern. I argued here in 2008, that voters for the Republicans were down from 2000, and that this was evidence of them staying home. In 2012, they also stayed home, as the numbers from Obama dropped off. What happens when those same voters come back in 2016? We see what we saw last election.

The real long term pattern is this. Democrats have never, aside from the Obama 2008 election, had a significant majority of American voters since the days of FDR. I discount 1964, because there were other factors involved. Rain or shine they get about 50 percent.

What is increasingly evident is that the Democrats are the party of the city and of city people. The most significant trend as to how you voted is where you lived. This hasn't always been the case. For a long time these particular areas in question, Iowa, Wisconsin, so on and so forth voted Democrat. What I am seeing is this. Many of these people are country folk. They are also white, older and remember a different America. The issues that the Democrats have spent the last generation campaigning on have zero appeal for them.

If you look at the electoral history of each county it becomes very apparent that there's been a revolution within the Democrat party of the last 20 years, and it is being reflected in their supporters. Despite all the claims of people staying home, they gained voters in the cities. It wasn't a case of 'people staying home', but where.

And that's what I'm trying to point out to Giancarlo. It is significant *where* the democrat voters have stayed home. If these issues aren't dealt with then we're going to see more Republican wins. I come on here after being so long away and nothing has changed. My sincere suggestions if you want to stop losing, stop whining over an election lost 2 years ago. Stop trying to 'get back' and take out your anger on people who voted the other way. All I've been seeing is the crystallization of attitudes cultivated long ago. I can't even talk to people without them telling me I should be thrown out of helicopters.

Impeachment is a dead end. It's literally sucking up all your energy. It might make you feel better, but it's not going to accomplish anything. I'm going to do a chart and I think it demonstrates the changes better than words do here.

[Ben Kenobi]

The issue is Obstruction of Justice, Election Fraud, Emoluments.

That even ignores Russia and the attacks on the Media/Justice/State departments.

Show me where any president since Nixon (excepting maybe Reagan) has had any of those things

Christ, show me a man on the street who cares about emoluments and I'll show you a candidate for the bar. Iran-Contra was a much more serious affair than anything here.

Geez, I sound like MtG. I must be getting old. Now all I need is for an ex-wife to show up here trolling for attention.

[Giancarlo]

Ben proves absolutely nothing. It isn't a zero sum game. You can't determine if anyone switched votes by merely posting total sums. Turn out changed, but that doesn't determine if Obama voters switched. Turnout plummeted in 2016.

Second, when was the last time republicans had a majority of voters? Dumb argument.

[Ben Kenobi]

[Ben Kenobi]

I love that big red area in the borders of the Quad Cities. That is why Trump kicked all your asses. The interesting part is how much things have been eroded in the North East. Maine is well on the way, NH is also razor thin, but Upstate is gone, most of PA is gone, most of OH is gone, most of IN is gone, Quad cities are now gone, as is most of Michigan and Minnesota. This isn't the deep south but the rural north east is voting like the South now.

[Ben Kenobi]

Gian,

I can absolutely show where Trump gained voters and increased the republican base, as I have above.

Second, when was the last time republicans had a majority of voters? Dumb argument.

[Aeson]

I love how BK outright admits it’s not a zero sum game, and then goes right back to using the vote totals as if it’s a zero sum game.

[Giancarlo]

Gian,

I can absolutely show where Trump gained voters and increased the republican base, as I have above.

Except he didn't increase it by much at all. You can cherry pick counties, but I don't care.

And Hillary in contrast to Obama in 2012, nearly matched him.

And now democrats are turning out in huge numbers.

You're running in circles like a little puppy. You admit it's not a zero sum game, yet go back to doing it, as Aeson correctly pointed out.

I think the religious fascism has messed up your brain.

[Giancarlo]

I love that big red area in the borders of the Quad Cities. That is why Trump kicked all your asses. The interesting part is how much things have been eroded in the North East. Maine is well on the way, NH is also razor thin, but Upstate is gone, most of PA is gone, most of OH is gone, most of IN is gone, Quad cities are now gone, as is most of Michigan and Minnesota. This isn't the deep south but the rural north east is voting like the South now.

Um, ask Conor Lamb what he thinks. By the way, democrats have won several in the rust belt as it's known, including in Wisconsin where they completely beat republican turn-out in the primaries.

You have no clue what you're talking about. Most of this is gone, most of that is gone... are you bull****ting me? It's 2018. Not 2016. Check your calender.

You're pathetic in almost a sad way.