This is the Republicans' dilemma. They want to run on the economy, & even at an event held specifically to promote tax reform, Trump turns it into all immigration all the time...
-
-
I think cutting corporate tax rates was right policy. But our country is in the process of being invaded by the third world and we can't go in if we keep bleeding working class jobs to China. Literally no one outside of clueless beltway wants to hear about tax cuts or 'growth'
-
That's not true. Educated, upscale suburban districts that helped elect Trump president wants to hear about this. They don't hold your views on culture, immigration, etc. It's an issue in House races, though might be less so in Senate races given the map.
-
I live in an elite suburban district. I meet Senators and Congressmen with small groups all the time. More people than you think hold my views on culture and immigration. The views of the large donors don't represent the views of the upscale districts you are referring to
-
23 districts voted for Hillary - and in 2017 off year elections more suburban erosion. These are things that happened, otherwise I might agree w/ you on the politics of it.
-
Here's what I've learned: The fat cat donors never, ever have their pulse on the issues that matter. Never ever. In fact, only one fat cat ever really understood the issues that matter... and he's now the President of the United States
-
What matters and what works are two different things. You won't get an argument from me that donors are often clueless about real politics.
-
Here's what I'm saying - the GOPe message about growth and taxes doesn't work. In a few districts? Sure. In states, no. Get someone with a 'nice' personality, but Trump's message and guaranteed winner. That's why it sucks so much that Josh Mandel dropped out. That race was 100%.
-
I think you're right about presidential elections as a general rule (Romney proved that) and you argue well. My analysis is focused on this midterm, under these conditions, where btw Trump isn't on ballot.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Immigration outside of New York City and DC is a winner. Even people who don't compete with immigrants for housing or wages don't want open borders, drug trafficking, or to pay for the social security and health costs of illegals.
-
1) Difference tween border security message and anti-immigrant tone. 2) Border security has broader appeal than "The Snake." It's simply not true that this is a winner EVERYWHERE except the Acela Corridor. Where the House is being contested, economic mssg would go further
-
Give me a second and I'll find it, but Trump is actually going backwards with downscale Rs, and Independents, not wealthier Rs & independents. More populism not less is needed. One side of the Coalition got their tax cuts, it's the other side that's disappointed and let down.
-
I'm not necessarily disputing. But I'm talking about how these votes are distributed. (It's why I noted this is not a problem & could help in Senate races.) Where populism is "needed" to buck up the base, Rs will win anyway. That's my contention. We'll find out either way.
-
Fair enough. I just think upper-scale conservative white suburbs are more open to immigration cultural appeals than others think, even conservative women. Crime, School Makeups etc. There's a reason white flight was a thing with this demo.
-
Fair enough back at ya. I think that's more a product of a past generation, don't agree (as you can tell.) But you argue well and your case is well thought out. Good discussion.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.