Funny. These districts (including IA-4) didn’t magically become competitive. It’s just the “Official Democrats” have been mostly ignoring them, and thus blind to the intense grassroots effort underway. So they didn’t get much polling. And then there’s a poll and everyone’s
.https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/1059126010292195329 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @zeynep
Totally silly premise you are spinning here. There were plenty volunteers knocking on the door in 2016 supporting Clinton. The persistent agitprop from Bernie Sanders wing muted effort on the ground.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BagLady20 @zeynep
Agreed. You know what I think is ridiculous- the idea that the national party somehow plays a big role in these races in '18. The world has really changed. Jess King, who is great, has raised $1.6M. Her opponent has raised $1.3M. If King loses it isn't gonna be due to lack of $
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @eCareDiaryJohn @BagLady20
I followed the whole PA-11 saga, before redistricting and through Hartman, so you're not right at all. King raised all that money in spite of, not with the help of, the official party. If it weren't for those efforts, there'd be no viable if still long-shot candidate in PA-11.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The official party tried hard to re-nominate Hartman, who may be a wonderful person, but ran & lost before *and* underperformed even Clinton in 2016. After redistrcting PA-11 got tougher, so Hartman bolted to run elsewhere again with support of party, but even botched signatures!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
She may well lose, given how tough a district that is for a D, but that is part of my point... Look how close someone got, even there, a +22 R district, once they tried. Meanwhile, re-nominating the person who lost, and with such a giant margin, was the official plan.
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.