Democrats Keep Losing, but They May Be on Track to Win

Bean counting mistakes the nature of politics and the problem for Democrats.

The New York Times and other outlets do our politics a disservice when they get swept up in such marginalia. Regardless of party, we benefit from feeling widespread engagement in our aspirations instead of cynically counting the survivors of broad disaffection.

Political momentum is palpable. You can feel it when talking to voters -- you get interrupted by someone gushing with enthusiasm. "Let's win this thing" becomes "I voted."

One could feel that passion at Bernie Sanders rallies, not so much at Hilary Clinton events. Worse, that difference was reflected in how their events organized supporters. Where I live, Sanders meetings quickly got people signed up to take action -- done in an hour. Clinton hosted 3 and 4 hour talkathons made one endure multiple, mediocre local officials and even didn't bother to contact you after the event. No wonder there were few second dates and even fewer votes.

Instead of isolating ourselves in the virtual reality of data models, Democrats need to have that feeling of real momentum in many more places around the country before counting margins adds up to even a hill of beans.

I'm beginning to see how Nate Cohn had Hillary an 87 percent 'sure thing' on election morning.

The flaw in his logic seems pretty obvious. Yes, there are a lot of seats where the Democrat has a 10 percent chance of winning, and, mathematics suggest Democrats will win some of them. But there are also a lot of seats where Republicans have a 10 percent chance of winning, and Democrats will LOSE some of them, if this is a purely math-based analysis.

Oh, but wait: You haven't factored in 'the wave effect' that will follow once everyone really gets to know and hate Donald Trump the way right-thinking analysts already do.

The unspoken assumption in all his calculations is that everyone will loathe Trump by election morning 2018 as much as the entire staff of the New York Times already does. Maybe. But that's precisely how he blew the November election: pretending there was some mathematical logic underlying his prejudices.

I feel like back when Democrats had both houses on lock down we weren't catering to a rising hate movement from the fringe left. I'm still liberal on every big ticket issue I can think of, but the politics of division is hurting us badly. Talking down to people and telling them about privilege when they're lives are in fact NOT that great is always going to be a terrible idea. I'm just sick to my stomach with worry that we won't learn this lesson by 2018 and get buried again. America is the greatest melting pot in the world, and somewhere along the way we stopped believing in that. Segregation/separation/division cannot be our future. It didn't work in the past why would it work now?

Tonight's loss for the Dems in Georgia is a heart breaker. I think the time has come to think outside the box. If over $40 mil was spent on this one election use the money differently. Surely the Dems can regain our reputation of the party that cares for the middle class by donating the money to worthwhile causes. Have the courage to put our money where it will do the most good and then advertise that behavior. Ossoff could have donated ten million to a variety of worthwhile charities, schools, homeless shelters, clinics, etc. in Georgia!!! Let's stop doing everything the same old way. It just doesn't win hearts and minds.

Nate Cohn has submitted dozens of these types of predictions over the past few years. I'd love to see an *independent* analysis of how well he's played out. He's lost most of my faith since Nov. 2016 and now when I read stories like this, I roll my eyes and move on.

People are getting caught up on is the Red vs Blue aspect of these elections that are coming up, but they should realize that both parties have blown it for the American people. Hopefully the Democrats will not make the same mistakes that they, and the Republicans, have in the past, and that is a lack of respect for the opposite party. Democrats have to open their hearts and minds to those with opposing views on gun rights, abortion, and religious freedom. They should see themselves as the party of working Americans, and concentrate on labor laws, financial/consumer regulation, healthcare, and infrastructure. They should level the playing field, and give rise to the voice of the people instead of the voice of 'money'.
The movement is real, people are sick of politicians fighting with each other, and not fighting for the American people. Trump by his very nature, will never be successful. Backlash against him will take its course, but the problem is much bigger than Trump, bigger than Democrats or Republicans, it is what course will our democracy take, and who is willing to speak and fight for the needs of all Americans. Not just Republicans, (like we have now) or just Democrats, or only the people with the most money. Our political process is corrupt with money buying whatever votes are for sale, and unfortunately it looks like they are all for sale.

Enough Democratic gains in 2018 to retake a majority in the House will do nothing but assure gridlock and stalemate. They can pass all the progressive legislation they wish and it will be a waste of time to send it to the Senate that the GOP is unlikely to lose. DOA. They can even gleefully pass articles of impeachment but there is little chance of the 2/3 vote in the Senate necessary for removal from office. The results will be more division and acrimony in an already divided country.

Trump can go about his merry way reorganizing government, dismantling the "administrative state" through executive action, and appointing judges and administrators that only require Senate approval. Congress might make little difference anyway. Running against a "do nothing Congress" might be rather successful.

Come on Democrats running for the House, get out there now with a credible vision and give as good as you get on all media – it's bare knuckles these days. Hill & Bill – stay home.

Republicans have nothing to fear. Democrats are too lazy go to the polls and vote.

I remain frustrated with the lack of understanding of Georgia's sixth district (in which I live, work, and vote) by media. This district is going to flip because of demographics changes driven by rapid over-development and a huge number of tech jobs. The voters this year are different than the ones last year, and will be different again next year.
I don't know if the flip will happen in this current special election, but I have no doubt it will happen by the next one. It won't necessarily be because last-years voters turned on Trump, it will be because the population moving in is young, international, well-educated, and more blue, just like most large cities with a strong footing in tech jobs.

See the AJC article from today titled "N. Fulton is home to Georgia's fastest growing large city" and the referenced Census data, Tech company data, and Business Insider article.

How can anyone vote Republican anymore.

Wake up right-wingers. Here's what they say:

When asked about her position on minimum wage, Handel, a Republican, responded: "This is an example of a fundamental difference between a liberal and a conservative. I do not support a livable wage."

She doesn't think you deserve to make a wage you can live off of.

So, how can anyone vote for her, when she's against the vast majority of us having even a nominally crappy existence, let alone getting by in a good way?

Wake up right-wing. These new Republicans are not conservative. They are not for you and your interests.

None of that matters and quit dishing out hope that never pays off. Face it, the R.party owns it all forever, in this​ paradigm. Dems are too nice even as they argue with a stack of facts as evidence vs aggressive fallacy​. Admit it, the nice guys don't hold the edge here nor will they.

Dems may as well raise the white flag now if they don't use the truth more aggressively on all issue fronts.

The only thing the R party actually 'accomplished' since Hank asked the public to bail the private, is move consistantly and successfully to ensure that party's control regardless of merit or straight up majority vote.

As much a declaration of intent to lock in control of one specific group in 2009, the Citizens United decision created the funding quietly and instantly. And just-in-time to basically, buy the '10 midterm governorships and House without fight nor merit. Which gets them the 'right' to use the Census to gerrymander themselves into district advantage to a level that shows no shame but should. Not to mention the voter suppression. The organizational funding and district advantage then gives them the Senate against all normal political odds. And then use all that to deny the sitting president a completely legitimate justice appointment.

The Dems have rolled over and played dead through all of this. Same thing, expecting different results, insanity. Dems better cypher who and what works against them, full tilt.

Nate - here's an analysis for you:

When you and just about all the other numbers guys had Hillary at 95% chance of winning did it influence the election?

Did a significant number of voters stay home thinking it was in the bag?

Did a significant number of voters vote 3rd party for the same reason?

Were folks over critical of Hillary thinking there was a landslide in the making and she needed to be kept in check by someone?

Did the media focus too much on asking Trump and his folks how they could win given the published long odds, rather than asking substantive policy questions?

Given the narrowness of Trump's victory in the key handful of states it wouldn't have taken much

Do you and your colleagues need to think about these issues for the next elections?

Should the analysis be published with such certainty in the future given the shocking failure of these stats this election?

Is it enough to do a post mortem on the methodology without looking at the effect as well of these mis-measures?

The Democrats can't win because they are terrible campaigners. The Republicans are all over social media taking swipes at everything with the Democrats letting them get away with it. Look at Hillary. Her campaign was mostly either warm and fuzzy "let's all get along" or defending herself against Trump's constant tweets. Are there no young, or any, Democrats who know how to use social media? Even in my very Republican state, the arguably dumbest member of the house got reelected because her opponent, a well established, old family resident of the state, was all about bis roots, not about the do nothing, know nothing nature of his opponent. Democrats are doomed by their own over-thinking. We are doomed to a rapidly declining country.

I have no confidence in anything political statistics guys write

The most important thing for Democrats to do is to vote.

Forget all this baseball stuff, and just vote.

Thinking in terms of Democrats vs Republicans has hurt this country.

This isn't a softball game; the goal isn't for one team to win and beat the other team, yet that's how so many partisans feel when the party they support gets elected. They crow that the other team got beaten.

Trump wasn't really a Republican. All of the traditional, Establishment Republicans were soundly rejected by voters. Trump was elected because voters no longer care about the softball teams; they will elect anyone who promises to make common sense changes to immigration, trade deals, and taxes.

The Trump electoral win has provided so many useful lessons for Democrats. Lying extensively to the white working class of rust belt states and making outrageous promises that can't possibly be realized legally or paid for, might help Democrats almost as much as this approach helped Donald Trump. Begging for the help of Russian trolls to plant damaging fake news stories on social media about the opposition couldn't hurt, either. Democrats must campaign as if the working class electorate doesn't understand or doesn't care how the Federal government functions, avoiding any mention of a greater good whilr. Pandering to only the hopes and aspirations of the white working class should endear Democrats to this group that once solidly voted Democratic. Most importantly, Democrats must never apologize under any circumstance and must never admit making any mistakes or being wrong Democratic candidates should be exclusively older white males with zero political experience.

There are many ways Democrats can win. Let's remember some reasons why Democrats lose.

In midterms, Democratic voters don't turn out as they do in presidential years. This led to the disasters of 2010 and 2014.

Democrats have a messaging problem. They need to develop a platform that appeals to working class and middle class voters, who feel Democrats abandoned them and explains why these voters have sought succor in the Republicans and Trump.

Democrats have done a terrible job reaching the non-voting public, at least 35% to 40% of the population. Many of these non-voters buy into the Republican propaganda of 'they're as bad as us'. The "pox on both their houses" is one of the most effective Republican voter suppression tools and Democrats need to combat it more, despite how difficult it would be.

I very much hope that Nate Cohn's analysis of the numbers is correct and that the Democrats re-take the House in 2018. My greater hope would be to see a coherent vision for Democratic Party governance beyond the entirely justifiable but inadequate opposition to Donald Trump.

The Democratic Party has failed and continues to fail in this respect. Hillary Clinton's campaign was atrocious, caving in to populism instead of educating the vast American middle about why a visionary Democratic policy could help the economic conditions of those left adrift in a transforming economy. Relying solely on the message that Democrats aren't as awful as Republicans is hardly a winning plan.

That said, what we have now in the White House and both houses of Congress is causing severe damage to the nation that will be difficult to reverse. The Democratic Party is anything but ideal. Until there is a viable alternative to both parties, however, it is the only viable alternative we have. Sadly, the Democrats' absence of vision fails to inspire enough votes to win a long-term majority.

I could have sworn Nate did this exact same story at least once before.
As far to the Left - where failure is the result 100% of the time - as the Dem party is now, it might as well be James Madison as Trump in the White House.
''Not Crazy'' is always going to win the race. Sorry, progressives, but emotion is never the answer.

This article underscores an important point: the House and state legislative maps have pretty much always tilted toward conservative majorities. In MI, PA, and OH, the state Senate hasn't been Democratic since the early 1980s. Our number 1 priority going forward must be to shift the map to a neutral place, especially at the base, power level: the State House.

The outcome the outcome of the Congressional elections of 2018 is very important. But please don't overlook the importance of who controls the state legislatures. If we are to move in the direction of rational redistricting after the 2020 census (such as it may be), we need to remove the corrupt people who created the complete mess of gerrymandered districts now in place. A robust discussion of how redistricting should take place would be most welcome, but there will not be a return to any rational process as long as those currently in charge remain in charge. My point is, GET INVOLVED IN ELECTING STATE LEGISLATORS.

Nate, the Democrats didn't lose. The USA lost. Anyway, I would like to see some reporting on what the Republicans did at State Level, to purposely trash stuff over the 8 years of Obama, so it looks like the USA is falling apart. The people then don't vote Democrat. Referring to Flint Water Damage, for example.

The most important dynamic in the next (or any) election is voter turnout, and Mr. Trump will motivate even the most cynical and disappointed Democratic to get out and vote, the tens of millions who otherwise just stay home. The Democrats won't have a wave: it will be a tsunami.

This is great news for the Democratic establishment, not so great for the rest of us; i.e., the Trump debacle is a kind of DNC dog obedience school for any of us who dare to challenge the party's wealthist, corporatist, and Wall Street wing. Not even the Ralph-Nader-as-whipping-boy cynical strategy will compare to how they demand that no one break ranks now.

This is a tragedy for all of us: the country is ready for genuine 99%-centered leadership and policy, not just another round of least-worst-party ultimatums and cosseting of the rich and powerful.

The Republicans have gerrymandered many states so that a high number of Congressional districts favor Republicans far beyond actual presidential vote totals. In my state of Virginia there are 10 Republican Congressional seats and only 3 Democrats even though nearly 50% of the votes went Democrat or Green in 2016 for president and Democrats have won ALL statewide offices in recent years. Gerrymandering explains a high proportion of Republicans in the House of Representatives.

Democrats have got to start focusing on issues that are popular with the majority of voters. Being the champions of small groups of people is not working. Some of the issues Democrats focus on scare the general population away from voting Democrat.

Democrats have lost 3000 seats nationwide since 2009. Republicans control 2/3rd of the state legislatures and governor's offices. In November, HRC failed to communicate a coherent message as to why she was running. Since, the Democratic party has been in denial about losing. It was the Russians, this brings nothing but laughs from anyone paying attention outside of the beltway. Meanwhile, you have old Bernie, who has an idealized design of the US becoming Venezuela. The Beatles song, Revolution comes to mind, "If you are carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you are not going to make it with anyone any how." Warren is a close second and then you have the loons, such as Maxine Waters. What happened to leaders and educated people like the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Barry Goldwater? On the other side, the Republicans are have their own problems, just not as self-destructive as the Democrats. If the Republicans had lost what the Democrats have since 2009, the NYT would be giddy and calling the party dead. Keep up the wishful thinking. No one who is working for a living is listening. They will keep voting against.

Nearly 100 million eligible voters chose not to vote for either candidate in 2016. While certainly some just don't vote at all, there must be a large number who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Trump or Clinton. Now that they've had a taste of Trump's incompetence and corruption, I have to believe that many of these people will be motivated to make the effort to vote.

Old ideas, old approaches, old party leadership and old candidates lead to the same old results. The country needs fresh leadership and young leadership.

The Boomers (I am one) have made a mess out of the country and need to get out of the way. Does anyone even know that Millennials are the largest demographic group in the US right now?

It partly depends on what Republicans in Congress achieve between now and the election. Much is expected of them, and I think they know that.

Democrats first need good candidates; veterans, small business people, scientists, technologists, physicians, and individuals with backgrounds in cyber/intelligence. Democrats need to change the narrative that they are just about diversity, labor, and the Hollywood elite. Democrats need to 'square the circle' and get the country excited about its future.

The Democrats need a strong potential 2020 Presidential candidate to raise their flag from where it now sits halfway up the pole. With that and some feasible policy positions that counteract Trump, mid-terms would get a huge boost. Unfortunately, no one stands out, and prospects like Bernie Sanders who will give away everything and tax everyone are not the answer to attracting the "middle" and reluctant Republicans. It has to be a moderate.

I think all prognostications at this point are very tentative, given the utter political chaos we find ourselves in. With daily, and even hourly, revelations of governmental ethical lapses, if not crimes, by the Trump administration, and the morass the White House finds itself in after only 4 1/2 months in office, who knows what the political landscape will look like next year. I agree that the Democrats need more spine, but, given enough evidence of Presidential crime, they may not find the going that tough in 2018.

Pretty creative accounting, Nate, but I hope you're right. You owe us one after the 2016 calculations.

Not every member of the 1% is a Republican nor are they all inclined to contribute generously to only the Republican Party. However, the Republicans have wealthy donors willing to contribute millions each year to win key races. More importantly, Reps have several notorious rich right wing zealots who have spent enormous sums and devoted considerable resources to funding right wing pacs and think tanks. In short, the Republicans have virtually an endless supply of money to influence elections.

Republicans have a multi-prong attack wherein they secure districts at all levels, lining local and state offices with Reps. After awhile it looks more like a bottom up organization than a top down.

Republican peer pressure is part of the culture. Unlike blue urban areas and states, when you "join" a red state you are typically vetted by whoever you try to become acquainted with. Your politics are fundamental to the relationship.

Gerrymandering is, if possible, underestimated for its effect on an election. If you're a Dem living in a Rep district, the outcome is 90+% guaranteed to go to GOP - year after year, decade after decade. Many people give up - what's the point of saying you voted when you lose every time.

Finally, the Reps have a huge media empire that is dedicated to disseminating an alternative reality. People are completely brainwashed and when you factor in the aspect of culture assimilation, the Reps power over people is unquestioned.

The Ossoff campaign has the whole country throwing money at it, and there are pockets of volunteers ask over phoning into the race. The Buncombe County (Asheville, NC) Democratic Party HQ has been phoning into it. I asked the me chair if they'd hit many opposition voters ahs he said they had. Their targeting is wrong. Once the polls open, which theirs did on May 30th, you want to eliminate the possibility of dialing your opponent's voters. In effect, they are reminding people who will vote against them to go vote. That's NOT how we'll win.
I freaked last fall when after the first two days of early voting, my volunteers had hit ten percent of their contacts who vowed to vote against us. I tried to isolate that ten percent so I could extricate them. Two interns came in on a Saturday and we tried to find a common thread among that 10%. At the end of the day we had nothing, they were flukes. Then I realized, silly me, that 90% for us would suffice. I'd taken my interns out to lunch, so they weren't upset with me, we laughed, and we won by a comfortable margin, just over 7%. Though it was a leetle over the top for me to worry about that ten percent, that's a much better way of looking at targeting than to be so sloppy that half or more contacts are vowing to vote against you.

Beating expectations yet still losing is...still losing.

40+ years of Republican gerrymandering, propaganda, viciously contesting every race from dogcatcher to President, huge infusions of money from wealthy people who expect favorable treatment in return, etc. is really paying off.

Democrats keep bringing butter knives to fight thermonuclear war, and if they can't figure out what they need to do then they deserve to lose.

Whistling in the dark. The Dems have no clear plan, are stuck in neutral, won't face growing rebellion against a corporate run Congress, won't listen to Sanders and Warren. Even if a few milquetoast Dems get elected, what will they do? Talk?

Awful candidates don't help.

I dunno - call me cynical, but after the bloodbath the Dems got at the hands of Donald Trump despite all the polls showing that Hillary Clinton had a 95% chance of winning the WH, reading these types of articles just makes my eyes bleed.

I can only laugh when I read about the Democratic Party's "victorious" turnout in "almost winning" a run-off election. Yikes. Wake up. There's a lot at stake in 2018. Copy the Republican playbook used to get out the vote. Stop bringing a knife to a gun fight. Start by electing fresh young leadership in the party.

In Roger Ailes" (not my hero) biography he said "TV will eventually destroy both political parties". They both seem to be well on their way. They epitomize "divided we fall". They are both incredibly divided. I do not have an answer, just an observation.

Promises, promises. How many years have I been reading that demographics or something was about to flip politics in the direction of Democrats? After the economic melt down of 2007-08, Republicans still took back the House in 2010; the Senate a little later. Last election, Republicans swept the table with the most unqualified presidential candidate ever in the history of the country. I don't know what American voters are expecting, but more or less 50% of them keep voting for a Party that represents 1%. Unless somebody puts something in the water that smartens everybody up, I think we're stuck with Republican dominance. Last time things flipped in the Democratic direction, it took the Great Depression.

To really provide insight into 2018 see if you can measure the strengths and weakness of the Democratic Party's operations, candidates and policies. The Georgia 6th is a case in point. The Democrats are putting a documentary film maker up against a former Chair of the County government. They are being severely outspent. Look at the NJ gubernatorial primary which just nominated a former Goldman Sachs exec to be the Democratic Party nominee in an era where new voters in the party reject its ties to wealthy donors.

Republican state power has gerrymandered districts in a way that dilutes Democratic voters. That's the issue. Nationally, more voters are Democrats and more of them vote than Republicans yet the party can't win local district elections. Gerrymandering works.
On the other hand, as long as the Democratic Party runs candidates like Quist in Montana there's little chance of eeking out victories in close elections.

The issues for Democrats are four fold in republican country: Running as the anti Trump may not work. Actual solutions to problems matter. Don't listen to the national DNC. They don't care about dems running in supposedly hopeless races. Lastly, get out and vote. If you don't vote, you cede the field to Republicans.

I hope all parties will use this dismal period in our nations history to seek agendas that benefit everyone as well as the lost art of compromise. Winning because the other side is most likely to lose is a poor excuse for a platform.

Maybe all the supporters of the Democratic candidates will come out and vote. It is alright to march and protest but winning some elections is what the Democrats really need. Lets not overthink everything and come up with reasons to stay home. Remember all of those democrats in 2016 who could not see any difference between Hillary and trump.

Vote for the progressive in all local, state and federal elections.