That was a tough read. This is what would change America …
Folks, there are so many challenges politically for the US, it’s just difficult to imagine who or what can get us back to “old school” common sense politics. Quess what … I do have THE answer … TERM LIMITS! Everyone gets six years - Reps, Senators, and the President. Then, they will VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCE - not worrying about running for reelection. After six, then out, with a nice little pension. No longer will the Representatives in the House spend all their waking hours groveling for money - running for office every TWO years? Really? That system is broken. So, going forward, whenever someone speaks about one of our elected officials not standing up for what most thinking people consider “American Values” - do what your elected officials won’t do, yell “WE NEED TERM LIMITS”! Bingo! I haven’t heard a peep from either side (of course), so let’s fill in the blanks, shall we? … Aloha, Mike
John, Perhaps you are correct about MAGA abandoning Dan Crenshaw, but I have to wonder, perhaps Dan's eye patch had influence with casual voters. i.e., those who vote but don't really have a clue about the candidates, and simply picked the guy without an eye patch. Dan's 'credentials' should have easily gotten him re-elected.
Just exploring an additional possibility......voters are damn funny people sometimes. Like those here in Oregon who voted to have feminine products installed in kindergarten boys bathrooms. (that actually passed by the way)
Crenshaw has been that district's incumbent congressman for several years. Everyone has long known he wears an eye-patch. Why would that suddenly stop people from voting for him?
I concede not knowing how you all expected Dan's primary to turnout but my guess is that his winning was expected. The fact he did not exposes a missing piece: I have long felt that folks in the analysis business don't really understand common voters. And results of my personal gathering of random and unsolicited comments does not track with the general consensus of typical political analysis. Particularly with analysis of Trump's administration and Dan's defeat being another example.
There is a huge block of voters involved. Most did not expect Trump's first victory for instance. The 78 million votes for Trump was not predicted. Dan was expected to win.
It just seems to me that the foundation of typical analysis is incomplete. The nuance and fickleness even of common voters is missing. That's a big piece.
As a post script, Tony Gonzales has now dropped out of the race to get reelected.
You are correct. Very sad. Political civil war in the near future?
That was a tough read. This is what would change America …
Folks, there are so many challenges politically for the US, it’s just difficult to imagine who or what can get us back to “old school” common sense politics. Quess what … I do have THE answer … TERM LIMITS! Everyone gets six years - Reps, Senators, and the President. Then, they will VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCE - not worrying about running for reelection. After six, then out, with a nice little pension. No longer will the Representatives in the House spend all their waking hours groveling for money - running for office every TWO years? Really? That system is broken. So, going forward, whenever someone speaks about one of our elected officials not standing up for what most thinking people consider “American Values” - do what your elected officials won’t do, yell “WE NEED TERM LIMITS”! Bingo! I haven’t heard a peep from either side (of course), so let’s fill in the blanks, shall we? … Aloha, Mike
John, Perhaps you are correct about MAGA abandoning Dan Crenshaw, but I have to wonder, perhaps Dan's eye patch had influence with casual voters. i.e., those who vote but don't really have a clue about the candidates, and simply picked the guy without an eye patch. Dan's 'credentials' should have easily gotten him re-elected.
I can't tell if you're being serious.
Just exploring an additional possibility......voters are damn funny people sometimes. Like those here in Oregon who voted to have feminine products installed in kindergarten boys bathrooms. (that actually passed by the way)
Crenshaw has been that district's incumbent congressman for several years. Everyone has long known he wears an eye-patch. Why would that suddenly stop people from voting for him?
Especially in a primary, where typically only the hardcore voters turn out.
John it probably did not. But something did. Your assessment is likely a big part.
What? Aloha, Mike
I concede not knowing how you all expected Dan's primary to turnout but my guess is that his winning was expected. The fact he did not exposes a missing piece: I have long felt that folks in the analysis business don't really understand common voters. And results of my personal gathering of random and unsolicited comments does not track with the general consensus of typical political analysis. Particularly with analysis of Trump's administration and Dan's defeat being another example.
There is a huge block of voters involved. Most did not expect Trump's first victory for instance. The 78 million votes for Trump was not predicted. Dan was expected to win.
It just seems to me that the foundation of typical analysis is incomplete. The nuance and fickleness even of common voters is missing. That's a big piece.