GA Special Election
 

Well, the kid in GA worked his Ossoff, got lots of help from the media and big money - lots campaign contributions from outside GA, got lots of help from screwy polling (RCP averages had Ossoff with a 48% - 17% margin.....REALLY?!?!?), and the kid still lost.

Curious what message the Dem party will take away from the election results, which, as the Atlantic observed, was to be used by Dems as a statistical sample that showed disaffection with Trump:

Democrats were counting on Ossoff, the boy wonder of Georgia’s Sixth Congressional District, to deliver the proof that, with Donald Trump in the White House, there was no limit to their political potential. But after a frenzied two-month runoff campaign between Ossoff and his Republican opponent, Karen Handel, the Democrat wound up with about the same proportion of the vote—48 percent—as Hillary Clinton got here in November. If this race was a referendum on Trump, the president won it.

Now, to be fair, Handel didn't necessarily run as a "Trumpist", though the Dems tried to paint her as fully aligned with Trump. Ossoff didn't exactly run as a tax and spend liberal either. But, as WaPo observed (WaPo, who continues to get it wrong might have this one right):

Handel’s win will bring fresh attention to a beleaguered Democratic Party that has suffered a string of defeats in special elections this year despite an angry and engaged base of voters who dislike Trump.

Also, this loss might create further rifts in the Dem party driven by the party's left flank:

For Democrats, Ossoff’s loss was demoralizing, coming after months of bitter infighting in the wake of Trump’s victory.

His defeat is also likely to lead to more criticism from the wing of liberal activists who want a more confrontational style embodied by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). They have already complained about the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s willingness to support a more moderate candidate in Ossoff, while more progressive candidates in special elections in Montana and Kansas this year were left largely in the lurch.

Hmmm....what path forward from here?

Glad someone got that low hanging fruit pun in before I was compelled.
The takeaway could be that the general overreach by a totally dominant entity hasn't passed tipping point for a sufficient majority. I do expect that will happen when the true consequences of the 2016 election become apparent to the betrayed and the politically uninvested constituents.

The Russians?

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Folks want something to vote FOR, and voting against something (i.e. "resist) just isn't compelling. I have no idea what the Democrats stand for. I'm pretty clear on what they stand against. But that doesn't really create, in most folks, a vision that they want to be a part of.

The GA special election was another example. Here's a headline from Ossoff's web site section that describes "who he is":

I’M RUNNING FOR CONGRESS BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE ALL HAVE TO STAND UP, RIGHT NOW, AND FIGHT FOR PROGRESS — FOR OUR PROSPERITY AND HEALTH, OUR CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES, AND OUR SECURITY.

Tells me nothing about the candidate or his vision and / or what "success" looks like to him. Tells me nothing about why I should support him personally, or what "progress" looks like. The rest of the page gives his resume, but tells me nothing about vision priorities. There is a "priorities" page, but it reads (pardon me) almost like a Republican wonk blog...and its a tough sell to suggest that Democrats are about austerity and fiscal discipline.

So, what's the unifying Dem party message? It wasn't apparent in the GA special election.

The unifying message is:

A VOTE FOR US IS A VOTE AGAINST HIM

Under the gaze of the national and even international press, voters cast ballots in Georgia that they knew would be interpreted as a referendum on Trump, the GOP healthcare plan winding its way through Congress, and much more.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elec...handel-n774936

It's quite obvious that message didn't work.

And you're more than a bit dull. :rolleyes:

Pffft. Typical.

Try this for a change. If you disagree with an opinion, try responding with actual counter - info or your own opinion. Much better than lame and ineffective insults.

Your comprehension problems are your concern.