Democrats said Georgia was a referendum on Trump. They’re right – Trump won
Ever since Donald Trump won the presidency, liberals have comforted themselves by saying it was all a mistake. They assume he is foolish, self-indulgent, and incompetent.
Yet this consistently underestimated president just went four-for-four in special elections.
If the elite media’s portrait of Donald Trump as an unpopular president was accurate, surely the Democrats could have won at least one seat.
But no, Kansas, Montana, South Carolina, Georgia – not once were the Democrats able to turn a GOP seat blue.
Karen Handel's victory in Georgia’s 6th District Tuesday night was the most visible, and the most unpredictable of them all.
Democrats poured over $30 million into their chosen champion, Jon Ossoff.
But Ossoff was flawed. He didn’t live in the district. He raised virtually all of his money from Hollywood and other far-left radicals who lived outside the district. And instead of addressing these issues, he chose to blandly avoid them.
Meanwhile, Republicans rose to the challenge. Handel was their champion, and they went all out to win. I have a friend who lives in the district and visited every home in her neighborhood on Election Day to ensure not a single voter failed to turn out.
Ironically, the higher the turnout, the better the Republicans did. This of course repudiates everything Democrats have believed for a generation about turnout. However, it fits the pattern Trump set in the primaries and in key rural areas in Wisconsin, Michigan. Pennsylvania, and elsewhere.
Throughout the race, the elite media was consistently negative, but Trump's use of social media ended up reaching a larger audience than the three major networks combined.
In Georgia, a similar situation occurred. The longer the race went on, the more vicious the leftwing media became, the more Handel grew, and the more Ossoff shrank.
For the Left this race had been portrayed as a referendum on Trump.
After Trump’s tweets and robocalls, there was a verdict.
Trump won.
It will be interesting to watch the elite media and leftwing activists try to deal with losing four straight elections. It will be equally interesting to watch them try to comfort themselves while they attempt to explain away Karen Handel's victory. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/20/gingrich-democrats-said-georgia-was-referendum-on-trump-re-right-trump-won.html
Yet this consistently underestimated president just went four-for-four in special elections.
If the elite media’s portrait of Donald Trump as an unpopular president was accurate, surely the Democrats could have won at least one seat.
But no, Kansas, Montana, South Carolina, Georgia – not once were the Democrats able to turn a GOP seat blue.
Karen Handel's victory in Georgia’s 6th District Tuesday night was the most visible, and the most unpredictable of them all.
Democrats poured over $30 million into their chosen champion, Jon Ossoff.
But Ossoff was flawed. He didn’t live in the district. He raised virtually all of his money from Hollywood and other far-left radicals who lived outside the district. And instead of addressing these issues, he chose to blandly avoid them.
Meanwhile, Republicans rose to the challenge. Handel was their champion, and they went all out to win. I have a friend who lives in the district and visited every home in her neighborhood on Election Day to ensure not a single voter failed to turn out.
Ironically, the higher the turnout, the better the Republicans did. This of course repudiates everything Democrats have believed for a generation about turnout. However, it fits the pattern Trump set in the primaries and in key rural areas in Wisconsin, Michigan. Pennsylvania, and elsewhere.
Throughout the race, the elite media was consistently negative, but Trump's use of social media ended up reaching a larger audience than the three major networks combined.
In Georgia, a similar situation occurred. The longer the race went on, the more vicious the leftwing media became, the more Handel grew, and the more Ossoff shrank.
For the Left this race had been portrayed as a referendum on Trump.
After Trump’s tweets and robocalls, there was a verdict.
Trump won.
It will be interesting to watch the elite media and leftwing activists try to deal with losing four straight elections. It will be equally interesting to watch them try to comfort themselves while they attempt to explain away Karen Handel's victory. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/20/gingrich-democrats-said-georgia-was-referendum-on-trump-re-right-trump-won.html
Tags
Who is online
103 visitors
Read em and weep, democrats!
Time for them to 
before Trump.
I Love the Hypocritical Right Wingers Living in Blue States (California) with all the Rights of Blue State Citizens, Criticizing Democrats, while enjoying Clean Water and Clear Air that was Championed by DEMOCRATS..That's Right, if you are so BRAVE and think Right Wing Republican Governments is so GRAND...BE BRAVE AND MOVE TO A RIGHT WING REPUBLICAN STATE..Then Report back on how much you enjoy the Change...I Lived in a RED STATE FOR 20 Years and HATED every Bit of it...
We are going to move to a conservative state. It's called Jefferson. California is the worst state in all of America. Bar none.
I live in red SC and love it here. Your argument is silly.
Time for them to
before Trump.
You can take care of the bootlicking.
Here is what we have for Trump
No decapitation picture? You'll lose your progressive credentials!
In your illustration I would posit that the one doing the kicking is a certain Robert Mueller, especially as he is now digging into past building contracts Trump had in building that were partially financed with what is now known to be be Russian mob money.
I guess when you can't win an election, that's what you have to resort to. Dreaming about a special investigator.
This is why Democrats have been losing since 2008.
It is true that in order to win back the House Democrats will have to flip about 10% of the current GOP seats while holding on to their own. What is not true is that one election right now is indicative of what will happen in '18. To say it is much too small a sample should be self-evident. The media is what makes these one time elections seem so important. I thought all you Republicans hated the media.
democrats need to take Stock of their extremism.
This is what Democrats needs to Do..Democratic States, Needs to have our own Health Care and Educational Programs that uplifts and Advances our own people just like NEW York is now doing, Forget those BACKWARD people in Right Wing States, If you are Self Sufficient, Ambitious, Creative and have all Attributes for Advancement, We will Welcome you and Move Forward...Conservatism is a Dying Idea that perhaps has another 10-20years to go..Perhaps..
Hmm, as progressives lose thousands of political positions, conservatives are dying!? Liberal logic at its finest!
Our jackass Governor, King Andy, has publicly stated conservatives are not welcome in New York. What an idiot statement to make. And this clown wants to be president. More people and more businesses are leaving New York State every day. They are squeezing the average taxpayer into oblivion. NYC types are oblivious to this as the rest of us in upstate feel the pain and are reacting to it. The 'Free Shit' mentality of New York City is costing the hard working people of New York State to pick up and move elsewhere. Wonder who will pay the bill when we are all gone and the employment base outside the city are gone?
You know New York is losing people to other states right?
This election was one of the few that will take place before 2018. That is why it was made a "referendum" by the media. The political makeup of the Georgia district is overwhelmingly Republican and were the media not pushing for a "referendum" to try and make some news, the unbalanced makeup of the electorate there would not have led to national news. A Republican winning in a heavily red district hardly cements Trumps popularity.
Spin it back now...
The news before the election: Well, it looks like the Democratic candidate is going to win, as Trump barely won this traditionally red district...... The news after the election: No one should be surprised that the Republican candidate won in this heavily red district.
Folks, it's not news anymore, it's editorials Opinion and nothing more. You can't trust these folks for real news.
A Republican winning in a heavily red district hardly cements Trumps popularity.
I couldn't agree more and the closeness of the race and the closeness of the other races does not bode well for the GOP in the 2018 elections. I also think that had the GOP controlled Senate revealed the CBO score of the upcoming sickness of their tax cut for the rich that they are going to refer to as the health plan before this election it would have been an easy Democratic win.
e political makeup of the Georgia district is overwhelmingly Republica
Trump won the district by one point. This should be one of the easiest seats in the country to flip. An open seat (incumbency is worth about 10 points) in a district that barely went for Trump. Given in his fall in popularity since the election day, this should have been a layup for Democrats.
Despite everything working in their favor, a massive war chest, unpopular President, media cheering their candidate etc.,. they still lost.
Luckily for Republicans, the idea of Nancy Pelosi as house speaker is even more toxic than Trump. At this rate, they will be stupid enough to run Hillary again in 2020.
The Democratic brand has been destroyed since 2008. It's now toxic outside of their urban enclaves.
How'd that referendum on Trump work out?
The special election in the 6th district of Georgia was universally billed 'a high-stakes referendum on Trump' in all the much-hyped build-up coming from the left and its media allies. Not a local election, not a fluke election. A moment-of-truth Referendum On Trump.
After all, weren't President Trump's poll numbers down? Didn't the 'resistance' put on a mega-protest show and continue its tantrum in all the days-of-rage riots on college campuses? Wasn't President Trump engulfed in scandal for colluding with the Russians to win the 2016 election that was rightfully Hillary Clinton's? Weren't the leftists whispering "President Pence"?
Rubbing their mousy hands together with glee, it's pretty clear the left thought it had a certain victory in the bag with that "narrative" along with a perfect post-election analysis no matter what the Georgia voters thought about it.
Get a load of this now-comical pompouss pre-election analysis that ran earlier this week in the New York Times, (emphasis mine):
Didn't turn out like they thought it would.
So it was a referendum on Trump? Maybe so. Lookee here, what were the locals saying when Karen Handel won the special election last night? From the Atlanta Journal Constitution:
Trump! Trump! Trump! Guess it really was a referendum, but not with the "narrative" Ben Rhodes and all his fellow Democratic Party coevals and media toadies thought it would be. Apparently, hating Trump is not sufficient to win elections these days.
The reality it shows is that Georgia voters and Americans in general are tired as heck of the left's kitchen-sink Energizer Bunny-style efforts to delegitimize President Trump - whether through tantrums, thuggery, lawsuits, special prosecutors, fake news, gobs and gobs of campaign cash or "by any means necessary."
Handel wasn't always riding high in the polls, but when it came down to brass tacks and the coinciding news was in all the disgusting efforts to stop President Trump and the agenda they elected him to accomplish back in Washington, Handel's numbers crossed the victory threshold.
Democrats, of course are horrified, though some are trying to put the best possible face on it and others are vowing to double down on extremism, to take two examples.
What they won't do is take an honest look at themselves and why voters chose Trump as a result.
There are two things to observe about this.
One is an observation from Peggy Noonan, who pointed out a few months ago that Trump's support isn't likely to tank or fade for the simple reason that voters took a long time to make up their mind on whether to support Trump. Making that mental 'investment' they weren't about to scrap it over something small or stupid.
The other thing is that Democrats have yet to confront the problem as to why they are losing elections. The big reason is that they have swung hard-left on every single issue that they once had moderates on - immigration, government spending, health care, law and order, terrorism. In every single instance, it's a stance that benefits some special interest group and leaves the average voter with the bill.
What's more, it's a creepy kind of leftwingery - one that benefits corporate interests at the expense of Main Street. Whenever some big-spending, freedom-ending intrusive Democrat program is rolled out "for the children" - you can be there are a plethora of corporate hipster crony capitalists slavering in the rafters over all the new contracts to come. The secondary backwash is massive speaking fees these corporate beneficiaries shovel out to Democrats the programs are enacted. This is not the party of the little guy.
And it's an inflexible, brittle stance as well. Like Obama, the left finds it impossible change course when it goes to far. It just keeps digging deeper and deeper into its leftwing party line, intensifyng it and thrilling its special interest activists and Sorosian NGOs determined to 'make a difference.'
Voters can see that - and yet at election time, the Democrats don't run one of these new-style extremists emblematic of who they now are - such extremism is reserved for leftist representatives in safe and longtime seats such as Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) The Democrats run what they claim is a 'moderate' figuring voters won't notice how far the party has shifted left. And figuring the youth gambit would work in the states as it did in France and Canada, they ran a candidate who tried to capitalize on his youthfulness, in this case, the 30-year-old documentary film-maker named Jon Ossoff who didn't even live in the district he purported to represent. He just said he hated Trump - and proposed a raft of tax hikes to prove he was a business-as-usual Democrat, not a new-style street extremist or Sorosian crony.
It doesn't work.
Now the Democrats are left with a steaming pile of $23 million in campaign debt, shelling out $200 per vote, all because they thought hating on Trump was a winning strategy that would thrill the voters. And if that wasn't clear enough a message, a similar race in the 5th district of South Carolina came out the same way.
The Left wanted a referendum on Trump. Today, they got it.
Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
You Know Most New Yorker's that Leave, return to NY, once they realize those Red States is not what they were sold/told right...Especially, those people who were living in the City..The Others from Upstate etc..well, they already have a Right wing Mentality..
Not true.
CerekoV:
THIS IS WHAT I SAID:
Conservatism is a Dying Idea that perhaps has another 10-20years to go..Perhaps. - See more at:
Said CONSERVATISM IS DYING..NOT CONSERVATIVES..
I AM REFERRING TO THE IDEAS, NOT THE PERSONS... PLEASE DON'T POLLUTE MY WORDS..
con·serv·a·tive
noun
noun: conservative ; plural noun: conservatives
1 .
a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.
synonyms:
right-winger , reactionary , rightist , diehard ; More
noun
noun: conservatism
1 .
commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation.
"proponents of theological conservatism"
DF:
Funny you said that, I once lived in Texas and vowed never to return there..Most People were assholes, not all, but some..
Cerenkov:
You know the saying, "If you can make it in NEW YORK, You can make it anywhere..New York is not for "The Faint of Heart"...
I didn't want to fund any more takers than I had too.
Welfare Hypocrisy: Red States Are The Real Freeloaders – The Ring of Fire
For years the Republican Party has been telling us that the welfare system in America is helping to make people lazy and making them too dependent on the federal government. If this is true, then a new report has some horrible news to deliver to Republicans.
As it turns out, Red states are far more likely to depend on federal welfare than blue states, and they are also more likely to have a higher percentage of poor people in their states. A new report from the Tax Foundation shows that two of the most conservative states in America – Louisiana and Mississippi – rank in the top 3 recipients of federal handouts. The report says that, of the revenue brought in by these states each year, with about 42% of Louisiana’s total state revenue coming from the federal government and almost 43% of Mississippi’s yearly revenue coming from the feds. The remainder of that revenue is what the states bring in via taxes, commerce, and other sources of revenue and that’s not a reflection of the workers in the state, but a reflection of the failed conservative principles that govern these states.
READ MORE:
Fun but irrelevant to my comment.
Very relevant to your comment, you claim to be running away from takers, but, you are in one the MOST POVERTY STRICKEN States in The USA...
Really? When cost of living is accounted for, SC's poverty rate is below the national average. Facts hurt.
Exactly. They look at income only and not cost of living.
Classy..... and a weird strategy to unite the country.
I know! Who runs a district campaign based solely on hating a sitting president!
PJ, the bottom dwellers have to concentrate on this one measly election - there is nothing else that is going well for their side in the news.
John,
Why was it such an important referendum on President Trump....until he lost to the Republican candidate?
Look at the expressions on the faces of these Clinton News Network comrades.
Lol!
Spikegary:
The Free shit mentality on NYC:
You are Hilarious: Just some FACTS!!!!
Downstate Pays More, Upstate Gets More: Does It Matter?
How much does my region of New York pay in the annual giving-and-getting that make up the state budget? How much do we get back? And perhaps more importantly, does it matter?
The answer to “does it matter?” may depend on a somewhat separate issue — the economic and fiscal stability of localities across the state. But first, let’s consider the numbers.
If indeed it is better to give than receive, New York City and its suburbs can count their blessings by the billions of dollars. City residents and businesses paid about $4.1 billion more to Albany in taxes and fees than the state returned in spending for education, health care, transit and other services in 2009-10. For the nearby suburban counties (Nassau, Suffolk, Rockland and Westchester), it was $7.9 billion more in taxes than came back in spending, a new Rockefeller Institute study finds. [
Where did the extra $12 billion go? North and west, up the Hudson River and along the Thruway corridor to Upstate regions that have struggled economically for much of the last half-century.
In fiscal 2010, the Upstate region generated less than 28 percent of the state’s taxes and other non-federal revenues (including SUNY tuition, lottery and other gambling profits, motor vehicle fees and so on). By contrast, Upstate received a much larger share of state-funded expenditures, 42 percent.
Look Downstate, and the ratios reverse. New York City generated 45 percent of state revenues in 2010, but received 40 percent of spending. The gap is even larger for the four major suburban counties: a collective 24 percent of revenues paid to Albany, and 18 percent of expenditures received in return.
The state’s largest source of non-federal revenue, the personal income tax, is particularly concentrated Downstate. New York City and its suburbs represent 64 percent of state residents, but around 80 percent of the income tax.
Yet regional imbalances don’t necessarily mean the current division of dollars is unfair.
For at least a century — certainly since the days of Franklin Delano Roosevelt — Americans, and especially New Yorkers, have believed that redistribution of wealth is a central purpose of government. FDR defined the measure of progress itself as “whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”
Thus, Albany will distribute some $20 billion in education aid this year based partly on how many children in each school are poor enough to qualify for free lunch. Individuals’ age and need will help drive more than $50 billion in Medicaid and welfare spending.
The personal income tax is expressly designed to take more from individuals who have more. And not just a higher number of dollars, but a larger proportion of upper-level incomes. In 2008, for example, the typical taxpayer with income of $500,000 paid about 15 times as much (rather than 10 times) as the average taxpayer earning $50,000. In other words, the effective tax rate on the highest-income earners is significantly higher than the rates paid by middle- and lower-income earners.
By definition, such income-sensitive spending formulas and tax policies redistribute dollars away from relatively wealthier people and communities — in this case, from the city and its suburbs to Upstate. And it’s worth noting that, while the regional distribution of tax payments outlined above does not match population shares, it does come close to matching regional shares of personal income.
Those who have more, pay more — and get less in return. Most voters seem to support this sociopolitical compact, at least in broad form.
READ MORE:
AS FOR YOUR COMMENT ABOUT KING ANDY(GOVERNOR) THIS GOVERNOR AND HIS FATHER MARIO HAS DONE FOR UPSTATE NYS THAN ANY REPUBLICAN, ESPECIALLY PATAKI...GOV. ANDREW CUOMO HAS BEEN DOING A GOOD JOB WITH NEW INVESTMENTS AND BRINGING IN BUSINESSES TO UPSTATE NY..UPSTATE IS NOW THRIVING, NEW AND MORE RAIL SYSTEM, COLLEGE KIDS ARE ALSO OPTING TO REMAIN UPSTATE BECAUSE OF MORE OPPORTUNITIES MY GRANDSON BEEN ONE OF THEM...SO, UNLESS YOU HAVE STUDIED THE ECONOMICS OF YOUR REGION, YOU WILL NOT KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON CURRENTLY..
Indeed.
Exactly.