It Ain't Over 'Til It's Over

[ Posted Thursday, October 29th, 2020 – 16:38 UTC ]

In 1973, baseball legend Yogi Berra uttered the immortal line: "It ain't over 'til it's over." He was speaking about the playoffs, but it's really a universal statement that has particular relevance right now. Because tens of millions of Americans just want the election to be over. Many have wanted this for months. And we've still got five more days to go.

We've all been through the wringer this year. We've been squashed flat by the twin rollers of the worst pandemic in 100 years and the worst economic hit since the Great Depression. We've been wrung out and hung out to dry. It's why everyone has been so exhausted all year long.

When an immediate crisis hits (an earthquake, a tsunami, a hurricane, whatever), there is the impact and there is the aftermath. The actual event takes relatively little time, and then the rebuilding process starts and goes on for a very long time. But people are rebuilding -- while mourning the dead and moving on with their lives.

This year has been different. The event itself never ends. There is no aftermath, because there is no "after" yet. We're still stuck in "during." Or "ongoing," perhaps. There is no real end in sight, no matter what the status of the vaccine testing is. Even if approved, it'll take many months before average people even have the chance to be vaccinated, meaning we're going to be stuck in "ongoing" for at least the next six months or so. That means we might only be at the halfway point right now -- a grim thought indeed.

Because there is no rebuilding, there is a definite lack of positive energy in the public. Things are not getting better, they are in fact getting worse. The average of new cases per day is heading north of 80,000. The deaths per day haven't started spiking, but they will in another few weeks (because this statistic lags all the others). And "indoor weather" season is just starting. Spring is a long way off.

Throughout all of this, we've had a presidential election like no other. President Donald Trump is determined to convince as many people as possible that the pandemic isn't even happening, or (at the most) is a lot less alarming than all those doctors keep saying. Joe Biden, meanwhile, has run the most restrained campaign since Jimmy Carter declared he'd be forgoing all campaigning during the Iranian hostage crisis. Biden took the experts' advice and cancelled most traditional campaign events, and campaigned virtually from his house. Only recently has he even emerged out on the campaign trail.

But this year, the COVID-19 pandemic -- in specific, the third wave of it -- is the not-very-surprising October surprise. This spike in infections was predicted by everyone. The fact that it happened in the closing weeks of the election has meant that the pandemic is what is on most voters' minds right now.

Trump, after getting the virus himself and recovering from it, has thrown himself into a whirlwind of rallies in swing states. He loves his rallies, after all, and he firmly believes that they are what won him the election the last time around. He doesn't seem to care that they are all "superspreader" events, because (to him) we've already "turned the corner" and can just stop worrying about the coronavirus. Everything's great! Who are you going to believe, Trump or your lyin' eyes?

This may be backfiring on Trump, however. Most sane people are aghast that Trump continues to hold rallies where masks are not required and people are packed together like sardines. Some of these rallies have been held even though state and/or local regulations have banned all such large gatherings. Trump doesn't care, though. And that's the heart of the problem right there: Trump doesn't care what happens to regular Americans during a pandemic. People aren't just seeing this, they're having their faces rubbed in it. And it's not a very politically helpful message, in the week before an election.

Joe Biden, on the other hand, does care. Not only does he care about the American people, he has actual plans to fight the pandemic. This is the exact opposite of Trump's "just ignore it and it'll go away" attitude. Politically, it would seem to be a winning argument.

We're all tired of the ongoing crisis. We all want it to end. At the very least, we all want things to get better, not worse. But few of us really believe that just pretending the pandemic doesn't exist is going to make things better for anyone. Biden doesn't offer a magic wand that he will wave and make everything go away, but he is offering to at least take the crisis seriously. At this point, that's a heck of a lot more hopeful than what Trump is offering.

We're also all pretty tired of the election season, too. We want it to be over. And we've still got five long days to go -- and then, quite possibly, an extended period of fighting over the results. Nobody sane is looking forward to that.

But maybe things won't be as bad as some are now fearing. Maybe the results will be so overwhelming that no amount of lawsuits will be able to change the outcome. Maybe Trump's just bluffing about fighting it all the way to the Supreme Court -- Trump threatens a lot more lawsuits than he ever actually files, after all. He really has two ways of dealing with a situation he doesn't like -- either just pretend it didn't happen (or rewrite it in his head to cast himself as the hero), or fight like a cornered wolverine. Maybe he'll actually accept the results, who really knows?

Maybe all of the voter suppression efforts have already backfired, because they've all been so public for so long. Maybe few voters actually trust the post office to deliver their ballots and they all get safely dropped off instead. Maybe Trump travelling to the battleground states that are now the worst hotspots in the country will so horrify voters in those states that they'll break in a big way for Biden at the last minute.

Maybe so, or maybe not. At least with the election, there will definitely be a point where we move from the event itself to the aftermath (whatever that turns out to be). There is a constitutional end to it all on January 20th. That's more than can be said about the pandemic.

One way or another, this election is going to end. It might end late next Tuesday night, or it might go on for months afterwards, but either way there will actually be an end in sight. It ain't over 'til it's over, but at least with the election, it will eventually be over. That's something to look forward to, at any rate.

-- Chris Weigant


Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant


50 Comments on “It Ain't Over 'Til It's Over”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Something to look forward to, indeed!

    Naturally, I'm not going to count any chickens before they hatch but, man, this election is feeling like it's going in the right direction.

    While we wait, and if you've been missing live music since Pandemic 1 began, then you are in for a treat tonight!

    Gowan, aka Lawrence Gowan of STYX, will be live streaming a phenomenal concert tonight at 8pm Eastern as he performs live from the Empire Theatre in Belleville, Ontario.

    If anyone can help us come out of the cultural darkness that have been enduring for too long, then Gowan is the entertainer par excellence to do it!

    This concert, full of Hallowe'en fun, is free for all but donations will be gratefully accepted in support of the live event community and venues that we all miss and love so very much!

    Click on this in 15 minutes and be prepared to be blown away!

  2. [2] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:
  3. [3] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Day-yam! Good show, Elizabeth!

  4. [4] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:
  5. [5] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Elizabeth, I'm really impressed with Larry Gowan. Methinks I'ma gonna pay you a little more attention on Sunday evenings.

    Again, it's Joe's election to lose. As long as he can keep that shape-shifting reptile thing on the down low for another five days.

  6. [6] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    I was born in 1958, too young to enjoy the 1960s and too old to be an MMA fighter. I had resolved to live 112 years* so I could catch the 2060s, but our Progressive Wave is going to give me my 60s fix, like, starting right now.

    *I like to say, "I'm going to live forever...and if I do die it will be with a surprised look on my face.

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Glad you enjoyed it, MtnCaddy - Gowan is a one of a kind!

  8. [8] 
    Kick wrote:


    I'm playing catch-up tonight because I've been busier than a one-legged man at an ass-kicking convention.

    This lie about Comey - he didn't make any announcement about Clinton in October 2016. In a confidential communique, he reported to the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee as he'd been directed to do. It was the Chairman who broke the rules by publicly revealing the existence of that communique and dramatising what it contained.

    I hate to burst your bubble and all, but if you think James Comey's "communique" *shakes head* wasn't an announcement, then you don't understand the American political system... such as it is. You needn't take my word for it, but you can take this guy's:

    And I sent a letter to Congress, by the way people forget this, I didn't make a public announcement, I sent a private letter to the chairs and the rankings of the oversight committees. I know it's a distinction without a difference in the world of leaks... ~ James Comey

    Comey has already admitted under oath that his letter was the equivalent of a public announcement -- "a distinction without a difference in the world of leaks" -- he called it, so y'all could at least allow yourselves to believe Comey.

    He was up in front of the House Ethics Committee because of it and chose to resign rather than be thrown out of Congress for what were serious violations of Committee and House rules.

    Well, there was a lot more to it than that, but what did happen is kind of -- to borrow Comey's verbiage -- "a distinction without a difference," so I'll cut you some slack on this one.

    But do any of you mention this? No.

    Yes, we know the Representative from Utah didn't resign to spend more time with his family. Yes, we've mentioned it multiple times on this forum. Where were you? Oh, right, you don't frequent the site... just pop in occasionally to point fingers at others on this forum. You were there one of those times we discussed Jason Chaffetz, but I guess we can't all have recall of events from multiple years prior. I will say that if I had a shitty recall of events, I would definitely stop accusing others of not mentioning things that were covered multiple times when I wasn't around... as well as when I was around but apparently can't remember:

    I guess you just forgot we've discussed it, but we are wont to remember things and definitely didn't forget.

    Then there's this other zombie lie that refuses to die, the one that falsely claims John Boehner was forced out of Congress by the tea party. Even when confronted with the truth, Americans still prefer the lie.

    *laughs* You have no idea what "Americans" prefer so feel free to stop fabricating regarding the utter nonsensical and ridiculous idea that you do.

    I would've thought the Left would welcome the truth but they don't.

    And I would've thought foreigners wouldn't lump an entire subset of Americans into one category and disparage them, but you've given us ample evidence on multiple occasions now that this too is not the case. Unless you were determined to appear obtuse and wholly unthinking, you should've thought before you posted such utter nonsensical rubbish.

    I'm wondering if human beings in every country have the same problem with the truth that Americans do.

    Your posts are ample evidence that you have memory issues that cause you to post untruths, but who among us is here to assign blame based on our own misconceptions? Oh, right... you are.

    I guess we must since we're all human beings and this flaw is a human one.

    So you think you're a human? Well, with your flaws that you've identified with your own untruths, you certainly meet your own definition. :)

  9. [9] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Wow. Just a bit overly defensive, eh? You may need to put some more music in your life! :)

    By the way, I hear that Senator Harris is on her way to Texas! Woo Hoo!

  10. [10] 
    John From Censornati wrote:
  11. [11] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Kick [8]

    I'd clap if I still could.

  12. [12] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    If Florida goes blue, it's over. - Joe Biden today

  13. [13] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    As some of the orange one's death cult zombies passed out in the Florida heat today, the fire department sprayed the crowd with a fire hose. The orange ignoramus didn't know what was happening:

    Are they friend or foe? Let's find out. If they're foes, take care of the sons of bitches.

  14. [14] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Those vote totals in Texas are just astonishing. The GOP likes low turnout. That's definitely not what they're getting.

  15. [15] 
    Kick wrote:


    Take the example of the 1930s when Franklin D Roosevelt introduced the New Deal. That was a massively progressive change at the time yet there was no backlash at the polling booth.

    The country had already been through a massive change with the Great Depression so it's seriously a lousy comparison.

    Roosevelt got a third term, the only president to do so and, when Eisenhower took over from him, he too was re-elected for a second term.

    Oh, FFS! Eisenhower didn't take over "from him" because when FDR died early in his fourth term, his Vice President, Harry Truman did. FDR knew he was dying when he ran for a fourth term and selected the next POTUS with the help of consensus from multiple Democratic leaders. Truman was then famously reelected (barely), and Eisenhower didn't take the oath of office and become POTUS until 1953, two decades after the first of the reforms of the New Deal were implemented. Therefore, your comparison -- as well as your knowledge of basic American history -- is flawed.

    Again no backlash for the New Deal which brought enormous change to the country and ushered in the beginnings of a middle class.

    Again, Harry Truman and the two decades between the beginning of implementation of FDR's New Deal in 1933 and Eisenhower's presidency which began in 1953.

    Please don't attempt comparisons in American history if you suck at it.

  16. [16] 
    dsws wrote:

    The election of Eisenhower wasn't a backlash against the New Deal. He was a moderate. By today's standards, he would be a liberal. He was known for having been supreme Allied commander in WWII, not for partisanship. Truman tried to recruit him to run as a Democrat. He ran as a Republican to keep another Republican out of the office.

    And Mopshell's error, typing the name of the wrong president, does nothing substantive to undermine the point: FDR won a third term, and his chosen successor was re-elected. Liberal policies don't always provoke a backlash.

  17. [17] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


  18. [18] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Liberal policies don't always provoke a backlash.


  19. [19] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    I would point out that comparisons to FDR and Eisenhower do not really work in todays day and age given that there is no fairness doctrine that governs how information is presented.

    In todays siloed information age, if backlash and outrage are needed it is easily manufactured by either sides information dispensing bubble.

    Yes I do realize that the fairness doctrine came into being in 1949, however, it was preceded by the Mayflower Doctrine when FDR established the FCC in 1934 or very closely thereafter.

  20. [20] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Shout out to Kick for, er, kicking ass!

  21. [21] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: In 1973, baseball legend Yogi Berra uttered the immortal line: "It ain't over 'til it's over."

    Oh, yeah? Well, Lenny Kravitz said it better in 1991:

    It Ain't Over 'til It's Over

    And Lenny sang the vocals and played the piano, the guitar and bass guitar, the sitar, and the drums... Could Yogi do that? Not without Boo-Boo! ;)

  22. [22] 
    Kick wrote:


    Yippee! Olbermann rant!

    Good rant. :)

  23. [23] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Yeah, good advice for this country/this planet.

    May Progressivism roll over the damned Repugs and hold a foot on their collective throats until we've excised Reaganism® from American politics.

    Cain't completely destroy the Repugs, though. I'm a believer in the notion that every country needs a center-right faction because that faction keeps (at least until recently) the racists/racists/traditionalists/reactionaries in check.

  24. [24] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    reactionaries in check.

  25. [25] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Take a look at Real Clear Politics. There were an awful lot of polls released yesterday. It seems to me that it's logical to assume that these polls should be more accurate with so many votes already made.

  26. [26] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    polls assume that votes are being counted accurately as cast.


  27. [27] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    Well you did get one thing right - One Demand is not a magic wand wand. It is just you taking yourself way too seriously and is not an actual plan to fight anything. It's grifting and doesn't even address dark money that isn't donated to campaigns.

    Your voter suppression idea has already failed spectacularly and the only choices we have that can win this election are the ones that are on the ballot - the ones who accept $201 donations.

    Stop being a troll.

    STF up. STF up. STF up.

    Get Help.

  28. [28] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    JL [27]

    I'm assuming that votes will be counted accurately as cast as well. If not, why even participate?

    The GOP is trying hard to not count mailed votes after election day. I believe that they will largely fail. Military ballots routinely arrive late. People who are in line before polling places close routinely get to vote late. California counted votes for weeks in 2018. Precedent is not on their side. People are voting early in droves because they don't trust the Postmaster Genital.

  29. [29] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Death Harris,

    And it is my opinion (the purpose of comments sections) that CW should be helping inform citizens about One Demand instead of helping the big money corporate Deathocrats perpetrate their deception.

    In other words, it is your insulting troll opinion that CW should help you sell your snake oil despite the fact that he has told you in no uncertain terms that he is not going to do anything as embarrassing as that for you. Reality.

    And just because One Demand does not directly address money outside the campaigns it does directly influence the money in the campaign which is a positive step that should not be discarded because it does not solve all our problems perfectly and instantly

    If it doesn't stop the dark money, it doesn't solve the Big Money problem at all and that's what your entire scam is supposedly about. Reality.

  30. [30] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    we participate because there's only so far the reported results can deviate from the true results, without completely destroying the facade of a fair vote count.


  31. [31] 
    MyVoice wrote:


    Important news bulletin: The Harris County Clerk sent out a tweet with a More Cowbell GIF on account of: Harris County is VOTING!

  32. [32] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    ***Dept. of Reassuring Elizabeth Miller***

    From the POLITICO article Trump's chances hinge on a polling screw-up way worse than 2016

    In some of the potentially decisive states, like Pennsylvania, the polls would have to be wrong to a significant degree — greater than the errors in 2016 — for Trump to win. The latest polling averages show Biden with a 5-point lead.

  33. [33] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    ***Dept. of Lincoln Project***

    Marc Anthony

    And a couple of Oldies But Goldie's:


    Wake Up

    And as much as I adore "Wake Up" I think that Last Call is the most devastating of them all.

  34. [34] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'll thank you when it's over, MtnCaddy ...

  35. [35] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Yes, the lyrics are quite topical.

  36. [36] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller

    Wow. Just a bit overly defensive, eh?

    Defensive? Nah. Setting the record straight? Yes, ma'am. You see, sometimes foreigners on this blog have a tendency to accuse Americans -- either singly or lumped into a group -- of some of the most ridiculous BS because they either forgot something, they don't know what they're talking about regarding America or our history, and/or they didn't think things through or check their own mirror before they spewed nonsensical rubbish about US.

    You may need to put some more music in your life! :)

    Said the foreigner who doesn't understand the chord wheel:

    Perhaps you weren't paying attention that day it was revealed that music has been a way of life for a great many of us on this forum. I'll let it slide this time since you're one of those foreigners with memory issues. ;)

    By the way, I hear that Senator Harris is on her way to Texas! Woo Hoo!

    The Rio Grande Valley too... exactly what we asked for, go figure. It's almost like we have telephone contact with some of the movers and shakers of the Democratic Party. <---- Spoiler Alert. :)

  37. [37] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    ***Dept. of Olbermann***

    #17 - 30 Worst People in Trumpworld

  38. [38] 
    Kick wrote:

    John From Censornati

    If Florida goes blue, it's over. - Joe Biden today

    He's dead on accurate too. We'll know how the election is going fairly early Tuesday night when the polls close on on the East Coast by comparing the numbers from 2012 Obama/Biden and 2016 Trump/Pence to the 2020 returns in Pinellas County. Obama/Biden won Pinellas by ~+6 in 2012, but Trump won it by ~+1 in 2016. If Biden does well in Pinellas County, it'll be a good early sign.

    The Lincoln Project has been hardly working, I mean working hard to peel off Republican voters in multiple states, and Florida is one of them. These are special voters because they're not just a pickup for the Democrats, like say a new voter, they are both a pickup for the Democrats while at the same time being a loss for the Trumplicans, and they could swing the election in multiple close states.

    It's getting close, JFC. I don't want to jinx it, but Georgia is looking good too. If Georgia goes Blue, it's also over too. This applies nearly equally to Iowa, and if Ohio or Texas flips blue, it's dead like roadkill is buzzard bait. :)

  39. [39] 
    Kick wrote:

    John From Censornati

    Those vote totals in Texas are just astonishing. The GOP likes low turnout. That's definitely not what they're getting.

    You have to jump through hoops to vote in Texas where disenfranchisement and gerrymandering and other BS are exactly how they have it set up. The GOP is in court now trying to have the drive-through ballots completely thrown out, but Texas has had curbside voting for a long time; they are therefore trying to differentiate them from curbside voting and disenfranchise every Texan who voted that way.

    If there is such a plethora of "silent Trump voters" like the GOP keeps claiming, why the hell are they working so hard from sea to shining sea to have their votes thrown out?

    The voters are supposed to choose their representatives... not the other way around. Well, it's now that time to flip some more of this bullshit. Who's with me? VOTE! :)

  40. [40] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    From an Atlantic article Don't Sweat the Polls

    But 2020 doesn’t have the same capacity for last-minute Democratic horror, because there aren’t nearly as many undecided voters. Fewer undecided voters means less volatility and a smaller chance of last-minute surprises that actually move votes.

    In 2016, we had the mother of all October surprises. In 2020, we have the most stable race in decades.

    Biden’s lead is larger and more stable than Clinton’s lead was in 2016. In fact, by one measure, it’s more stable than any presidential nominee’s lead in more than 30 years.

    Does this mean that the state polls in 2020 are guaranteed to be perfect? Absolutely not. In fact, they’ll almost certainly be wrong again. (They’re never exactly right.) But the polls almost certainly won’t undercount the pro-Trump non-college-educated vote by the same margin, given how many pollsters adjusted their methodologies specifically to avoid making the same mistake in consecutive presidential elections.
    In 2016, district-level polls indicated a last-minute Democratic collapse. In 2020, they indicate Democratic strength.

    In 2016, there wasn’t a global pandemic. In 2020, there is a global pandemic.

    The most important difference between 2016 and 2020 isn’t about polling methodology or the opposing candidate. It’s this: Four years ago, Trump ran on the vague promise of success, and this year he’s running on a clear record of failure. Judging by the polls, Americans have noticed.

  41. [41] 
    Kick wrote:


    The election of Eisenhower wasn't a backlash against the New Deal. He was a moderate. By today's standards, he would be a liberal. He was known for having been supreme Allied commander in WWII, not for partisanship. Truman tried to recruit him to run as a Democrat. He ran as a Republican to keep another Republican out of the office.

    You're preaching to the choir. Nice sermon.

    And Mopshell's error, typing the name of the wrong president, does nothing substantive to undermine the point: FDR won a third term, and his chosen successor was re-elected.

    She said FDR's successor was Dwight Eisenhower and also said not a single thing about FDR winning a fourth term and not a single thing about Harry Truman because she conveniently altogether omitted him and multiple years of American history, and YES, you do tend to substantively undermine your point when your comparisons are complete falsehoods and additionally separated by two decades of American history your comparison completely omitted.

    Also, you are preaching to the choir. I said her choice of comparisons to make her point were flawed because they were... incorrect.

    Liberal policies don't always provoke a backlash.

    Two things:

    * First off, there is almost nothing you can name regarding politics that "always" does whatever you can name. You lose your point (and she definitely lost hers) when you toss around terms like "always" in a political debate and attempt to bolster your ridiculous "always" assertion with examples from American history that are totally incorrect and completely omit people involved and multiple years and years of it.

    * Secondly, she was arguing a point that the poster to which she was responding never made. That is why her ridiculous attempt at American history in response to prove something Bleyd (and no one on the blog said) was laughable and nonsensical rubbish.

    So to recap: "Always" is not a term to be tossed around lightly in any political debate; you will dang near always lose when you attempt doing it... just like you and Mopspew did. Yes, I know her "name." I just tweaked it a little bit to make it fit my narrative better; you know, the same way she keeps tweaking both our words and our American history to fit her narrative. I guess I'm human too. :)

  42. [42] 
    Kick wrote:

    By today's standards, Eisenhower would have been considered much more of a "golfer" than a "liberal." Don't believe me, look it up. :)

  43. [43] 
    Kick wrote:

    goode trickle

    I would point out that comparisons to FDR and Eisenhower do not really work in todays day and age given that there is no fairness doctrine that governs how information is presented.

    Very well said, sir. That's how you make a point with history... by knowing what the hell you're talking about. Point to GT. :)

  44. [44] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris

    The pandemic of big money infecting our political process is not going away- things are not getting better they are getting worse.

    And just like Trump with covid-19 you are determined to convince as many people as possible that the pandemic of big money infecting our political process is not happening.

    I don't see anyone here attempting to argue to anyone else what you're claiming. Quite the contrary, in fact, I believe there are those among us who meet your definition of part of the problem. I think you're just delusional.

    Are you one of few that really believes that pretending big money infecting our political process doesn't exist is going to make things better for anyone?

    Again, you seem delusional.

    One Demand

    Why don't you take "One Demand" and shove it as high up your ass as it will go. Seriously, just shove it up in there right next to Ralph Nader.

  45. [45] 
    Kick wrote:

    John From Censornati

    Exactly... all this!

  46. [46] 
    Kick wrote:


    Important news bulletin: The Harris County Clerk sent out a tweet with a More Cowbell GIF on account of: Harris County is VOTING!

    I saw that early this morning, and I thought about you, MV! It was so early and I rubbed my eyes and thought I must be seeing things because I was so darn tired. So I enlarged it, and dang if it wasn't but was definitely MORE COWBELL!

    Harris County is off the charts! It's not out of the realm of possibility that Texas could flip; it'll just definitely be a harder flip. The bellwether county to watch in Texas is Collin. Collin County has had a booming population for nigh on a decade now and is now (not kidding) 1/6 Asian. In the 2012 presidential election, Collin County went to Romney/Ryan by ~+31 points; however, in 2016, Trump only won it by ~+17. By the 2018 senatorial race, the GOP/Cruz only won it by ~+6. The GOP is losing the 'burbs in Texas, and it's happening fast because of their diversity and people moving/transplanting from other states who traditionally vote Democratic... particularly transplants from the West/California.

    Beto O'Rourke has a group in 2020 signing up these transplanted Democrats, and there are multiple other groups like The Lincoln Project working their magic to flip GOP voters.

    So... Texas might surprise everybody, and TX-3 is one to watch... fingers crossed, but it's only a matter of time if it's not 2020. :)

  47. [47] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Kick wrote:

    John From Censornati

    Exactly... all this

    I second (or third) that!

  48. [48] 
    MyVoice wrote:

    [49] Kick

    Am I correct that you've taken your spatula to Collins County? Even if not, you are doing amazing work. I salute you.

  49. [49] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    How goeth TX-23?

  50. [50] 
    Kick wrote:

    MyVoice 51 | MtnCaddy 52

    Our spatula has helped out a little in TX-3/Collin County in 2020 but has primarily been working to flip that giant honking piece of Texas known as TX-23. It's going as good as can be expected. If it doesn't flip this cycle, it's on to the next election. It'll flip eventually. :)

Comments for this article are closed.