A midterm election in the US are those that take place halfway through a president’s four-year term. The president himself (so far always a him) is not up for re-election, but most of Congress is: a third of the Senate and all of the House. So are many governors and state lawmakers.
The 2010 midterms saw the rise of the Tea Party and the takeover of many states by Republicans. That allowed them to gerrymander the voting map and prevent President Obama from getting much done for six years (2011-17).
The 2018 midterms, on November 6th, is the first nationwide election since the rise of Donald Trump in 2016. Both Barack Obama (former president, centre-left) and Sean Hannity (cable news blowhard, far-right) agree that this is the most important US election of our lifetime. It will determine what becomes of Trump.
Blue Wave: If enough Democrats come out to vote, they could gain control of the House or the Senate. Either one would allow them to block Trump’s policies and look into his business dealings.
- The House: Because of gerrymandering, Democrats will need 5 to 6 million more votes than Republicans to gain control of the House. A huge Democratic turnout would put them over the top.
- The Senate: The Republicans barely control the Senate, but of the 35 senators up for re-election, 25 are Democrats and 10 of those are in red states (states that Trump won in 2016). So control of the Senate looks unlikely, unless the Blue Wave turns into a Blue Tsunami.
Red Wave: If Republicans keep control of Congress then their faith in (or fear of) Trump will be confirmed. Anything that comes out of Robert Mueller’s Russiagate investigation will be dismissed. It would mean at least two more years of Crazytown – if not six. It will help to normalize Trump – he will become “what America is.”
Impeachment: For Congress to remove the president it requires a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate. A crushing Republican defeat might make that possible – not because Democrats would gain enough seats outright (even if they won every Senate race they still would not have enough), but because enough Republicans will start to see Trump as a threat to their political futures and work to remove him. Mueller’s findings, if damning enough, could give them a face-saving way to do that.
Russia: As in 2016, there is no reason to believe that Russia will not be using its hackers, trolls, and bots to help President Trump, who seems to be a Russian puppet.
Advice:
- Vote! Trump won because many sat at home while White Evangelical Protestants came out in droves. Elections are won or lost on turnout, not opinion polls. If voting did not matter, Republicans would not be trying to suppress Black, Latino, and Millennial votes.
- Stick to news sources you trust. Understand that some amount of what you see on the Internet is probably fake Russian propaganda, even if it seems to be coming from a Black person.
– Abagond, 2018.
See also:
- some candidates in 2018:
- gerrymandering
- voter suppression
- White Evangelical Protestants
- Russian hackers
- Russiagate – as of July 16th
- Russian propaganda
- Crazytown
- How to remove a US president
534
Very important post! Russia is eye-balling American real-estate and Trump has put up the “For Sale” sign.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“If voting did not matter, Republicans would not be trying to suppress Black, Latino, and Millennial votes.” That is actually a very good point.
And kudos to having an Amara la Negra banner!
LikeLiked by 3 people
I hope the American political system shall be on a self-healing mode to recover from a virus of Russian totalitarism. The midterms and the sub-cycles of the political events such as governor elections are a part of that immune system. And healthy and strong America means a healthy and strong counterforce for current Russian post-franquist junta.
For your information: one of the first things Putin as a caudillo had done was the cancellation of governor elections — the governors were to be appointed personally by ‘the president’. And all the political cycles were synchronised into a ‘uniform voting day’.
However, I wouldn’t invest my political interest into a female presidency. First, because a female ruler wouln’t necesserily prove herself being more human or civilised than any other dictator.
Second, because a degree to which a ruler’s actions are right depends on his or her principles and on a level of his or her advancement in wisdom and compassion, not on a sex or gender.
And, last but not least, ‘a woman’s mind is all about following her desires’, therefore I believe that women are in fact more likely to be dictators than men, even if the recent post-matriarchial society seems to prove it has been otherwise for, say, the recent 10 000+ years or so,
LikeLike
@dorisjean23
Oh, please. Russia is not its current government or the State.
LikeLike
Please black people please get out and exercise your right to vote. It is a privilege that people like Fannie Lou Hamer who was beaten and put in jail fighting for the rights of black Americans to vote. Remember Viola Luizzo and other social justice warriors many who were murdered and many who were beaten like Congressman John Lewis. We need to dismantle this current evil, white supremacist, incompetent administration.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on League of Bloggers For a Better World.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@A Russian Nagpo
You listed 3 reasons why you “invest my political interest into a female presidency.
The 1st reason, “a female ruler wouln’t necesserily prove herself being more human or civilised than any other dictator.“, is not a reason to avoid women candidates. It may be a caution against having that as a preconceived notion, but a female ruler wouldn’t necessarily prove herself less human or civilized either. So, not a reason to avoid backing women.
The 2nd reason, “[the] degree to which a ruler’s actions are right depends on his or her principles and on a level of his or her advancement in wisdom and compassion, not on a sex or gender.” is also not a reason to avoid women candidates. Your statement itself indicates that sex or gender is not a deciding factor of a candidate’s ability to be right.
The 3rd reason, “that women are in fact more likely to be dictators than men” because “a woman’s mind is all about following her desires“, is ridiculous. It’s also the only rationale that you actually listed as to why you wouldn’t invest your political interest into a female candidate.
How does one get to be so sexist? Who filled your mind with the false premises of gender stereotypes? My guess, people like you trying to push their sexist viewpoints on others with their not-so-subtle recommendations to fear women in power.
LikeLiked by 3 people
^ …3 reasons why you wouldn’t…
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t trust any news source and voting for a democrat would be a difficult choice as well. Not that i am republican, but I don’t trust either party to remotely do the right thing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Open Minded Observer
Wouldn’t, shouldn’t and must not, ever. Anyway, I don’t have to rationalise my intuition, my likes or dislikes, or my religious believes, because they constitute my personality.
Btw, you have also managed to insult my religion, which is not a nice thing to do for anyone aspiring to position oneself as a ‘non-sexist’ and ‘open minded’.
Therefore I don’t see any reasonable grounds to go on further conversation with you, especially since you seem to be a woman with an inclination to pose her little mental tags on other people.
[I am not to be engaged into any debates or battles with women, children, mentally handicapped, drunk or intoxicated persons, followers of wrong views, inferior spirits, demons or animals].
Ciao.
LikeLike
Open minded observer aka STEVE
He is just as bad as Daniel except extremely sexist and one of those don’t see color types so good luck.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ A Russian Nagpo
“I am not to be engaged into any debates or battles with women, children, mentally handicapped, drunk or intoxicated persons, followers of wrong views, inferior spirits, demons or animals”
I am none of those things so, we’re good. I may be one that expresses views that you believe to be wrong, but I am not a follower to any views.
“I don’t have to rationalise my intuition, my likes or dislikes, or my religious believes”
Fair enough… we can agree to disagree on whether or not your rationales are rationales (the 1st two points you made)
“Btw, you have also managed to insult my religion”
I deeply apologize for this. I don’t pretend to know your anything of your religion. So, any insult to it was unintentional as my remarks were directed at you and not your faith. I must assume from your reaction that your faith is your rationale for your 3rd comment. So, I concur, no further engagement would be fruitful.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Open Minden Observer
“I may be one that expresses views… but I am not a follower to any views”.
Does it mean that you are not believing what you say, or don’t understand what you are trying to express, like e. g. a certain sharinaIr?
LikeLike
@A Russian Nagpo
“Does it mean that you are not believing what you say”—I believe what I say which is why I say it and provide sources.
“don’t understand what you are trying to express, like e. g. a certain sharinaIr?”—I also understand what I express and further provide sources. Can’t blame me because people like you don’t understand what is being expressed. shrugs
LikeLiked by 1 person
@sharinalr
I am saynig this as an exception once and without further repetitions. You want less shrugs, you observe Boudic(c)a, not me, you stupid human being.
LikeLike
@A Russian Nagpo
“you stupid human being”–Shrugs ROFL. Cry me a river you man child. Stupid would be you using your religion as a cloak for your bigotry or these fits you keep throwing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ A Russian Nagpo
“Does it mean that you are not believing what you say, or don’t understand what you are trying to express”
No. It means that I am not blindly going to follow views.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“[I am not to be engaged into any debates or battles with women, children, mentally handicapped, drunk or intoxicated persons, followers of wrong views, inferior spirits, demons or animals].”
I would say that a debate for drunk, mentally handicapped animals would be the perfect place for Nagpo, but that would be an insult to drunk, mentally handicapped animals. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
You been busy abagond?
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Open Minded Observer
“I don’t pretend to know your anything of your religion.”
He won’t say what exactly his religion is, so how would you have known?
From what he’s hinted at so far, it appears to be some type of European hermetic theurgy with cultural appropriations from Santeria and Tibetan Buddhism.
Whenever he’s challenged on his sexism, homophobia, or racism, he brings up his religion as his shield or his excuse.
Neat way of turning the tables, to yell “religious bigot” while refusing to examine whether his religion (or his understanding of his religion) is itself bigoted.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@ ARN
“I am not to be engaged into any debates or battles with women”
Because you’ve lost every single one so far and are all butthurt about it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Sharina
“voting for a democrat would be a difficult choice as well. Not that i am republican, but I don’t trust either party to remotely do the right thing”
Agreed, but yet it seems to me imperative to get Trump out of office, or at least limit him to one term and minimize the damage he can do in the next two years.
Abagond wrote, “If enough Democrats come out to vote” but truthfully it is also going to take a lot of Independents voting with them.
It sucks that we functionally have a two-party system with neither party representing my views and interests. But it sucks worse that Trump is president.
At least, that’s my take on it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Open Minden Observer
So, do you adhere to a view of non-adherance to any views?
LikeLike
@Page
That means that I’m not them, I’m The Other. Of course they would befirst himulated and then insuled by my mere presence, not to mention my speech 🙂
In fact, I’m quite flattered by what you say.
LikeLike
@ A Russian Nagpo
“So, do you adhere to a view of non-adherance to any views?”
That is my current view. I am open to changing it and I am not a follower of it. If I were to change it, I’d become a follower of a view and you’d need to reevaluate your willingness to engage with me based on your position regarding it’s wrongness.
Seriously though, there’s no need to justify your rationale on this. If you don’t want to engage with me, simply stop.
LikeLike
It has been interesting to see the impact of the “Trump effect” on state and local politics. There have been some places that seem to have energized against the “establishment” by electing and/or advancing newcomers that might be considered non-traditional candidates. There seems to be other areas that seem to be fighting for a return to normalcy rallying around experienced politicians running for new positions to counter-balance the wild ride we’re on. Both of those involve displacing incumbents. It seems people are energized around changing the status quo though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Solitaire
Agreed. My worry stems from the idea that some democrats secretly carry similar thoughts as Republicans. They are not against dirty dealings to get what they want. Sadly it is the lesser of the two evils. 😔
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Open Minded Observer
My decision depends mainly on what you need, what you want and what you have to offer.
LikeLike
If we don’t do something about this madman, the record low black unemployment rate may drop even further and black people will continue getting richer. Before we know it they’ll be running from the Democrat plantation and develop individual thought.
By God, we have to stop the madman before it’s too late.
LikeLike
@Joriko
Upon a certain level of economical independence, you shall not be allowed any freedom of individual thought at all. Eventualy, you’ll have to trade your freedom for making a living. I’ve already been there. Consider Russia in 2000-2007. As soon as an emerging middle class [of former white slaves] started getting their economical and poitical freedoms, the State wedged a political war, thus reinstalling stalinism (in a neo-franquism mode). Or Chinese Uygurs, with a cybertotalitarism and individual loyality ratings defining career, residence areas and even personal lives.
Trump is OK as a makeshift solution for poverty, but is an absolute disaster for indivudual freedom, as anywone dealing with Putin is.
LikeLike