Ed Morrissey:
It’s a good question, and last night’s disappointment in Georgia makes it even more acute. Before it became clear that the GA-06 special election would head to a runoff in two months, Democrat Jon Ossoff called the result “a victory for the ages.” Ahem:
OSSOFF here in Atlanta: “We may not know the outcome for some time… but there is no doubt this already a victory for the ages.”
— Robert Costa (@costareports) April 19, 2017
Other Democrats don’t see a victory for the ages, or even a moral victory. Instead, they wonder when they’ll see the first victory of the Trump era. As Politico’s Gabriel Benedetti points out, the prospects are growing dimmer rather than brighter after Ossoff failed to close the deal in Georgia. The party and its constituent activist groups may have to keep the angry energy up for a long, long time before they get to a win:
For all the anger, energy, and money swirling at the grassroots level, Democrats didn’t manage to pick off the first two Republican-held congressional seats they contended for in the Trump era, and the prospects aren’t markedly better in the next few House races coming up: the Montana race at the end of May, and the South Carolina contest on June 20.
Their best shot at knocking Donald Trump down a peg appears to be Ossoff’s runoff against Republican Karen Handel, also scheduled for June 20. But the Democrat will be an underdog in that contest, when there won’t be a crowded field of Republicans to splinter the vote.
After that, it’ll be another five months before the New Jersey and Virginia elections for governor, leaving some strategists and lawmakers wondering how to keep the furious rank-and-file voters engaged in fueling and funding the party’s comeback — especially given the sky-high expectations that surrounded Ossoff’s ultimately unsuccessful run at the 50-percent threshold that was necessary to win the seat outright.
In fact, compared to Hillary Clinton’s performance in the same district in November, this doesn’t even look like a moral victory, let alone one for the ages. Ossoff raised $8.3 million to campaign just in this district, giving him a huge advantage in a special election. His 48.1% of the vote was just a little over a point better than Hillary’s final result in GA-06 — 46.8%. That’s a pretty lousy return on investment, and the huge buildup of Ossoff’s chances by the national party may have damaged their credibility for the larger contest next year:
Now, with Ossoff falling short of an outright win despite an unprecedented surge of campaign cash and national attention — in a district which Hillary Clinton lost by just one point in 2016 — comes the potential for another round of finger-pointing within the party. The worry: that if operatives and voters continue their practice of quietly blaming each other for losses, as they did after a narrow defeat outside of Wichita last week, the current level of runaway enthusiasm and budding trust in the national party leadership could sputter out long before the 2018 midterms.
It’s not just credibility that might get damaged, either. Democrats spent $8.3 million to win one House seat that they would almost certainly not be able to hold in the 2018 regular election anyway, a win which would have absolutely no impact on the party’s standing in Congress in the rest of the session. That would have been a foolish waste of resources even if Ossoff had managed to pull off a surprise win yesterday, and now it looks almost like gross political negligence.
The demacrats the whining starts with them and those little collage snowflakes
When does the whining start? it already did.
Maybe you should be asking yourselves why the republican majorities you put in charge of both houses of Congress still aren’t making good on any of their campaign promises, coming up on your republican President’s 100th day in office.
@Greg: he wasn’t elected for 100 days. Why not run down your big list of great accomplishments Obozo made in his first 100 days.
but,but, but, but,if if if if if…………
Trump’s average approval rating on the day he was sworn in was 44.2 percent. He’s now got that down to 42.5 percent. His disapproval rating exceeds his approval rating in every recent national poll taken.
Obama’s first 100 days? Obama inherited an actual disaster. The unemployment rate had been climbing for months and was rising faster and faster. The financial system was in danger of a cascading collapse and the stock market was on the brink of a crash.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 had passed both the House and Senate before the end of February by wide margins; many state and local governments avoided bankruptcy and the wide spread shut-down essential services only because they were bailed out with the resultant availability of federal dollars; the families of countless out-of-work American breadwinners were saved from financial ruin only by emergency extensions of unemployment compensation; U.S. and global economic catastrophe had been averted before the end of Obama’s first year in office.
Obama’s approval rating on his 100th day in office was 65 percent. On his final day as President, after 8 years in office, his job approval rating was at 63 percent.
@Greg: 1 in 5 households doesn’t have anyone employed, great legacy. Keep looking at the polls. You didn’t answer RTs challenge Greggie what were the great accomplishments? Trump has a much deeper mess than Obama could dream of. I got the only promise I voted for. Companies are looking to the US as a place to invest again, Trump killed billions in job killing regulations. Signed bill allowing vets to see private doctors. Aliens attempting to cross border is way down, Just because your media doesn’t report on it doesnt mean it isn’t happening.
@kitt, #6:
A meaningless and totally misleading statistic from Trump’s understudy, Vice President Pence.
There are a total of around 118 million households in the United States. Around 24 million of those households consist of persons over age 65 who are retired and neither working nor looking for work. That alone represents around 20 percent of all U.S. households, or 1 in 5.
I realize many elected Republicans would secretly like to scrap Social Security and force their retired elders back to work for substandard wages at Taco Bell as a means of reducing taxes and boosting profit margins, but I very much doubt their supporters will approve, once they figure out the scam.
@Greg: Your numbers are meaningless. There are about 97million people of working age, not on SS, that should be working but do not have a job. Deal with that number. True unemployment is about 50-55%.
@Redteam, #8:
Trump will be disappointed to learn the unemployment rate he’s been taking credit for is totally bogus.