Message from @Red Storm (in NYC)
Discord ID: 408420957041197076
yes, but again, it can be minimized
What makes the midterms flip to the opposite party of the President that was elected before it?
midterms are seen as referendums on the ruling party
the opposition party usually has higher turnout because their voters are motivated to stop the ruling party's agenda
Virginia election data
D+2.9: R 236; D 199
D+5.9: R 231; D 204
D+7.9: R 225 ; D 210
D+9.9: R 218; D 217
D+12.9: R 196; D 239
I have read that the Libertarians caused the Democrat Pickup in 2016
Which Democrat pickup?
Trump probably would have won in New Hampshire and Nevada were it not for the Libertarians
he also could have won Minnesota
I doubt that
The type of people who voted for gary weren't potential MAGA guys, I can tell you that.
why not ?
Trump has libertarian appeal
Styxhexenhammer666 was originally planning to vote for Johnson but decided to choose Trump
they were more the lulzy "haha fuck trump and clinton" type of libertarians, the people who say and are proud of being third party for the sake of being third party.
I think the vast majority of those people wouldn't have voted otherwise
but I think there are people who voted for Johnson who would have been willing to vote for Trump if the libertarian presence wasn't as strong
Now if Ron Paul or someone of that nature was running on the Libertarian ticket, I'd be humming a different tune. That may have stolen votes.
also, Evan McMullin stole enough votes in Minnesota that you could say it would have gone to Trump otherwise
the Never Trump movement and the mormon cia candidate stole Minnesota
hivemind
by a margin of 10,000 if every McMullin vote went to Trump he would've won MN, but I doubt that 6/7 McMullin voters would've went for Trump
NeverTrumpers, the such
It's been proven at this point that McMullin proved Minnesota to swing to the Democrats, by the good old "Nader stole Florida." metric.
I can't tell if it's for better or for worse that the USA didn't have a Canadian-style Reform Party takeover, on that note.
The Progressive Conservatives in Canada were essentially replaced by their Ross Perot supporting counterparts in Canada, due to the fact that electing the Reform Party of Canada required electing a Reform legislature.
In other words, Ross Perot lost because he could never control Congress. Reform Canada won because precisely the opposite was true--Commons elects the Prime Minister.
But if Ross Perot became President in 1992 or 1996, would we have a Justin Trudeau like monster today?
The Canadian Tories, formed by the merger of the Reform/CA party with the Prog. Cons., have been failing to outlaw abortion and gay marriage pretty much continuously for decades.
And they can actually just suspend human rights and ban those things in Canada, as their Supreme Court is weak.
And they didn't even disclose Canadian immigration stats until they were leaked by dissidents under Trudeau
So no one even knew it was an issue.
And on top of that, they ratified NAFTA--the treaty they were founded to oppose--and joined the WTO.
That said, they didn't even get into office until Stephen Harper. So they basically had to repeal all of that.
This is interesting Nuke. I had read Alberta is very Conservative. How do they feel about being in such a Liberal mess? Is there any talk of session?