Well, that’s a very partisan take
It;s factually accurate. One party points it out, the other tries to explain it away. Regardless, it was the catalyst for GOP enthusiasm in 2010.
expect something similar of Jones.
Agreed. He doesn’t have any lifelines.
since Republican bleeding is unlikely to stop as long as Republican has the Oval Office.
True, but you can’t bleed when there is no blood. The phenomenon by which Dems pack themselves with increasingly higher density into urban districts (which are then won by Dems by 90–95%) makes it more and more difficult to gerrymander additional Dem districts in suburban, exurban, and rural areas.
The result is that you’re unlikely to see 260 seats held again, by either party. A losing party might have a bottom of 190 seats or so, no less.
but had Trump leaned hard against Russia,
He just did.
Russia denounces new U.S. sanctions as illegal, mulls retaliation
MOSCOW - Russia condemned a new round of U.S. sanctions as illegal on Thursday and said it had begun working on…
However, at this point, there are so many people who are completely invested in the notion that Trump is beholden somehow to Putin, I doubt it will put a dent in that armor.
During the campaign, there were interesting ideas about using the tax windfall from corporate repatriation for infrastructure projects. I have no doubt that the corporatists in the Senate prevented that from happening. Disappointing.
Mostly their terms concern free trade, but catch someone on the left in private, and they will grumble at the idea that immigrant labor lowers American wages and is a boon to corporations that don’t want to pay a decent wage.
Yep. You would think that people on both sides would get pissed on how the corporations are screwing all of us using illegal immigration on the low end and H1B’s on the high.