On Morning Joe today, they interviewed Senator Mallory McMorrow. She mentioned toward the end (around 8:02 minutes in) that in 2014 the Republican party had less than 50% of the vote. However, they had 72% of the seats. Unfortunately, it was toward the end and no one’s ears perked up upon hearing this. She notes it will not get any better unless they are voted out of office.
At Crooks and Liars today is a post of James Carville suggesting that the Democratic Party needs to start pointing out how “weird” and “strange” the Republican Party is. I’m thinking he did not hear Senator McMorrow. Her words all revolved around the word “hate”. The hateful, hate filled words coming out of the mouths of the Republican Party universally.
Both note that election results have to change. I’m certain using words such as weird and strange is really not describing the truth of the Republican opponent. Too easy for a Republican skilled in word warfare to deflect. Using words such as hateful, mean, nasty will get people to stop and think about what they are voting for. It is using shame for once against them and ultimately stigmatizing as they have been doing since Gingrich’s list of words in the 90’s. (Tressie McMillan Cottom piece)
So, this gets me to the math problem. What percent of the Republican vote has to vote for the Democratic Party candidate when the Republican Party only had less than 50% of the vote but 72% of the seats such that their win is 50% of the seats?
Is it real to expect that percentage shift in those voting Republican? Is there that percentage of voters who voted Republican that would come to realize how hateful , mean, nasty the party has become?
And then there is Manchin and Sinema to mess up the math.