There was a medium wave, but that wasn't the point of that tweet at all. That tweet also tries to undercut the progressive wins and the races that were close that had no business being close. It also fails to mention the ballot initiatives that passed that were progressive ideas.
Hmm... assuming there have been other corrupt campaigns in the past... how does this defend kemp's corrupt campaign?
Why did Gillum concede so early? Stacey Abrams out here fighting tooth and nail with 48% of the vote, lol.
Ignoring of course, the tweet simply cherrypicked races after the fact, since there were races where very liberal candidates won and other campaigns where very conservative/trump-supported candidates lost.
Perhaps Abrams decided to contest the results because of all the obvious corrupt actions on the kemp side?
This seems like a "close the stable door after the horse has bolted", but given the obvious abuses, most obvious the kemp/Abrams race, there should be some careful examination as to whether this should be prevented in the future (eg, Secretary of States should step down if running for another office or have the role managed by an independent organization).
This probably doesn’t count as a wave. If you look at the Index I referenced on Monday, our preliminary results suggest that things have moved about 23 points toward Democrats. That’s a substantial shift, but it falls short of even “semi-wave elections” such as 2014 (a shift of 26 points toward Republicans) and 2006 (a movement of 30 points toward Democrats). Obviously, as results trickle in this might shift further, but probably not by much. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/11/08/six_takeaways_from_the_midterms_138590.html
Interesting... Arizona GOP sues to limit mail-in ballots in McSally-Sinema race https://www.cbsnews.com/news/arizon...ail-in-ballots-martha-mcsally-kyrsten-sinema/
