|
Ben Jealous gonna lose really bad.
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:10 |
|
|
Nonsense posted:Ben Jealous gonna lose really bad. This has been the case since before the primary even started. Hogan is in "live boy, dead girl" territory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
I read an article that reminded me of a really stunning statistic: there are less than five districts where Democrats do not have a candidate in the House this year. That means in virtually every single one of the 150+ seats that no realistic blue wave is going to put seriously into play, there's someone who is so loving pissed off about Republicans and Trump that they're spending months on what is almost certainly an unpleasant, unpaid job with less than a 5% chance of winning (and that 5% is being very, very, very generous). That's amazing. People have talked about "why didn't Democrats run a candidate here??" a lot in the past, and the answer was always "nobody was willing to step up and do it" because running a doomed campaign is a soul-sucking experience (and running a losing campaign is very bad as well especially if you're a career politician, which is why some races that were potentially winnable didn't get candidates in the past). It also probably means that up and down the ballot there are democrats running in state legislative races they've never seriously contested before as well. It's a Big loving Deal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 15:58
|
|
|
Any MA goons catch the MA gubernatorial debate last night? Was wondering how it went.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
Tony Gunk posted:Any MA goons catch the MA gubernatorial debate last night? Was wondering how it went. Even the most devastating blue wave couldn't elect a Democrat in the blood red state of Massachusetts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
Tony Gunk posted:Any MA goons catch the MA gubernatorial debate last night? Was wondering how it went. i didn't catch it, but I can tell you the net effect: charlie baker is still going to be re-elected in a landslide
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
I'm still amazed that the Democratic challenger in my district (GA-10, rep. Jody Hice) didn't run a conventional primary campaign at all and still completely trounced the other two Ds. She didn't show up for the debates. She didn't have a website. There was no picture of her available anywhere that I could find. No interviews. Nothing. She's a black woman from rural Washington County, and she completely swept the black vote. Had an outright majority over the other two candidates, one of whom had been making some national news. This NYT piece is no loving joke: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/us/politics/black-women-voters-south.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Even the most devastating blue waves couldn't elect a Democrat in the blood red state of Massachusetts. the only democratic governor that has gotten elected in Massachusetts since michael loving dukakis was elected in a backlash to mitt romney tacking hard right to try to run for president, it's loving insane. but the massachussets democratic party deserved what they got for letting Martha Coakley run for anything ever again
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Even the most devastating blue wave couldn't elect a Democrat in the blood red state of Massachusetts. If Charlie Baker acted like Donald Trump then he would never have sniffed the governorship. People here love voting for Republicans that act like Democrats. Also, Martha Coakley should have been locked in a cage and dropped into Boston Harbor after that disaster in 2010 rather than be allowed to run for governor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
Nobody would be complaining about Charlie Baker if he had a (D) after his name. The reason he's popular is that he doesn't have any national Republican politics and he's not burning the commonwealth to the ground. Could we do better? Sure. But Massachusetts is booming and it's hard to think of reasons to vote against Baker that aren't partisan in nature.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Nobody would be complaining about Charlie Baker if he had a (D) after his name. The reason he's popular is that he doesn't have any national Republican politics and he's not burning the commonwealth to the ground. Could we do better? Sure. But Massachusetts is booming and it's hard to think of reasons to vote against Baker that aren't partisan in nature. Also a Democratic supermajority can stop any nonsense if he lurches to the right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Also a Democratic supermajority can stop any nonsense if he lurches to the right. Yep, and that's happened several times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
Unlike other Republican Governors, Baker hasn't poisoned his state's water supply(yet).
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
I tracked down a copy of our local ballot, but I'm not clear on how the hell I'm supposed to know whether I want to vote for incumbent judges. The ones running have their party affiliation listed on the ballot, but the incumbents just have their names and the option to fill in Yes or No. Does anyone have experience figuring out how to determine their positions before voting? Or is it different everywhere? I'm in Illinois, if that helps (gently caress Rodney Davis).
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
The easiest is to check the endorsements of an organization you trust to have similar values to yours
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
morcant posted:I tracked down a copy of our local ballot, but I'm not clear on how the hell I'm supposed to know whether I want to vote for incumbent judges. The ones running have their party affiliation listed on the ballot, but the incumbents just have their names and the option to fill in Yes or No. Does anyone have experience figuring out how to determine their positions before voting? Or is it different everywhere? I'm in Illinois, if that helps (gently caress Rodney Davis). as a practical matter no incumbent judge is getting voted out unless there is a well-funded campaign against them alleging they are soft on crime, so I wouldn't bother
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 18:57
|
|
|
http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/gop-poll-morrisey-manchin-almost-tied Manchin up by....1 Guess we might not have to worry about whether to keep manchin in the caucus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:as a practical matter no incumbent judge is getting voted out unless there is a well-funded campaign against them alleging they are soft on crime, so I wouldn't bother Ahh, fair enough. I was afraid that would be the case. cheetah7071 posted:The easiest is to check the endorsements of an organization you trust to have similar values to yours Still, this is good advice. I'll see if I can find anything before we go to vote in the next couple days. On the plus side, I've gotten three anti-Rodney Davis mailers in the past week, very large and colorful about how bad he sucks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/gop-poll-morrisey-manchin-almost-tied That’s a partisan pollster. Whenever you see a poll, head over to today’s polls on 538, if the name of the pollster has an asterisk next to it, it’s a partisan pollster.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
[quote="kefkafloyd" post=""488760853"] Sure. But Massachusetts is booming and it's hard to think of reasons to vote against Baker that aren't partisan in nature. [/quote] Partisan reasons are the #1 to vote him out
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
morcant posted:Ahh, fair enough. I was afraid that would be the case. ballotpedia might have info for you. it usually has very clear, concise info about ballot measures and candidates.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Partisan reasons are the #1 to vote him out Right, never vote for any Republican.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/gop-poll-morrisey-manchin-almost-tied Wildly at odds with other polling, seems like a fluke. Regardless it gives me mixed feelings...
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 00:43
|
|
|
If the best poll available is a Republican internal where Manchin is still leading, that probably means Morrisey is trailing by a sizable amount.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 01:00
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/gop-poll-morrisey-manchin-almost-tied its a leaked internal poll, with 19% undecided, that still shows manchin up. it means he's way up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/gop-poll-morrisey-manchin-almost-tied Going to be great if that's the assholes last act.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 02:19
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Going to be great if that's the assholes last act. Well, it's an internal for his Republican opponent, so... 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Going to be great if that's the assholes last act. this is a bad take
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
Tony Gunk posted:Any MA goons catch the MA gubernatorial debate last night? Was wondering how it went. Jay Gonzales did not do a good job and came across as a lightweight. I hate Charlie Baker but realistically, he is getting reelected.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 03:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1050121839794634753
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
Heard a radio ad that was railing against Colorado Prop 112 as lowering pay for teachers, hurting education etc. and it had me until the end of the ad where it said it was paid for by some petroleum council. The proposition? "Mandates that new oil and gas development projects, including fracking, be a minimum distance of 2,500 feet from occupied buildings and other areas designated as vulnerable. "
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 06:04
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:this is a bad take Nah, it's a great take.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 07:13
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:Heard a radio ad that was railing against Colorado Prop 112 as lowering pay for teachers, hurting education etc. and it had me until the end of the ad where it said it was paid for by some petroleum council. There's this one ad in Florida that spends about 25 seconds saying "Amendment 3 wasn't proposed by some stuffy constitutional commission or the state legislature, it was proposed by YOU, the voter!" spoken by a bunch of happy white people surrounded by their nuclear families and it's only in the last 5 seconds of the ad that they say what the amendment actually is, making it so new casinos have to be approved by referendum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 08:36
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:Heard a radio ad that was railing against Colorado Prop 112 as lowering pay for teachers, hurting education etc. and it had me until the end of the ad where it said it was paid for by some petroleum council. Aren't their laws against this sort of thing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 08:59
|
|
|
I have no idea but I dont know who those ads are supposed to target anyways. Without the petroleum council - fracking link, I would have thought my memory was loving with me and they were talking about the prop that wants to build roads without raising taxes, since the opposition argument is how itll siphon funds from other public services.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 10:25
|
|
|
Theyve spent millions of dollars to lock down the crucial vote of the guy with perfect memory of random number strings but who also votes blindly based on radio ads
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 10:26
|
|
|
What? Dino Rossi has a chance of winning something? That's not right. I hope he barely wins the first count but loses in the recount again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 10:31
|
|
|
that poll had rossi winning women voters which, seems  given recent events
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 12:30
|
|
|
That pollster is rated A+ by 538.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 13:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:10 |
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:Aren't their laws against this sort of thing? There isn't, far as I can tell. Reason the ballot measure even became a thing is because peoples houses kept getting blown the gently caress up from nearby fracking apparently. I just signed the petition for this in June though, I'm surprised its already on the ballot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 15:22
|
|
