|
MEanwhile, from last thread...some guy posted:Both of these seem crazy to me. In CA that's almost like running for congress. As for New Hampshire, my townships city council has 15 members all of which represent roughly 2,500 voters (I figure each ward has somewhere between 500-1000 residents who aren't even registered) and that's at the municipal level. In PA state reps get about roughly 50,000 voters and state senate about 250,000, which seems about right to me.
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 00:55 |
|
|
spoon0042 posted:My assumption is that Toomey has been keeping a low profile to keep people from realizing he's as crazy as Santorum, is that accurate / consistent with reality? He's a different type of crazy. Santorum was all about social conservatism, Toomey emphasizes economic conservatism. He's tried some centrist stuff in the senate, namely that gun control bill which died and if it weren't for that I'd write him off but as is I could see him pulling out a win if the Democrats send out a flawed candidate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:You've got two opposite inclinations here. The first is that the point of a district is that it has its own unique interests and needs someone to represent those particular interests. That tugs in favor of 'natural' districts: you'd want to put like people together in a district so that their representative represents those interests. The second is democracy - there's a problem when the elected representatives do not represent the electorate, and you've got a, say, 50-50 state that sends 75% of one side to Congress. This leans in favor of making each district competitive so that you avoid wasted votes as much as possible. This is old but worth bringing back up. I favor "like districts" and believe the way to get around the lack of competition is to switch a form of jungle primary, either having the "primary" on the date of the real election like several southern states do or having it prior to it like California does. That way you get interested groups voting together while also giving people a real shot to vote them out, just in many cases voting out one D for another or R for another. I really like runoff systems and wish they were more popular. edit: Also I'm disappointed that Toomey was left off that list of approval numbers last page, I was legitimately interested in seeing what the state thought of him.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Currently Republican controlled. Not exactly narrowly, but in an amount that eyeballing it and knowing nothing about the local politics should be doable. There is a very real possibility that the legislature's districts could look completely different in 2020, we are slowly trundling towards a (horrible, horrible, horrible but incredibly popular with the public) constitutional convention with the specific goal of shrinking the legislature's size. Anyways, it would be very hard for Democrats to hold the trifecta in PA without a wave election in 2018 or 2020. Ironically enough the SEPA part of this map, though currently a GOP gerrymander, might end up filled up with Democrats at that time. The best bet would probably be to keep the governor's office in that time and then force a "compromise" map that results in large parts of the state returning to swing districts. Also, and this is pretty nit-picky, you said earlier that there is a 13 seat difference to be had too, which isn't quite true. It would be a 12 seat difference since PA is almost assuredly going to lose a district due to low population growth. The Monkey Man posted:Pennsylvania did pretty well too, it was the only state where an incumbent GOP governor was unseated. Well, sort of. Corbett got his rear end handed to him yes but Republicans actually gained seats in the state house and senate. In the lower house they gained 8 seats while losing none of their own and added a total of three seats to their senate majority. They've decided to celebrate in the typical PA Republican way, by waging battles between themselves- both the house and senate majority leaders faced leadership challenges. Nothing came of it though and the "relatively" moderate leadership remained in place. Rather than looking at it as a party win I would look at it as an individual candidate's loss. We had something similar happen for our local (county) attorney race in 2010 where, despite the Republican wave, we voted out our sitting prosecutor due to his well known and widely hated lack of competence. Zwiftef posted:Cedric Richmond might be competitive for Vitter's seat if he's tired of the House. He's obviously ambitious and gives decent speeches. There's a state rep whose name I cannot remember right now that might run, but I think he's still too green. I don't mean to be racist (against white southerners?) but I don't think they'd ever give enough of their vote vote to a black Democrat from urban New Orleans for him to be at all competitive.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:I'd wager it stays 5-6 Dem for awhile starting in 2016/18. I don't think the 10th is one of those districts until Comstock is gone, probably to challenge Kaine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
In other news it looks like Martha McSally has "won" in Arizona though the race is so close that a recount will occur and who knows what will happen then. Costa might (or might not, with odds slightly favoring "might not",) lose too. Every other close race is breaking the Democrats' way leaving a net loss of 14 or 15 house seats. Its interesting, the Democrats have yet to lose an incumbent's seat in California and did not pick up any in 2010 either (though that was majorly helped by gerrymandering.) You'd have to think that if it weren't for their jungle primaries there would be Green or Peace and Freedom candidates loving up at least one of those close contests.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
Ehh, lots of pols are helicopter parents, her running wouldn't surprise me. This isn't like Gabby Giffords where she physically was not capable of running due to her not-yet complete recovery, Tammy Duckworth is just a nanny away from never having to deal with the kid.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 09:19
|
|
|
SO over on DKE there's some chatter that there is chatter (so this is coming third hand, at best) that Coffman might challenge Bennett in the 2016 Colorado senate race. If so, needless to say, Bennett will win and by a large margin too. For those who don't know Coffman makes tons of gaffes and is a good source of humor.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The Democrats chances of regaining the Senate in '16 are shining bright should these hope find purchase in reality. Democrats have a pretty good shot either way but its definitely not going to happen by way of a McCain-Palin battle. Anyways as far as the Tea Party goes, their greatest shot, honestly, is targeting anyone who spends very little time involved in state-district level issues. Remember, Lugar wasn't defeated because he was a liberal Republican, he was defeated because he was a liberal Republican who only came "home" to Indiana once a month or so. Voters of all stripes hate that poo poo. Cliff Racer has issued a correction as of 01:45 on Nov 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
CubsWoo posted:Toomey should lose in PA and Johnson should have issues in WI but I can't for the life of me figure out who the Dems put up in either case. The Democratic bench in PA is anything but weak. Setting aside all of the former congressmen who are viable, including Sestak who's made motions towards running again, there's people like Wagner, Huffel, etc who are very much so not nobodies. Not to mention whoever Philly and Pittsburgh have crawling around. I can only assume Illinois is even more fertile ground due to its Democratic history.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
To be fair I feel like people put too much of his period's successful Democratic gains at Dean's feet when an equally big role was played by President Bush. People like to talk about Katrina as a turning point but really Bush fell apart basically the day after he was re-elected. Conservatives let out their breath in relief as they realized that they could stop pretending that he was a great president and his numbers rather quickly fell apart as a result and only got worse as time went on. It was only natural that people across the country would either start voting for Democrats or just stay home entirely. Yes, Dean did a great job at candidate recruitment but at the same time even unheralded candidates in races that weren't focused gave surprisingly close results in 06 and 08, just as they did in 14. And its funny, I look at that 2006 retirements chart and I see anything but failure. Sure most of them are no longer in office. But a majority of those losses were either from redistricting or from challenging for higher office. Redistricting has to be a mulligan and going for higher office should be viewed as a solely positive outcome of those candidates' 2006 victories.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Or, if you're a cynic's cynic, you realize that the political pendulum is an elaborate dance that disguises the genuine points of agreement among the 1 percent who rule the 99 percent. It might set certain things off limits that aught not to be (along with a bunch of stuff that is, rightly, regarded as sacrosanct by both sides) but it would be foolish to pretend that there isn't real disagreement among both the movers and shakers and the people on the ground which drives the two parties to fight against each-other.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:Eventually, you'll have local favorites who've successfully survived waves, and the state starts turning blue. That isn't how states turn colors.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
I think he meant that the Kennedy's weren't responsible for killing Republicanism in that state. I dunno if they are or not, I never studied Mass state politics but am liable to bet that its demographics at work again instead of a political family.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Do it. Get Top 2 repealed in 2017. Why, top 2 is great? It resulted in Democrats being screwed ONCE (in a race that got corrected 2 years later) but at the same time people forget about all the good it has done and can do.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
CaptainCarrot posted:Which is? Making it harder for extremist candidates to win in the general. Most of the people on this forum probably hate that (because they are extremists themselves) but when it comes to getting candidates who actually represent the largest portion of their district's values having a jungle primary or southern-style runoff is preferable to the default primary/general system used in most states.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
CaptainCarrot posted:Can you provide an example of an extremist candidate who did poorly in a jungle primary but would have taken a spot on the November ballot in a partisan one? An extremist who can garner a lot of support will have a good shot in either system, and one who turns people off will similarly be screwed. Its not about taking spots, its about winning the final race. Look at the California 8th in 2012 for example. It was an establishment Republican versus one of the cofounders of the Minuteman movement. The Minuteman came in first in the primary and the establishment Republican came in second, only to score a pretty sizable victory in November (because the moderates and Democrats in the district voted for him.) Stark v. Swallwell was sort of similar with a moderate overtaking a more outside of the center opponent but it also involved Stark saying loads of goofy things over the years.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
CaptainCarrot posted:Meanwhile, there's the 31st district, where 2 Republicans split just over half the vote and 4 Democrats took the rest, so an evenly split district gave little choice to many of its voters. I'm not seeing a real downside for extremists in this system.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:What I don't get is why everyone keeps saying Foxx won't run against Burr. What else is he gonna do? The governor's race is already spoken for, and who goes from a cabinet job back to city mayor? He could go lobby, but that seems more of a retirement gig. Stay in cabinet, assuming Hillary or another Democrat wins.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2015 07:43
|
|
|
Carpetbagging is important. Even more so when you've NEVER had a tie to a particular state. It probably won't matter so much in a presidential race but many otherwise "good" candidates have been undone by the fact that they were only willing to live in, say, West Virginia if they were being voted on. Just look at how much lack of time in state hurt Lugar and Roberts (KS.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Something tells me the CA TV networks are going to find out exactly how much that's worth. Something tells me its worth a lot more than what you think it is for a post as big as CA senator.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Yes I am sure the billionaire will struggle to get their names out. Yeah I'm sure he has some sort of very populous constituency that isn't already filled by another, better candidate. People aren't going to go "who is that?" when Kamala Harris announces she's running and she isn't going to have trouble raising money either. Neither are a bunch of other Democrats and probably at least one credible Republican. Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman couldn't spend their way to victory in 2010, Ro Khanna couldn't spend his way to victory in 2014. Why should we believe it is any different here.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:He has the all important "D" next to his name. Yeah he does, and so will a shitload of his opponents in the primary and, if he makes it there, probably one in the general as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Steyer's out. The likelihood of Senator Harris happening is rapidly approaching 100%. I still think that there's a good probability she doesn't just walk to the nom. Villaraigosa should have a number of strong constituencies to draw from and its possible that, should he run, he and a Republican grab slots 1 and 2 in the primary. If I were him I'd go for it too. The Newsom/Harris deal looks set to eat up Cali's top slots for another decade and if these other candidates want a position they had might as well seek it now.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
Gorilla Desperado posted:I don't care how good her health is, she needs to go for a lot of reasons, preferably by retiring because that makes it easier. I had actually hoped Steyer's interest was in order to raise his profile and gain experience in campaigning before going for Feinstein's seat in 18, whether she retires or not. And if she doesn't, hell yes i'd take Villaraigosa going at her, bad as he is. Or anybode else... He's not going to primary a sitting senator, none of them are unless it gets to the point where they trundle her around like a vote casting mummy. Even then I doubt voters would respond well to that, people love their incumbents. You people love to talk about how Jeb's been out of politics for too long or that such and such candidate is fading into irrelevancy. Well if those cases are true then Villaraigosa has to factor in those same concerns when deciding how much longer to wait. Its not like he only recently left office. Cliff Racer has issued a correction as of 04:30 on Jan 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Those constituents must not include anyone who lived in LA during his tenure, because I don't know a single person that is excited about him running for anything above trashman. Looking at his Wikipedia I am rather surprised he only left office in 2012/13. Also holy poo poo thats a lot of scandals.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 07:53
|
|
|
I had forgotten that it had happened, remembering only the John McCain by acclaimation thing the Republicans did in 2008 instead as the only blatant non-democratic vote at a convention. The fact that both occurred during publicly funded events is, in itself, scandalous to me. If parties want to bend rules during their own time that is fine with me but when they are doing things with millions of dollars of state and local money they had better do stuff to the letter.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Voice vote is 'by the letter', it's even used in congress and the senate. Yeah, its by the letter, but the vote was purposely called incorrectly both times. Looking back I remember watching the DNC convention at the time and ayes and nays were not evenly voiced, nay kicked aye's rear end. edit: And choosing the president by acclamation is not standard, typically every state gets up and does its thing as a publicity measure for the state parties/reward for the party loyalists chosen as delegates. Come to think of it, I don't think McCain was done by full acclamation, it might have been an issue of certain states misreporting their delegations as all voting McCain when some individual delegates did not in fact agree to do that. Cliff Racer has issued a correction as of 01:29 on Jan 24, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
It doesn't make him look all that bad to me. The worst part was the corruption investigation and him blaming it on Cuban spies but the article spent just a single sentence on that before moving on to bland politics. Why not elaborate? Did that investigation come to nothing? Was there really any indication that Cuban agents were involved? How did Obama react to the public revelation of the investigation?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Pat Murphy would probably win in a primary though I don't know, she has to have amassed some sort of organization while heading the DCCC or whatever it was she was in charge of.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
Yeah, keep wishing for Grayson, there's no way he could turn into your very own version of Todd Akin next cycle.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Uh what the gently caress are you on about? Oh no he might say something mildly left of center, that's just like saying "I LOVE RAPE"? Submit to me!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Uh what the gently caress are you on about? Oh no he might say something mildly left of center, that's just like saying "I LOVE RAPE"? You're a K-Street Whore! I bet women will just love that one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Uh what the gently caress are you on about? Oh no he might say something mildly left of center, that's just like saying "I LOVE RAPE"? Nope, but those claims that he shoved her around are just peachy to you since he votes the right way, aren't they Fishmech?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Could you imagine what Fishmech would say if the person in the below article was a Republican?quote:The divorce drama between Rep. Alan Grayson and his estranged wife continues. Now Lolita Grayson is claiming that she and the Florida Democrat’s four kids are living in a mold-ridden house because the congressman hasn’t paid for repairs.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Alan Grayson's kids live in a moldy house that isn't receiving repairs because he refuses to pay for them. Your next senator, Florida! Also the septic tank is leaking all over the yard apparently. Alan Grayson doesn't care, do you? Cliff Racer has issued a correction as of 21:53 on Mar 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Acrophyte posted:How is Wasserman-Shultz policy wise? I'm sending some dislike in this thread but I still like to have a modicum of rationale before I start parroting the DnD hivemind. She likes Israel but thats about all I have on her.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
I have to disagree. Sure Republicans will have an easier time finding people in Florida but there's plenty of places for Democrats to grab from too. There's lots of mid to large sized cities to pick mayors out of, a decent amount of Democratic congressional districts (way less than the Republicans, sure, but also way more than many states in their entirety have,) a booming business community with at least some Democrats in it and occasional state-wide officers. The fact that Democrats can find better candidates in places like Alaska and Montana than in Florida is laughable to me- its more down to the state parties being run well/poorly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
Peztopiary posted:It was the same failing most Democratic presidential candidates have (Obama got around it by That crying might well have saved it actually, wasn't she was projected to lose NH pretty much right until the primary happened and she didn't.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 00:55 |
|
|
Welp its happening. Goodbye goon approved Mayday PAC. http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-03-17/the-super-pac-to-end-super-pacs-makes-a-strategic-retreat Also goodbye Representative Aaron Schock for lying about his spending and, apparently, claiming twice as much mileage on his government vehicle as was actually put on it. Fraudy McFraudster resigned today and good riddance to him. Seat is safe R so don't expect any upsets here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 22:19
|
|