|
HorseRenoir posted:In all fairness, turnout for special elections are even lower than midterms. It's pretty nuts that dems are pulling midterm GOP level numbers for a 2017 special election there are also simply more republicans than democrats
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:39 |
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:I too would like to know how the Democratic party let things get so dire that "contest every seat in congress" seems to be a novel idea. I can understand how poo poo like 9/11 or the Tea Party movement can blindside strategists, but it just seems so baffling that a national organization could allow it's infrastructure to atrophy to such an extent and over such a long a period. it's not novel, recruiting a viable candidate is just really difficult. like most people can't take a year of their lives off to go campaign for a congressional seat they're definitely going to lose.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
the black husserl posted:See, that's thinking based in a pre-internet age. They don't need to "campaign" for a year. They need an intern with a camera, a Twitter/Youtube account, and a loving personality. That's it. It's about building a national brand, not turning the liberal 20% of nowheresville, MO into a winning majority. what % of people in a district do you think read twitter or youtube? like virtually 0, even in this brave internet age. if you want to reach voters, you have to spend money. if you want money, you have to do stuff and prove you are actually going to put up a real campaign instead of a vanity operation. a candidate that does nothing during their campaign but put out snarky tweets is a waste of time at best and a liability at worst. the reason why we need a candidate in every district is 1. to suck up money from safe seats so incumbents have to spend on themselves 2. to build a bench for future runs, either in district or statewide, and 3. build a local base of activists who are professionally trained and understand how to win elections. just putting a face on the ballot doesn't help at all.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:if the DNC were smart, they'd realize that they made gains in Georgia, Texas, and Arizona in 2016 and figure out ways to mine dissatisfaction with the GOP there yes, clearly no one has thought of this before
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
i'm pretty sure georgia house district 131 existed prior to 2012? i suspect it looked a lot different since the dems gerrymandered the map in 2000 very hard
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
LolitaSama posted:okay theres just no wiki or ballot pedia on it that lets me know who was winning it before 2012 , maybe i could look somewhere else https://ballotpedia.org/Georgia_House_of_Representatives_elections,_2008
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Nate CohnVerified account that's hardly "rip" https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/853052529378250752 https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/853053326107316224 we'll see how election day turnout ends up (it will likely be bad for dems) but dem is performing very, very well in ev. gop typically has strong edge in this district
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:the only thing you can point to there in ossof's favor is the partisan breakdown relative to 2016 well the composition of the unaffiliateds is pretty important, but the thing there is that in GA the unaffiliated = people who have never participated in a primary before. those are surge voters, and more likely to be democrats than republicans. the revily poll gave ossoff 63% of early voters (fwiw since it's not a great poll). predicting tuesday is a fool's errand, imo. there's no way to know for sure what's happening without counting the votes given the uncertainty about turnout, but the idea that this race is over is just wrong. the ev is very good, and gop turnout is still dramatically underperforming.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:pretty sure that's just listing which primary someone voted in last if they did so, not party affiliation overall yes that's what i was saying i mean look at the ev comparison between 2014 and 2017 https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/853052281792671748 if dems are voting like this is 2014, and gop is voting like it's a primary, then that's the ballgame and ossoff will hit 50%. so there's a lot of reason for dems to feel encouraged by ev (but again, still vast amounts of uncertainty re: outcome) Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 19:09 on Apr 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:sounded like you were saying that people who've never voted in a primary are considered unaffiliated in ga which is ridiculous ok idk what you're arguing about. i am talking about michael mcdonald's graph of ga-06 ev, a state with no party registration. i am saying the people in gray, unaffiliated, are likely strongly dem leaning.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
tbh really low turnout is probably what ossoff wants today, he's going to get rocked on election day voting
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
you just gotta believe
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:its going to be insanely close lmao believe in magic
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
You believed too much.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Outright is still possible though. If e-day turnout isn't great in these GOP areas. Just a bit too much enthusiasm earlier
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 02:21
|
|
|
Yeah probably done now
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
ossoff will miss the runoff by exactly 1 vote, which he could have cast had he lived in ga-06
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
48.6 ossoff
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
basically turnout on election day was far too high for ossoff's substantial early vote lead to withstand. he would have been looking for 150, it's gonna be like 185-190. a giant pile of lazy republicans reluctantly went to the polls
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Zikan posted:remember that karen handel is a martha coakley level of walking failure for republicans, don't underestimate her ability to gently caress up a sure thing this is true, also i think voting twice requires a level of enthusiasm that the gop may not be able to muster. moreover, handel has to consolidate support from a lot of candidates - including diehard trumpers that hate her for distancing herself from the donald. the blanket election was basically 50/50 between dems and gop, the run-off could go either way even if handel consolidates support perfectly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:39 |
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Rs always circle the wagons in the end. Trump won by 2 and the congressional won by like 20 points so this seems obviously false
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 02:46
|
|