Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Agean90
Jun 28, 2008



Hopefully a good showing the the dems there will convince the national level that the concept of "red states" is bullshit and that any state can be contested if they're willing actually contest it. I've said it on this subforum a hundred times and ill say it again, the only reason GA isnt a swing state is because the democrats are unwilling to turn it into one.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


Fog Tripper posted:

It might be that democrats are horrible. :shrug:


??? yes thats basically what i said

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


financially racist posted:

i swear to god if the dems don't properly take advantage of the kind of attitudes that are leading to poo poo like this race being as close as it is i am done with the party. they absolutely have to keep doing with other dems what they are doing with ossoff even if it's a district they likely won't win.

I think the fact that they dumped this much effort and money into it shows they'd going on the offensive.


The real questions are:

1. If they lose will they have the will power to keep putting oressure in solid red districts and

2. Will they use this as an excuse to ignore the leftist part of the party (yes)

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


financially racist posted:

yeah this is true, i just hope they stay pissed. relying on dem voters is, uh, well it's as bad a strategy as relying on the party itself tbh

if the national level party doesn't support them then they should get chewed out by every state and local level party regardless of outcome

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


Cobweb Heart posted:

I'm just a know-nothing retard but it seems to me like the Democrats have a solid liberalized foothold in the coastal, populous side of states like California and Washington, and have had for decades and most likely will continue to have one for years, so maybe the smart thing would have been working on all the red states people like to poo poo on to make the Democrat wings there powerful and well-known. It seems like when it comes to boosting red Dems they sort of accept the status quo and it makes them always look weak and worthless.

The dnc dumb as hell and tries to appeal to moderate republicans instead of the real majority in red states: people who don't vote.

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


Azathoth posted:

This is only correct if you assume that a candidate, at worst, can do no harm, and that's just plain not true. Even in solidly red areas, there are local and state legislature races that can absolutely be hosed up by an embarrassing campaign immediately above them on the ballot. If the campaign turns into an embarrassment or a farce, you risk driving down voters for winnable down-ballot races.

Also, if you're a left-leaning person with a personality and an ability to use Twitter/Youtube, why in the hell would you want to run a losing race somewhere that you have no hope of ever winning ever and not instead take those talents and put them to use for a candidate in an area that actually has a chance of winning? As red as most places are, there's usually a large enough town nearby to have a few blue state legislators at least if not a House Rep who would kill for someone with that skillset.

it's also why the DNC get rightfully shat on by other democrats, since it doesnt matter what your local parties staces are, a lot people will look at the national level and immediately associate their idiocy with whoever has a D next to their name

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


i looked at nate silver, ie the only person on election night who said trump had a chanceand he said ossof still has a chance in the runoff v:v:v

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


Vox Nihili posted:

i think he's going to take it tonight, holy poo poo

Im predicting based of dead reckoning he will poll between 48-53 and 53 is a generous upper limit

If he goes above 55% then :stare:

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


im the "delete all votes" card lol

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


the fact that the democrats are putting ANY effort into a southern state should be endlessly praised so they keep loving doing it. You think the turnout last night was a good showing? Now imagine how it would have been if the democrats had been pushing in that region over the course of the last decade.

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


axeil posted:

Also I did the math and Ossoff needs 3,653 more votes to win outright. The other Dems got 1,521 votes so he's already close to halfway there.

alternately he only needs that many repubs to not turn out. The election can go either way.

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


comedyblissoption posted:

ah yes let me thank the heavens for these neoliberal turds falling from the sky

at least its not a neoliberal i shout as creationism becomes mandatory in schools.

Dont get me wrong, i wish he wasnt a boring centrist too, but gently caress unless you wanna run what else can you do v:v:v

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008


Shinjobi posted:

"We want the Democratic Party to change! And we'll do it by sending a message. The message: just don't be a Republican! That's the true secret to obtaining a progressive government! Just concede everything!!!!!"

Yes, because letting a theocrat into office isnt conceding. Yes sex ed is outlawed and muslims are required to wear badges, but at least i didnt vote for a lib!!!

  • Locked thread