|
axeil posted:
Hm, I hope returning voting rights to felons helps against this because Florida switching from lean Dem to lean R makes the path to 270 look real awkward for Dems. Of course, the situation is a bit more complex than that. It's just that I'm looking at the red states and feel confident that most of them won't vote for a generic Dem and I think a good number of blue states can go red if a candidate devoid of charisma is at the top of the ticket. I wonder who would be a good Dem to maintain a hold on these states.
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 09:36 |
|
|
Tibalt posted:Depends on the state, and we can take it to the primary thread if it turns into a real conversation, but I think most of the names being thrown around that are stronger in rust belt states (PA, MI, OH) aren't going to be as strong in the southern states (NC and FL). I don't intend to turn it into a real conversation. I was mostly contemplating the complexity of the situation for the Dems and how, in choosing their candidate, they were going to need to balance many competing factors, such as exciting their base as well as appealing either of the two areas you mentioned. There isn't going to be a perfect candidate, so it just becomes an issue of which priorities are the most impactful. (I'm also forgetting that the primaries aren't a process of carefully selecting the optimal candidate.) But the political landscape will change considerably in two years, so my original question that can only be properly addressed in a year. Basically, in summary, Nate's map demonstrates for me that, despite Trump's poor overall popularity, losing to him again is a very solid possibility.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
The bottom two issues are the ones with the largest split between Republicans and Democrats, so no wonder they would be at the bottom. The poll also demonstrates that Republicans are very much still the party for people who value personal wealth over other issues. Additionally, even if the Russia investigation has the lowest importance rating that could just be a signal that some people feel that it is being handled well enough.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:That literally did help the Republicans in 2016 with their base, so who knows? Maybe it gets people motivated for 2020. There is a certain asymmetry for the two parties where Republicans aren't necessarily unhappy when the government doesn't do anything, but Democrats tend to be unhappy. But the point of the bill is probably as ammunition to rile up the Dem's own base.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
If the voting by email issue can be demonstrably shown to have only applied to primarily conservative areas, I imagine that would be another big court case in a close race. But I don't know if either of the democratic candidates would pursue it when they could still possibly win regardless. It would probably be a case that appears after the rest of the votes are counted.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Now that Jeff Flake has been replaced by a Democrat and is a lame duck, he has finally found the leverage he refused to find for the past two years: Shouldn't it be the opposite? That since you know that you are a lame duck, you start being aggressive with your agenda since there is no downside. Does that mean that Jeff Flake actually cared about decorum but crumpled when pressed instead of a conservative that was just trying to use decorum to pretend that he is sensible adult? Although I guess that's still up in the air. He might still flake.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:Avenatti is unhappy with Jacob Wohl Wouldn't the initial report to the police have been filed anonymously? If so, I don't really know how Avenatti could go after Jacob because the police would probably prefer not to reveal the identity of those who reported a crime anonymously.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
Feinne posted:Because he's the internet's dumbest man Wohl has already been bragging about being responsible for this through the Surefire twitter. Yeah, but people are capable of claiming credit for things they didn't do. So I would think that a lawsuit in this situation would need a higher standard than 'he claims he did it' to be successful.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2018 16:15
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:I just checked all of them on Progressive Punch. I'm not sure how well their scoring system works, but of the currently elected members nearly everyone of them was rated a D or an F, so it looks like this is a conservadem movement. Exceptions - Marcia Fudge and Linda Sanchez are rated B and A respectively. I know SA doesn't really like Pelosi, but she's likely better than the more conservative democrats, right?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Bringing up progressive punch reminds me to ask, is there any generally accepted sort of ranking system where we can say who is most or least progressive/leftist/whatever? I usually try to look at 538's voting track record here. Its a bit limited. There are other nuances that don't necessarily make it the best method, but I think its often pretty useful. Nemo Somen fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Nov 15, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:
I think this warrants some analysis, though. How did the Dems win the tax issue? Did they get their message out better? Were voters overall more skeptical about the intentions of the tax bill? Were people carefully comparing their before and after taxes and seeing how little impact it had? Were people less concerned with higher taxes if it meant better government services? Basically, lower taxes always seemed like an issue that was difficult to counter since you'd be seen as taking away people's hard-earned money if you wanted higher taxes. So was this time a fluke, or is there a lesson that Dems should take away for the future?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
How important is the trust with federal prosecutors for lawyers? Is it career-ending if broken, or is it something more along the lines that federal prosecutors will make their jobs more difficult in the future?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
axeil posted:it doesn't matter if she voted no or voted present and people in this forum get way too wrapped up in symbolic things. i guarantee her constituents in alaska didn't care. Iirc, it was the Alaskan native tribes that put in a lot of efforts to get her to win by write-in when she lost the Republican primary. They are part of her constituents.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
So this is just posturing from the Republican Senators, right? I don't really see the House voting for a repeal.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 09:36 |
|
|
I think the biggest issue with a lot of Christian groups is that opposing abortions is treated as an issue of the highest importance. So people either use that single issue to determine how to vote, or at least heavily sway their vote to Republicans. I'm not sure how Dems can capture those individuals. I suspect they would need people to stop being single issue voters.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2019 17:51
|
|