Search Amazon.com:
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 $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«245 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


For some reason our Founding Fathers (TM) decided to stagger elections so we'd have one every four years that was really important, but nobody cared about. This is a thread for discussing the one scheduled for 2014. I've listed information for the House and Senate, but feel free to use this thread to discuss gubernatorial elections, mayoral elections, whatever, unless those have their own threads.

US House: Who's running?

435 seats up for grabs! I'll fill this in later if any of the leadership or the media darlings faces a serious challenge.

Current balance: 234 Republicans, 200 Democrats, 2 vacant seats (AL-1, MA-5)
Cook Report Rankings
Sabato Rankings

Tea Party Caucus strength: 49 members
Progressive Caucus: 68 members

US Senate: Who's running?

Current balance: 53 Democrats, 2 Independents who caucus with Democrats (VT, ME), and 45 Republicans.

Comparison of model predictions of the 2014 US Senate election.

Alabama: Jeff Sessions (R) (Incumbent). Currently unchallenged.
Alaska: Mark Begich (D) (Incumbent). Dan Sullivan, former Attorney General (R).
Arkansas: Mark Pryor (D) (Incumbent). Tom Cotton, Representative (R).
Colorado: Mark Udall (D) (Incumbent). Cory Gardner, Representative (R).
Delaware: Chris Coons (D) (Incumbent). No serious challengers.
Georgia: (Open Seat). Michelle Nunn (D). David Perdue, Businessman (R).
Hawaii: (Special Election). Brian Schatz (D) (Incumbent via Appointment), Campbell Cavasso, former State Representative (R).
Idaho: Jim Risch (R) (Incumbent). Nels Mitchell, attorney (D).
Illinois: Dick Durbin (D) (Incumbent). Jim Oberweis, State Senator (R).
Iowa: (Open Seat). Bruce Braley, Representative (D). Joni Ernst, State Senator (R).
Kansas: Pat Roberts (R) (Incumbent). Greg Orman, Businessman (I).
Kentucky: Mitch McConnell (R) (Turtle), Alison Lundergan Grimes, Secretary of State (D).
Louisiana: Mary Landrieu (D) (Incumbent). Bill Cassidy, Representative (R).
Maine: Susan Collins (R) (Incumbent). Shenna Bellows, former Director of ACLU of Maine (D).
Massachusetts: Ed Markey (D) (Incumbent). Brian Herr, Hopkinton Selectman (R).
Michigan: (Open Seat). Gary Peters, Representative (D). Terri Land, former Sec of State (R).
Minnesota: Al Franken (DFL) (Incumbent). Mike McFadden, financial executive (R).
Mississippi: Thad Cochran (R) (Incumbent), Chris McDaniel, State Senator (R). Travis Childers, former Representative (D).
Montana: (Open Seat). Amanda Curtis, State Representative (D). Steve Daines, Representative (R).
Nebraska: (Open Seat). Ben Sasse, University President (R). David Domina, former candidate for Governor (D).
New Hampshire: Jeanne Shaheen (D) (Incumbent). Scott Brown, Bqhatevwr (R).
New Jersey: Cory Booker (D) (Incumbent). Jeff Bell, former candidate for Senate (R).
New Mexico: Tom Udall (D) (Incumbent). Allen Weh, former New Mexico party Chairman (R).
North Carolina: Kay Hagen (D) (Incumbent). Thom Tillis, State Represenatative (R).
Oklahoma: Jim Inhofe (R) (Incumbent). Matt Silverstein, insurance salesman (D).
Oklahoma: James Lankford, Representative (R), Constance Johnson, State Senator (D).
Oregon: Jeff Merkley (D) (Incumbent). Monica Wehby, doctor (R).
Rhode Island: Jack Reed (D) (Incumbent). Mark Zaccaria, member of the state GOP central committee (R).
South Carolina: Lindsey Graham (R) (Incumbent). Brad Hutto, State Senator (D).
South Carolina: (Special Election) Tim Scott (R) (Incumbent by Appointment). Joyce Dickerson, Richland County Councilwoman (D).
South Dakota: (Open Seat). Mike Rounds, former Gov. (R)., Rick Weiland, Daschle staffer (D).
Tennessee: Lamar Alexander (R) (Incumbent). Gordon Ball, attorney (D).
Texas: John Cornyn (R) (Incumbent). David Alameel, former candidate for Congress (D).
Virginia: Mark Warner (D) (Incumbent). Ed Gillespie, former Chairman of the RNC (R).
West Virginia: (Open Seat). Shelley Moore Capito, Representative (R). Natalie Tennant, Secretary of State (D).
Wyoming: Mike Enzi (R) (Incumbent). Charlie Hardy, former candidate for Congress (D).

Joementum fucked around with this message at Sep 3, 2014 around 23:05

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cantorsdust
Aug 9, 2008

Infinitely many points, but zero length.

Most important question: will the Democrats retain control of the senate in 2014?

HUGE PUBES A PLUS
Apr 30, 2005

The Koch brothers are behind this new avatar.


A Nebraska tumbleweed is likely to have more sentience than any human interested in running for the senate in that state.

The 2014 race in Michigan will be hinged on what happens on February 23rd. That is when the Michigan Democratic Party will vote for the chairperson of the party. Mark Brewer, who the UAW hates now is running for his 19th year. Lon Johnson who tried to run for state house in Kalkaska despite never living in this part of the state before 2011 is running against Brewer. Johnson is also married to Julianna Smoot, who has worked on both Obama campaigns. The UAW is endorsing him. The Teachers unions are endorsing Brewer. Both are lovely choices and we would all like a third option.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


Safe Democrat (no race): 34
Solid Democrat: 8 (DE, IL, MA, MI, NJ, NM, OR, RI)
Likely/Lean Democrat: 6 (CO, HI*, NH, LA, MN, MT)
Toss Up: 6 (AK, AR, IA, NC, SD, VA)
Likely/Lean Republican: 5 (GA, KY, ME, NE, WV)
Solid Republican: 10 (AL, ID, KS, MS, OK, SC, SC, TN, TX, WY)
Safe Republican (no race): 31

So, 48 D vs 46 R with six toss ups. * HI would normally be solid D, but their special election rules let multiple people from the same party run, which could split the vote.

Joementum fucked around with this message at Feb 19, 2013 around 00:19

Willa Rogers
Mar 11, 2005

THIS SPACE FOR RENT: $10/DAY WITH MAD DISCOUNT FOR MODS


My one prediction is that the rollout of PPACA will ultimately determine the result of the midterms, for better and for worse.

On one hand, you'll have tens of millions of people subsidized for their health insurance or newly covered by Medicaid. On the other hand, the feds are scrambling to put together a national exchange for the states' rejecting state-based exchanges; there's a loophole for dependents when it comes to family coverage offered by employers that might leave millions of families priced out of healthcare; and there will be continued increases in the cost of insurance and in deductibles/co-pays for all insurance plans.

Even though PPACA is federal legislation, a lot of it will be carried out at the state level, which means reps and senators will take the accolades or hits from it. And its passage was pretty much the determining factor in the GOP's 2010 sweep, so it's bound to be a hotbutton issue for 2014.

As far as the Dems go, there will probably be more retirements of older guys like Lautenberg and the party will continue to fill those slots with New Dems like Booker. But I think it'll take the first quarter of 2014 to see where voter sentiment is regarding PPACA before we know the Dems' shots at keeping the Senate or retaking the House.

Badger of Basra
Jul 25, 2007
Don't tell Maliki!

Joementum posted:

Safe Democrat (no race): 34
Solid Democrat: 8 (DE, IL, MA, MI, NJ, NM, OR, RI)
Likely/Lean Democrat: 6 (CO, HI*, NH, LA, MN, MT)
Toss Up: 4 (AK, AR, IA, SD)
Likely/Lean Republican: 4 (GA, KY, ME, NE, WV)
Solid Republican: 10 (AL, ID, KS, MS, OK, SC, SC, TN, TX, WY)
Safe Republican (no race): 31

So, 48 D vs 46 R with four toss ups. * HI would normally be solid D, but their special election rules let multiple people from the same party run, which could split the vote.

Obviously I'm missing two states here somewhere.

Why are Alaska and Arkansas counted as tossups?

KIM JONG TRILL
Nov 29, 2006

GIN AND JUCHE


Not sure if you were trying to be facetious, but Mary Landrieu is a Democrat.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


Badger of Basra posted:

Why are Alaska and Arkansas counted as tossups?

They have Democratic incumbents, but are very red states.

KIM JONG TRILL posted:

Not sure if you were trying to be facetious, but Mary Landrieu is a Democrat.

Nah, that was a typo. Thanks.

eta: the missing two were NC and VA, which I put in the toss-up section.

Joementum fucked around with this message at Feb 18, 2013 around 23:50

prefect
Sep 11, 2001

No one, Woodhouse.
No one.


Joementum posted:

Massachusetts: Ed Markey (D) (Incumbent). Currently unchallenged.

Markey's not really an incumbent, is he?

Ammat The Ankh
Sep 7, 2010

What else could I say?
Everyone is gay


^^^ Correct, it's currently Mo Cowan.

Joementum posted:

Likely/Lean Republican: 4 (GA, KY, ME, NE, WV)

You have five listed here.

On the House side of things, is there any indication things might change at all? I doubt there'll be a switch in power since the party opposed to the President tends to gain seat in midterms. But is there any indication yet if someone might challenge Boehner for Speaker? Also I had heard Pelosi was going to retire either at the end of this term or the next, though I suppose that will end up in a peaceful transferal of power to Clyburn.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


prefect posted:

Markey's not really an incumbent, is he?

No, not for another couple months.

Ammat The Ankh posted:

You have five listed here.

Bah! I was trying to do that while cooking dinner and did a bad job of both.

Ammat The Ankh posted:

Also I had heard Pelosi was going to retire either at the end of this term or the next, though I suppose that will end up in a peaceful transferal of power to Clyburn.

Not if Steny Hoyer has anything to say about it.

Joementum fucked around with this message at Feb 19, 2013 around 00:20

axeil
Feb 14, 2006

The Philadelphia Eagles are merely a series of booms and busts; the long run trend of the franchise is positive.

But the long run is a misleading guide to professional football. In the long run we are all dead.


Joementum, is this also the place to talk about the VA and NJ state-level elections even though they're in 2013 and not 2014?

Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


axeil posted:

Joementum, is this also the place to talk about the VA and NJ state-level elections even though they're in 2013 and not 2014?

There's already a thread for New Jersey and one for Massachusetts, so talk about those there. Feel free to gab about Virginia here unless someone bothers to start a thread for that.

Real Name Grover
Feb 13, 2002

Like corn on the cob

Joementum posted:

Nebraska: (Open Seat). *tumbleweed*

Gov. Dave Heineman (who is term limited) said today he's going to consider running. If he does, I'd bet good money on him winning.

Other GOP possibilities: Attorney General Jon Bruning (who was upset in last year's senate primary by Deb Fischer); any of Nebraska's three reps in the House (they are interchangeable)

Democratic possibilities: State Sen. Steve Lathrop; a jar of mayonnaise

As I said in the other thread, since Johanns' retirement is a surprise and the gubernatorial race is kkkkkkind of wide open, it'll be interesting to see who runs for what.

Fuck You And Diebold
Sep 15, 2004



Joementum posted:

Safe Democrat (no race): 34
Solid Democrat: 8 (DE, IL, MA, MI, NJ, NM, OR, RI)
Likely/Lean Democrat: 6 (CO, HI*, NH, LA, MN, MT)
Toss Up: 6 (AK, AR, IA, NC, SD, VA)
Likely/Lean Republican: 5 (GA, KY, ME, NE, WV)
Solid Republican: 10 (AL, ID, KS, MS, OK, SC, SC, TN, TX, WY)
Safe Republican (no race): 31

So, 48 D vs 46 R with six toss ups. * HI would normally be solid D, but their special election rules let multiple people from the same party run, which could split the vote.

Got all ready to write up a post about how Minnesota should be solid D but then I remembered how close Franken's election was. He has really good approval ratings and the Republican's don't have anyone awesome to run but I guess he can't be in the solid yet when he won by a hair after a crazy lizard people recount. Still don't see any Republican doing well against him, though I am still hoping for the comedy option Bachmann campaign.

axeil
Feb 14, 2006

The Philadelphia Eagles are merely a series of booms and busts; the long run trend of the franchise is positive.

But the long run is a misleading guide to professional football. In the long run we are all dead.


Joementum posted:

There's already a thread for New Jersey and one for Massachusetts, so talk about those there. Feel free to gab about Virginia here unless someone bothers to start a thread for that.

Okay.

Virginia Governor's Race

Republican Party

Declared

Ken Cuccinelli - Attorney General of the State of Virginia

Ken Cuccinelli is most well-known to non-Virginians for his lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act and support for a bill mandating trans-vaginal ultrasounds prior to abortions. Since current governor Bob McDonnell is ineligible to run and the Lt. Governor Bill Bolling has withdrawn, Cuccinelli is the most likely since he was the only candidate to file for the party's convention. Barring a major change he will be the Republican nominee.

Notable Declines

George Allen - former United States Senator of Virginia

Democratic Party

Declared

Terry McAuliffe - former Democratic National Committee Chairman

Terry McAuliffe was head of the DNC during the Bush II administration (2001-2005). They did...poorly during this time as they lost the 2004 Presidential election and control of the Senate. His chairmanship also saw one of the few times in recent history that the opposition party has lost seats in a midterm election. McAuliffe is no stranger to failure though, he lost the 2009 Democratic Primary for Governor as well, receiving a paltry 26.43% of the vote. However, due to nominee Creigh Deeds' crushing 58.61-41.25 defeat he stands a good shot of redemption as former Governor Mark Warner has declined to run (since he's now a US Senator). McAuliffe is probably the most high-profile name on the Democratic bench, but former Senator Jim Webb has not ruled out a run.

Notable Declines

Mark Warner - former Governor of Virginia and current US Senator

Important Dates

May 18
Virginia gubernatorial election Republican convention*, 2013

*note: this is not a primary but some weird sort of party-only caucus. I've yet to figure out how it actually works

June 11
Democratic primary election for the Virginia gubernatorial race

November 5
Virginia Gubernatorial Election


Pre-election Polling

Assuming a McAuliffe-Cuccinelli match-up, the latest polling average on RCP has the race as a pure tie with the following polls:

Roanoke College, 1/14-1/22, ?? RV - Cuccinelli 33, McAuliffe 26
CNU, 1/14-1/20, 1015 RV - Cuccinelli 30, McAuliffe 31
Quinnipiac, 1/4-1/7, 1144 RV - Cuccinelli 39, McAuliffe 40
PPP, 1/4-1/6, 602 RV - Cuccinelli 41, McAuliffe 46



At this point it looks very close but in an off-off year election things can change pretty quickly. I'll try and keep an eye on this for everyone in the thread.

axeil fucked around with this message at Feb 19, 2013 around 01:11

spoon0042
Dec 13, 2006
welp

Yeah, governors. Does anyone know if the PA Dems are going to put any effort into it or just let Corbett coast to a second term on a 30% approval rating?

AsInHowe
Jan 11, 2007

Red Wings hockey.
The best hockey.


Is it just me, or shouldn't 2014 be another big win for the Democrats?

I'm not joking here. Everything that's been going against the Republicans is only going to get worse in the years to come, along with a lot of simmering issues that will come back into the discussion until November 2014.

In the next year or so, it's reasonable to expect the following things to happen (or keep happening, as it were):

- Obama's healthcare plan will take effect, and it's expected that millions of people will benefit in some way from it. Going by the current Republican strategy, any Obamacare benefits would presumably help strengthen the Democratic base, hurt the Republican 'oppose everything, cry wolf' argument, and basically become the biggest reason to support President Obama and his party.

- The Republican schism has no signs of stopping, as some bizarre issue will continue to split the party into two, three, four groups. Immigration is only the beginning. It'll happen again, and again, and again, through the mid-term elections.

- All of the traditional Republican tactics to win are all breaking down too. Fox News is losing viewers, the base is growing older. Every time that a politician lies, says something offensive, or even panders, video will get on YouTube. Talk radio is losing its influence. Meanwhile, the Democrats have embraced a media strategy that will work for the future.

- Those Republican governors who have been extremely unpopular? Scott Walker, John Kasich, Rick Snyder, Rick Perry, Paul LePage, and Rick Scott are ALL up for re-election. Jan Brewer will be term-limited out of office, creating an open race in Arizona. 2014 will get presented as a referendum on all of those guys, their policies, the Koch brothers, and all of that. The story on the Republican side would basically be defending and promoting ridiculously unpopular policies.

This all leads up into a political climate of a very popular Democratic policy going against a set of highly toxic Republican policies, of a modern Democratic PR movement against an out-of-touch Republican one, all with a Republican party that shows no signs of figuring itself out.

Shouldn't the Democrats win big in 2014? Shouldn't this be a potential blowout, as the Republicans lose even more ground before a 2016 election where Tea Party senators finally go up for re-election? I think so.

Family Values
Jun 26, 2007

I've got one that can see


AsInHowe posted:

Shouldn't the Democrats win big in 2014? Shouldn't this be a potential blowout, as the Republicans lose even more ground before a 2016 election where Tea Party senators finally go up for re-election? I think so.

A lot depends on turnout. Some core Democratic constituencies are somewhat notorious for not showing up for midterm elections.

UCS Hellmaker
Mar 29, 2008



gently caress You And Diebold posted:

Got all ready to write up a post about how Minnesota should be solid D but then I remembered how close Franken's election was. He has really good approval ratings and the Republican's don't have anyone awesome to run but I guess he can't be in the solid yet when he won by a hair after a crazy lizard people recount. Still don't see any Republican doing well against him, though I am still hoping for the comedy option Bachmann campaign.

That was also due to it not being an open election that year which is traditionally hard to win as the outside challenger. Now that franken has the incumbent advantage he should be relatively safe in his seat. That and the mn GOP is horrendously awful and corrupt at this point. They couldn't pay the rent on their state headquarters building at one point as an example.

koolkal
Oct 21, 2008


http://www.nationaljournal.com/blog...ouse-in-2014-15

It'll be interesting to see whether Obama does actually help in various House and Senate races this time, combined with his machinery.

Personally, I think the Democrats will make gains, but I highly doubt they'll take back the House.

A COMPUTER GUY
Aug 23, 2007

I can't spare this man - he fights.


Yeah, I would bet that MN and VA in particular should both be Likely D if not Solid. Mark Warner's approval ratings are through the roof, and no VA Republican big names seem likely to challenge him, seeing as McDonnell has his eye set on the White House and Cuccinelli is running for Governor this year.

AsInHowe
Jan 11, 2007

Red Wings hockey.
The best hockey.


Family Values posted:

A lot depends on turnout. Some core Democratic constituencies are somewhat notorious for not showing up for midterm elections.

Part of that idiotic Republican messaging will undoubtedly include party chairs saying stupid things about restricting voter turnout (reduced hours! poll taxes! literacy tests!), which will embolden people to turn out simply to screw over the people trying to take their rights away. 2012 had more voters than 2008, and I'd be shocked if 2014 did not have significantly more voters than 2010.

HorseRenoir
Dec 25, 2011

LET'S BE STUPID FOREVER



I'd also put Iowa into the "lean D" column as well, because Steve King seems way too fringe to win the general election.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


HorseRenoir posted:

I'd also put Iowa into the "lean D" column as well, because Steve King seems way too fringe to win the general election.

King (who actually hasn't officially declared, but basically has) is just one of about a half dozen Republicans who'll be gunning for that spot and whichever of them who is not named Steve King and appears strongest is going to get a cash boost from Rove. Money matters in primaries. So yes, you're right that Steve King vs. a 2x4 with the word "Democrat" branded into it would be a "lean D" race, but I'm interested to see if King makes it out of the primaries. Obviously most of these strong/leans/toss-up rankings depends on who the eventual candidates actually are.

jeffersonlives
Jul 22, 2007

"Mathewson pitched against Cincinnati yesterday. Another way of putting it is that Cincinnati lost a game of baseball."


AsInHowe posted:

Is it just me, or shouldn't 2014 be another big win for the Democrats?

In gubernatorial races, sure. In Senate races, it's just a brutal, brutal map for the Democrats. The only blue or purple state with a Republican senator is Maine, and there are a ton of red or purple states with Democratic senators. Their only opportunities on offense appear to be in inhospitable places like Kentucky and Georgia.

This was true to a lesser extent in 2012 as well, and the Democrats were widely predicted to lose the Senate early in that cycle too, but the Republicans handed over what should have been a gimme hold in Indiana and a gimme pickup in Missouri out of stupidity, and even beyond those lost a lot of close and/or winnable races.

OAquinas
Jan 27, 2008
Ye Olde Newb

AsInHowe posted:

Is it just me, or shouldn't 2014 be another big win for the Democrats?

...

Allow me to introduce you to the Democratic Party, who are as Hawking is to cosmological physics when it comes to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.



Also, much of what you said could be only slightly reworded and subbed in for 2010, and look how that turned out. A lot can happen, and Citizen's United has been beta-tested. Expect a more potent use of PAC cash for 2014 and beyond (though there'll still be plenty of wtf-waste).


Granted, it looks like a long shot for the GOP since their major plays have already been used ad nauseum, but never underestimate the low info voter.

Fuck You And Diebold
Sep 15, 2004



I'd say 2014 in general is less of a safe win for Democrats just because so many of the seats up for reelection are from traditionally non-Democratic seats won in the 2008 wave. If they can make it through the 2014 election I'll count them safe but for now we could lose a few seats.

Undead Unicorn
Sep 14, 2010

by Lowtax


To be fair it's one hell of a bad sign for the Republicans if the Democrats retain control of the Senate and manage to pick up a couple of House seats.

pig slut lisa
Mar 5, 2012

so hungey for burriot



I can't wait to donate to/volunteer for whatever schlub goes up against Rodney Davis, our freshman Republican congressman in IL-13! Our statehouse gerrymandered this district to pack in Democratic voter blocks ranging from Champaign to the Missouri border, but no presidential election = very few votes from the college kids at U of I, ISU, UIS, SIU-Edwardsville, Millikin, Illinois Wesleyan...

Question for the brains in the thread: One potential challenger for this seat is my (totally dreamy ) State Senator, Mike Frerichs. He enjoys wide support in his senate district and chairs the Higher Education Committee, but I dunno how well he knows the rest of this huge Congressional district. Does it make sense for him to test the waters in 2014, where he'll be going up against a freshman but will lack a Presidential election boost, or wait for the boost but risk going up against a more entrenched Davis?

(Caveat: This may be a difficult question to answer if you are not one of the 11 goons who live in east central Illinois)

Joementum
May 23, 2004

I said a million dollars. With a million dollars (unintelligible) clemency. You couldn't do it till after the '74 elections. That's an incriminating thing. His, his word against the President's.


Cook puts IL-13 at D+1, but your district went for Romney by 0.3% in 2012. Looks like it got redrawn something fierce in 2010 since Obama won the old district by 11% in 2008.

eta: The old 13th was the suburbs south of Chicago, the new 13th is an amalgamation of old districts that spans the center and central-West of the state, so there's no comparison to be had here.

eta2: Nevermind, the Kos spreadsheet takes into effect the new boundaries when calculating the 2008 numbers, so the area that is now the 13th really did vote for Obama +11 in 2008 and Romney +0.3 in 2012.

Joementum fucked around with this message at Feb 19, 2013 around 03:07

HUGE PUBES A PLUS
Apr 30, 2005

The Koch brothers are behind this new avatar.


AsInHowe posted:

Is it just me, or shouldn't 2014 be another big win for the Democrats?

I'm not joking here. Everything that's been going against the Republicans is only going to get worse in the years to come, along with a lot of simmering issues that will come back into the discussion until November 2014.

In the next year or so, it's reasonable to expect the following things to happen (or keep happening, as it were):

- Obama's healthcare plan will take effect, and it's expected that millions of people will benefit in some way from it. Going by the current Republican strategy, any Obamacare benefits would presumably help strengthen the Democratic base, hurt the Republican 'oppose everything, cry wolf' argument, and basically become the biggest reason to support President Obama and his party.

- The Republican schism has no signs of stopping, as some bizarre issue will continue to split the party into two, three, four groups. Immigration is only the beginning. It'll happen again, and again, and again, through the mid-term elections.

- All of the traditional Republican tactics to win are all breaking down too. Fox News is losing viewers, the base is growing older. Every time that a politician lies, says something offensive, or even panders, video will get on YouTube. Talk radio is losing its influence. Meanwhile, the Democrats have embraced a media strategy that will work for the future.

- Those Republican governors who have been extremely unpopular? Scott Walker, John Kasich, Rick Snyder, Rick Perry, Paul LePage, and Rick Scott are ALL up for re-election. Jan Brewer will be term-limited out of office, creating an open race in Arizona. 2014 will get presented as a referendum on all of those guys, their policies, the Koch brothers, and all of that. The story on the Republican side would basically be defending and promoting ridiculously unpopular policies.

This all leads up into a political climate of a very popular Democratic policy going against a set of highly toxic Republican policies, of a modern Democratic PR movement against an out-of-touch Republican one, all with a Republican party that shows no signs of figuring itself out.

Shouldn't the Democrats win big in 2014? Shouldn't this be a potential blowout, as the Republicans lose even more ground before a 2016 election where Tea Party senators finally go up for re-election? I think so.

Not when states like Michigan have been gerrymandered to death. There is a very well entrenched Republican machine here and we have extremely weak Democratic party leadership. Northern Michigan has a Republican sitting in every state house district seat, and some of them have run unopposed for decades. Northern Michigan is not like the southern part of the state. Everyone knows every one up here and it's a close knit area. That and we're loaded to the teeth and we have lots of state and national forest to frolic in.

We also have this problem where the current Republican majority pay no attention to the state Constitution, state law, and have no intention of changing how they're doing things. Enough people still hate former Governor Granholm and blame everything wrong with the state on her. If we can keep the negative numbers up for The Nerd maybe we can get rid of him.

Ender.uNF
Sep 28, 2001
Lowtax giveth, and Lowtax taketh away.

The republicans have proven they learned nothing and simply need to double down harder; all we need is a couple more "legitimate surprise sex" moments.

I also think Democratic turnout in 2012 was a reaction to low turnout in 2010... People realized what happens when you don't bother to vote. I predict higher turnouts for 2014, especially if Obama puts his organization to work (another hard lesson about 2010).

Nth Doctor
Sep 7, 2010

Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way.


I'm a bit worried about Carl Levin (D-MI) retiring. I had the pleasure of meeting him over the summer and he was incredibly warm and personable. My only problem is we still haven't gotten a copy of the photo we took with him for N+1th Doctor's baby book.

On the other hand, according to this article, the strongest candidate to replace him is my current Congressman, Gary Peters. I met him as well, and did get a copy of the picture. He and his staff were incredible and helped us to get in to the House Galleries and snag a short-notice tour of the Capitol Building. On the day of the Democratic primary. I made sure to give them a congratulatory phone call the next day when he won the primary.

Gary Peters getting the big promotion could also open up the Michigan 14th to another run by Hansen Clarke who lost his seat due to Republican-led redistricting which caused his home to end up in 13th district and his constituency in the 14th. Given that the 14th district includes Detroit and has a PVI of D+27, anyone winning the D Primary is going to get elected.

pig slut lisa
Mar 5, 2012

so hungey for burriot



Joementum posted:

Cook puts IL-13 at D+1, but your district went for Romney by 0.3% in 2012. Looks like it got redrawn something fierce in 2010 since Obama won the old district by 11% in 2008.

eta: The old 13th was the suburbs south of Chicago, the new 13th is an amalgamation of old districts that spans the center and central-West of the state, so there's no comparison to be had here.

eta2: Nevermind, the Kos spreadsheet takes into effect the new boundaries when calculating the 2008 numbers, so the area that is now the 13th really did vote for Obama +11 in 2008 and Romney +0.3 in 2012.

Thanks Joe. Do you have any sense about what the wisdom is about challenging a relatively fresh incumbent in a district that slightly leans the incumbent's way in 2014 vs. waiting for coattails in 2016? Because we'll have both D & R primaries in 2016 I imagine this question is applicable to both parties.

sullat
Jan 8, 2012


Nice Davis posted:

Thanks Joe. Do you have any sense about what the wisdom is about challenging a relatively fresh incumbent in a district that slightly leans the incumbent's way in 2014 vs. waiting for coattails in 2016? Because we'll have both D & R primaries in 2016 I imagine this question is applicable to both parties.

Generally speaking, the first re-election campaign for someone is when they are most vulnerable. After that, the advantages of incumbency begin to snowball.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

I say, old bean.


If the Democrats are able to just barely squeak out retention of the Senate, it will be a win. Because just look at what the 2016 elections look like.

24 Republicans up for re-election compared to 10 Democrats is an even worse map than 2014, as the Tea Party nuts finally come up for re-election. Factor in that it'll be during a Presidential Election that currently figures to go well for the Democratic Party (but who knows how things will be three years from now?), and there could be a pretty big electoral shift.

Although none if it will really matter until 2020. The Republicans effectively permanently control the House until then considering how badly they've gerrymandered certain key states.

Gen. Ripper
Jan 12, 2013

Charles J. of the family GUITEAU was FRAMED for the murder/assassin-ation of 20th president Republican James A GARFIELD on 7/2/1881. The REAL killer was Michael Thomas BARRY! Google it sheeple!!!!

JT Jag posted:

If the Democrats are able to just barely squeak out retention of the Senate, it will be a win. Because just look at what the 2016 elections look like.

24 Republicans up for re-election compared to 10 Democrats is an even worse map than 2014, as the Tea Party nuts finally come up for re-election. Factor in that it'll be during a Presidential Election that currently figures to go well for the Democratic Party (but who knows how things will be three years from now?), and there could be a pretty big electoral shift.

Although none if it will really matter until 2020. The Republicans effectively permanently control the House until then considering how badly they've gerrymandered certain key states.
I'll be happy if we can just get rid of Ron Johnson.

SedanChair
Jun 1, 2003



AsInHowe posted:

Is it just me, or shouldn't 2014 be another big win for the Democrats?

It should. But I'm using Pundit Mojo to declare that they've shot themselves in the foot again with the-contentious-issue-that-shall-not-be-named, and that they'll snatch defeat from the jaws of victory as only Dems can.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Raku
Nov 7, 2012

What's the matter!? Did you catch a bug!?


SedanChair posted:

It should. But I'm using Pundit Mojo to declare that they've shot themselves in the foot again with the-contentious-issue-that-shall-not-be-named, and that they'll snatch defeat from the jaws of victory as only Dems can.

If CNN closed shop before the midterms I'd call it for the Dems. Their vile horse-race bullshit turned a bad debate into a near political rout.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«245 »