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
The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
I hope someone is trying to convince Brian Schweitzer that he's not going to be president but he could be a Senator.

Namely because I don't have much faith in Baucus to pull it off and hope he retires.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Joementum posted:

The DSCC, citing a poll that shows they might actually beat McConnell without creating a circus, is now trying to dragoon Alison Grimes into running instead of Judd.

I've been thinking, state level Democrats seem to do well-enough in Kentucky, it seems like they shouldn't need to get someone open to easy attacks like Judd. Speculation from miles away, of course, but the whole Judd thing just utterly confuses me. poo poo, is Conway just waiting for a rematch against Paul or something?

OAquinas posted:

Speaking of, how hosed is Begich?
Checking TPM's polltracker, there's two polls on that race from late January/early Feb: one from Harper Polling (R), one from PPP (D). All sorts of grains of salt on these, but a few points:
- Begich starts with solid approval numbers: 49-39 in PPP, 48/39 in Harper (also if you look back, these are pretty consistent with his numbers since he got in)
- Both polls show that current Governor Sean Parnell is the highest tier opponent (tied in PPP poll, 48/48; 46/40 Parnell in Harper). Parnell hasn't announced any interest in the race however, and there's a decent chance he'll just for reelection as governor
- Joe the Miller (who has announced "serious consideration" of the race) would probably get his rear end kicked: 58/30 Begich in PPP, 52/29 in Harper
- Sarah Palin fares little better: 54/38 in PPP; 47/40 in Harper

Begich also holds more modest leads against a handful of lesser knowns.

Way too early to make any kind of call and Begich holding his seat will be an uphill battle, but Alaska's a weird rear end state and the size where retail politics can really make a difference (think Heitkamp), so writing Begich's epitaph seems a bit premature to me.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

The easy attacks may severely backfire: Judd's a pretty girl, and most of the easy attacks either have easy retorts (i.e., all those photos of her in Kentucky jerseys) or might just make her even more popular (I'm not sure nude scenes are going to be a negative for the Palin demographic).
No doubt part of the logic was the (reasonable) expectation that the Republicans would overplay their hand if/when they viciously attacked her; it also seemed like the Democrats were/are becoming a bit more aggressive on a handful of issues (mostly social ones), so she could play into that strategy. And The Daily Caller nudity thing was the level of respectability in journalism that I've come to expect from Mr. Carlson.

Still, I can't shake the feeling "Hollywood Actress Liberal Ashley Judd" will have some power with that electorate, and given that Mitch McConnell is a pug who no one in the state (nor his own party) actually likes, it would be a shame to do that campaign when they might have some more traditional, more formidable candidates in a race that doesn't strike me as a lost cause.

Perhaps I'm wrong.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
For what it's worth, PPP had Herseth Sandlin outperforming Johnson as well.

It could very well end up a GOP pickup (that's probably the safe guess), but a) Johnson's retirement won't be the reason b) Herseth Sandlin has some of that 'rural retail politics Democrat' flavor to her, kinda like Heidi Heitkamp in 2012 in that other Dakota.

edit: missed the top of the page link whoops

The Landstander fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Mar 25, 2013

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Brigadier Sockface posted:

Here's a liberal wishlist of awful Republican Senate nominees likely to go full Akin.

GA: Karen Handel
IA: Steve King

Is there a non-insane Georgia GOP candidate? Paul Broun is the name I keep hearing and he's literally in the same league as Bachmann or Louie Gohmert. The other big name is Phil Gingrey, previously noted as the 'saw where Akin was coming from' guy. And yeah, Handel's probably worse than either of them. I have the feeling the Republican will have a built in advantage and win anyway barring some kind of 2006 Democratic landslide, so it's kinda scary really.

Also, someone has to be coming from the establishment to put up a real challenge to Steve King. Right? Latham stood down (thanks Karl!) but a world in which Steve King is the presumptive nominee for a Senate seat... :psyduck:

(also I suspect Braley could beat King even in a lovely year)

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

FlamingLiberal posted:

Good riddance. There's no better example of a corporate whore Democrat than Baucus. He also ruined any chance of a public option, since he and his buddies in the insurance industry wouldn't be having any of that.

Yeah, there's no real downside here: if Schweitzer runs - which he really should and probably will - he's not only a move from a really lovely DLC-er to probably the most progressive guy you're going to get out of Montana, but also makes the seat easier to hold.

This is good news all around.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Brigadier Sockface posted:

So how about this: Charlie Crist steps aside on the understanding that if Nelson beats Scott and wins, he appoints Crist to replace him in the senate?

Haha wow, this would be half skeezy as hell, half brilliant. Nelson seems like a way safer choice to run against Scott anyway.

Politics aside, would there be any legal ethical implications of this (not that they would be open about this 'understanding')?

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

dorkasaurus_rex posted:

So maybe it's a tad early for this, but what's the math looking like for 2014? Are the Dems or Republicans more likely to gain seats? Where will they be gained? What are the margins? I'm curious if Nate Silver or anyone like him has gotten around to running the numbers yet.
I think it's pretty early to figure out how the national mood is going to lean, but I think the Republicans have a structural advantage in both chambers going in.

Think of it this way: the Senators up for reelection this year come from the 2008 cycle, where Obamamania was running wild and the Democrats won just about every seat possible (the closest things to 'exceptions' are probably Maine [where Susan Collins is likely unbeatable], Georgia, and Kentucky). As a result, 21 Democrats and 14 Republicans are up for reelection, including Democratic retirements in some red territory like West Virginia and South Dakota. A good list of the professional predictors and their early thoughts on specific races are on the Wikipedia page. Nate Silver also has a (somewhat dated) rundown. Whether the Republicans can get 6 seats to take the chamber is one thing, but it's hard to see the Democrats not losing seats (then again, this was the common wisdom for 2012 as well).

Republican House gerrymandering/natural nature of rural vs. urban seats has been discussed to death (here's a good take on it which also puts it into the context of the current Congress), but the short version is the Democrats have a huge uphill battle to gaining a lot of seats there, and regaining the House is going to be very, very difficult if even possible.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

I like how this unintentionally backs up Obama's original joke.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
What exactly could this "ammunition" be that wouldn't have been something they dug up and used during his gubernatorial runs or his previous Senate run? The still popular former governor who was polling well isn't viable? :confused: Something feels weird here.

Anyway, that's all but a certain -1 D in the Senate.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Plastic Megaphone posted:

There seems to be a schism forming between the more moderate GOP old guard and the batshit elements

Sincere question, is Liz Cheney a representation of the latter? The Cheneys are their own type of batshit, but they honestly never struck me as cliche Tea Party types.

As an outsider, Liz Cheney popping up to primary a seemingly conservative Senator is really loving weird.

cbservo posted:

It's sad when she disagrees with her father, lord of darkness, about the qualifications and amazing-ness of one Sarah Palin.

oh, i guess there's my answer

edit: Erick son of Erick weighs in:

quote:

I'm pleased to endorse Liz Cheney for the United States Senate.

The Landstander fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jul 17, 2013

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
This is worth mentioning from that article as well, and it's why McConnell sucking up to Paul is so ironic:

quote:

Going into the Spring of 2009, Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson was a favorite local son. That year, Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader and the state’s political godfather, persuaded Senator Jim Bunning to make way for a more dynamic candidate and urged Grayson to run for the seat. Grayson seemed to be a lock for the Republican nomination—his main competition was an ophthalmologist in the western part of the state.

...

Grayson and his team assumed that Rand was just a younger Ron, and, accordingly, ignored him. “We made a huge mistake,” says Les Fugate, then Grayson’s chief political aide. “That gave him five months to define himself.”

The magnitude of that miscalculation soon became clear. Paul tapped into his father’s national grassroots network, raising half a million dollars in a one-day “money bomb.” Thanks to his work on his father’s campaigns, he had relationships with national conservative media that Grayson lacked. Most important, he proved adept at harnessing the anti-establishment anger that had just spawned the Tea Party. Paul unleashed ads linking Grayson to the mess in Washington—“a message that stuck,” Fugate says. Two weeks before the primary, Grayson ran an ad in which McConnell, who is more feared than loved in Kentucky, declared that he needed Trey Grayson at his side in Congress. “We never will know this for sure, but that ad goes up, it’s our final ad, and then, boom, Rand goes through the roof and beats me by twenty points,” Grayson says. “We underestimated him.”

Whatever you may think of Rand, his 2010 rise to fame is a pretty interesting story.


Also, the extremism of North Carolina's state legislature is probably helping to boost up Kay Hagan a bit - Sherrod Brown had a similar boost from Kasich's anti-union law and the subsequent backlash in 2011.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
^^^ Bayh is a Lieberman-quality Democrat, so that's not too surprising

De Nomolos posted:

However, with new Super Double Stuffd Voter Suppression Laws in NC, I have no clue what the electorate there will look like.

I'm somewhat skeptical that the actual change in vote that these kinds of laws can bring can be overstated* - but if there's any electorate where it seems like it would be effective, the North Carolina Democratic coalition of black people and young college students seems like the place where it could do the most damage. :ohdear: If someone has some data that shows NC is doomed/it's not bad in the kind of way, I'd be interested.


Also, as Willa referenced, wrap it up Weinailures:

quote:

With his wife at his side, New York City mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner appeared at a hastily scheduled press conference Tuesday evening to address lewd photos and explicit online chats between him and a young woman that were released last night. Weiner stressed his past behavior was “behind” him and his wife even though the new batch of photos and chats occurred in 2012, over a year after he resigned from the House of Representatives due to other explicit online exchanges that became public.
I was kinda rooting for him, but this stuff starts to add up - especially when he's still doing it at home in 2012.



*note that I'm not trying to diminish how hosed up and reprehensible this legislation is, just the literal vote count at the end of the day

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

De Nomolos posted:

The only way to make some sort of dent would be to end the supermajority and elect a Democratic gov. in 2016. The former requires winning back more than the Obama Coalition, so they're going to kinda be forced to go beyond that black/college alliance anyway.

Oh yeah, the districts make that completely necessary - I was just saying that if the voter ID laws affect anyone, it's disproportionately those two groups. I was thinking more about Hagan specifically.

Willa Rogers posted:

He's asking for "a second chance" but he's way beyond that point now. The actual tweets from 2012 are vulgar enough that he'd better go find a nice non-profit to work for and abandon the idea of resurrecting his political career until he's aged out of being a crazed horndog.

The entire method of dealing with the scandal has been a pure "second chance" narrative, which just completely falls apart now. He'll stay in and keep trying, but I think the party doesn't want this at all - and it's not like the rest of the Democratic primary field is unacceptable, he's not the only choice.

And I honestly thought he might've won, too.


Anyone else watch House of Cards? Reminds me a bit of Peter Russo relapsing :v:

The Landstander fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Jul 24, 2013

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

evilweasel posted:

Yeah...but you'd think getting caught once would have punctured that.

Attacking his intelligence on the fact he was dumb enough to do this again seems pretty valid, on top of everything else.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

axeil posted:

That said, if the voting population is in fact older and whiter than in 2012 and McAuliffe is still up by a fair amount I think it's going to be very difficult for Cuccinelli to win.

This poll was interesting, and reminded me of this memo from Democracy Corps.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/carville-greenberg/why-seniors-are-turning-against-the-gop/

quote:

—In 2010, seniors voted for Republicans by a 21 point margin (38 percent to 59 percent). Among seniors likely to vote in 2014, the Republican candidate leads by just 5 points (41 percent to 46 percent.)

—When Republicans took control of the House of Representatives at the beginning of 2011, 43 percent of seniors gave the Republican Party a favorable rating. Last month, just 28 percent of seniors rated the GOP favorably. This is not an equal-opportunity rejection of parties or government — over the same period, the Democratic Party’s favorable rating among seniors has increased 3 points, from 37 percent favorable to 40 percent favorable.

—When the Republican congress took office in early 2011, 45 percent of seniors approved of their job performance. That number has dropped to just 22 percent — with 71 percent disapproving.

—Seniors are now much less likely to identify with the Republican Party. On Election Day in 2010, the Republican Party enjoyed a net 10 point party identification advantage among seniors (29 percent identified as Democrats, 39 percent as Republicans). As of last month, Democrats now had a net 6 point advantage in party identification among seniors (39 percent to 33 percent).

This is actively biased firm, of course, so a ton of grains of salt are in order. But their releases tend to be less narrative setting stuff (like PPP or Rasmussen) and more in the realm of "hey, we think this is what Democrats should do to win elections". Here's a pretty good example from last cycle, involving Obama's economic messaging).

2010 was fueled in large part by old white people - if they still hate Obama but are kinda tepid about the Republicans and think they're assholes as well and are willing to make a call based on that, that could actually have some real implications.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
It's still early, but Weiner is currently 5th, behind de Blasio, Thompson, Quinn, and "the other one" John Liu.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Ideological arguments aside, those Colorado recalls have to give some doubts to Democrats who were viewing this as a major base mobilization issue.


I don't have any direct evidence but I also suspect Bloomberg's money and name being tossed around in Colorado didn't help much. "New York money influencing our politics" is a solid narrative, even beyond guns.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Whatever you may think of him, Al Sharpton not endorsing Bill Thompson because of a lukewarm stop-and-frisk stance certainly seems meaningful in the context of the election itself (ostensibly what this thread is about), particularly since that was such a central issue which helped fuel de Blasio to victory. So the original point seems off.



Any more info on Natalie Tennant? Some quick digging produces this newspaper poll from the (non-British) Daily Mail from the end of August:

quote:

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito's run for U.S. Senate could be a tight one if Secretary of State Natalie Tennant were to enter the race, according to the latest edition of the West Virginia Poll.

The phone survey, conducted earlier this month, found 45 percent of respondents said they would pick Capito, R-W.Va., to replace retiring Sen. Jay Rockefeller.

Forty percent said they would choose Secretary of State Natalie Tennant, a Democrat. Fifteen percent weren't sure.

5 point deficit isn't prime position, but it's a hell of a lot better than anything else I've seen from that race. Also, the rest of that newspaper's own article details how much their own poll sucks, so...

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

notthegoatseguy posted:

The total number of House seats Dems need isn't impossible, but it would require a Democratic wave to fight REALLY hard. I think I read recently that of the GOP House majority, only 10 live in districts that Obama won in 2012.

Two useful resources for this kind of thing:
Presidential Vote by Congressional District (Daily Kos, but content is non-partisan)
Cook PVI (which gives a basic rundown of how much of an advantage one party has in a Jack Johnson vs. John Jackson scenario)

It's not even so much the Louie Gohmert (R+21) districts that create the huge Republican advantage, it's the large number of R+4, R+5, etc districts in comparison to the Democrats. This is why the generic ballot question is useful (where most people agree a national House vote win of ~7 points is where Democrats actually winning the House comes into play).

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Virginia governor's race is probably McAuliffe's to screw up:

quote:

A new NBC4/NBC News/Marist poll finds Republican Ken Cuccinelli slipping further behind Democrat Terry McAuliffe, 46 to 38 percent in the race for Virginia governor among likely voters. That’s 3 points wider than McAuliffe’s 43 to 38 percent lead a month ago -- before the shutdown. Libertarian Robert Sarvis gets 9 percent.

Virginia was one of the top states impacted by the shutdown -- with hundreds of thousands of federal workers, contractors, and military service members and retirees in the state. And a majority (54 percent) in the poll blames Republicans for the shutdown. Just 31 percent of likely voters blame President Barack Obama.

...

The Republican Party brand appears to be badly damaged in the commonwealth – 62 percent said they had an unfavorable view of the party, while just 33 percent said they viewed the party favorably. Among independents, it was even worse. By a 71-23 percent margin, the GOP was viewed negatively.

The Democratic Party and President Obama get better scores – 45-50 percent unfavorable for the party, 50-48 percent favorable for Obama.

Cuccinelli, the Tea Party-aligned attorney general, has been outspent on the airwaves 2-to-1 since the shutdown, and he has seen his likability rating take a hit. A majority now say they view him negatively (37-54 percent) up from 49 percent a month ago. By contrast, McAuliffe is 44-43 percent favorable. (His negative rating, however, is also up 7 points from last month.)

...

“When you have a majority viewing you negatively, it’s hard to win an election,” said Barbara Caravalho, who also helped conduct the poll. “It’s not that McAuliffe has closed the deal, it’s that he’s the lesser of two evils.”

McAuliffe, being viewed favorably, :psyduck:

I've never been sure how to read the libertarian in that race, 3rd party support is usually overestimated on polls but it seems like he could actually do decent enough. But yeah, Cooch better find a rabbit in his hat.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Hmm, didn't Olympia Snowe quit out of fear of a primary challenge? Or was her stated reason, something to the effect of "I can't take this poo poo anymore", actually sincere? I figured it was both, but I also recall she was generally popular in Maine in the same way Collins is and that the tea party was (aggressively and loudly) stating their intent to primary her.

Or was it more serious back when the non-Paulites were in charge?

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
I wonder if "pullng a Cuccinelli" will become a shorthand way of describing a candidate who's too ideologically extreme for a general election (does Akin essentially own this term already?), just as "Martha Coakley" became synonomous with losing a sure thing.

Because people sure hate Ken Cuccinelli!

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

fade5 posted:

Honestly, this is why social issues are such a good winning strategy for Democrats: Cuccinelli has ran a pretty explicitly conservative campaign, full of anti-abortion and anti-sex stuff, and he's now losing very loving badly to McAuliffe at least partially because of that.

Man, the optics for Chris Christie are going to be great next Tuesday.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Haha, I thought a handful of CT progressives found a way to take over Connecticut for Lieberman for laughs. Did they get bored?

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Not too surprising given how the PPACA rollout went from "hmm well they'll get the website up soon" to "holy poo poo", but yeah say goodbye to those generic ballot numbers from last month:

quote:

The first federal government shutdown in 17 years wreaked havoc over the GOP brand last month, sinking Republican approval and boosting Democrats ahead of the 2014 mid-term elections.

A new Quinnipiac University survey released Wednesday showed Democratic momentum all but reversed amid the embarassing fiasco that has been the Obamacare rollout, with both parties now tied on the generic ballot at 39 percent. As a measure of the public's record-low disapproval of Congress, another 23 percent of registered voters said they would prefer another candidate or abstain entirely.

Same poll which showed Obama at 39% approval. Keep in mind because of gerrymanders and the nature of cities, a tied result would mean Republican pickups.

America seems to be going into "gently caress everyone" mode. Can't blame 'em.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Gygaxian posted:

Apparently we'll have another "accidental Congressman" in Stockman's seat (at least if you trust DailyKos), since the only Republicans that filed are no name types.

I wonder how they rate on the "Kerry Bentivolio" scale.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Jim Matheson (D- UT, somehow) announced his retirement. No "how the gently caress did he win again" this year. :(

Also makes the seat more or less guaranteed R pickup.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Joementum posted:

But I'm betting Walsh will get the appointment.

According to a TPM source, yap:

quote:

Bullock will pick Lt. Gov. John Walsh (D), currently running in the Democratic primary for Senate, to finish Baucus' term, according to a Democratic official.

Assuming they're correct, that was a fun half hour of Schweitzer speculation. :v:


edit: Walsh struck me as having a pretty strong background for a Dem candidate in Montana, and this basic scenario gave Dean Heller in Nevada a big boost. Maybe there's some hope for the Dems holding this one.

The Landstander fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Dec 18, 2013

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Disappointed we will never see the PolitiFact article about whether Dick Cheney and Mike Enzi are fishing buddies or not.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Sad Banana posted:

And the only winner of these debates is..... Michelle Nunn.

Who made an impressive $1.6 million in her 4Q 2013 fundraising, to boot.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

" The fundamentals in this survey favor a Jolly win, leaving the Democrats with one option: trying to buy this race with big money from Washington and outside groups. The Jolly Campaign can expect an onslaught of negative attacks from the Sink Campaign and her liberal, Democrat special interest allies. With the necessary resources, considering David Jolly’s lead, he should be in good shape for the special election."

I'm...kinda doubting this particular poll (which was also an internal, so, you can safely toss it out anyway).

The other one is a newspaper blog poll; pollster seems very localized, but on face value it seems to have a bit more validity. Jolly is apparently going for a "local guy vs. career politician" angle; that doesn't seem all that crazy.

Worth keeping an eye on.

The Landstander fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Jan 22, 2014

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

Ammat The Ankh posted:

Besides presumably the ability to win over the Tea Partiers, what does Bevin have going for him?
He's recently been trying to make an electability argument based on McConnell's lovely poll numbers.

Problem is, the polls aren't good for Bevin, either. Favorability ratings from that SurveyUSA (who are generally pretty good) poll:
Grimes: 26/27, not great
Bevin: 10/17, not promising
McConnell: 27/50, :lol:

Grimes has a 4-point lead on McConnell and a 5-point lead on Bevin as well, so nothing too inspiring there. Expect Grimes numbers to drop a bit once the primary is over and the Republicans are down to one choice.


I guess if you're being really generous, you could argue Bevin has more uncommitted voters in which to present himself as a Generic Republican, as opposed to the already highly disliked McConnell. But given that poll also shows a 26-point lead for McConnell over Bevin in the primary, it's probably irrelevant anyway.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
Nate Silver has a forecast up for the Senate:

quote:

When FiveThirtyEight last issued a U.S. Senate forecast — way back in July — we concluded the race for Senate control was a toss-up. That was a little ahead of the conventional wisdom at the time, which characterized the Democrats as vulnerable but more likely than not to retain the chamber.

Our new forecast goes a half-step further: We think the Republicans are now slight favorites to win at least six seats and capture the chamber. The Democrats’ position has deteriorated somewhat since last summer, with President Obama’s approval ratings down to 42 or 43 percent from an average of about 45 percent before. Furthermore, as compared with 2010 or 2012, the GOP has done a better job of recruiting credible candidates, with some exceptions.

Includes a short rundown of every seat, and probabilities here:


Surprised Georgia is above Kentucky. Also what are you doing Udall come on man get this poo poo locked down

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

dorkasaurus_rex posted:

insuring inaction and gridlock for the next two years.

I agree that the election will be bad for the Democrats, though I still think the Senate is hold-able and I don't think it'll quite be 2010-level bad.

However, the House isn't in play and we're immediately going into 2016 season, so this part was basically guaranteed no matter what. :v:

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:

And here the establishment Republicans were crowing a couple of short weeks ago about how they were shutting out tea party primary candidates. Yeaaah baby, The GOP is back!

Between this and Cochran's almost certain incoming loss, yeah, tea party has made quite a statement past two weeks.

Also hahahahahah Eric Cantor hahah

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
From what I read I guess a write-in McDaniel candidacy is out of the question.

Which is kind of a shame, because if I'm in his position there's a pretty strong case to go for it and actually makes Mississippi interesting/competitive 3-way in the general.

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.

OneThousandMonkeys posted:

This video is from 2010, so it seems like some sort of figure got passed around the think-tank circle as a talking point.
If I recall correctly, it picked up conservative-mainstream cred when someone - I think Erick Erickson? - started pushing it as a meme to counterpoint the "I am the 99%" Occupy thing.

Romney was talking to a bunch of conservative true believers with deep pockets, that's why he said it in the first place, so not surprised it had been tossed around before then.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Landstander
Apr 20, 2004

I stand on land.
I thought Conway was a halfway decent candidate from what I recall? He got a bit desperate with the Aqua Buddha thing, but I took that as a "we're currently going to lose by 5 points; let's risk that to see if this Hail Mary sticks" type deal.

  • Locked thread