|
Troy Queef posted:On the "for" side was Scott Steiner, a man who despite having gone to Michigan was so notoriously bad at putting words together that people have made super-cuts of stupid things he's said Look, say what you want about his debate abilities, but the man is a mathematical genius.
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 14:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
Ardennes posted:Kentucky as a "Likely R" might be a bit on the edge at this point, assuming they the Dems get all leans and likely and one toss-up, they have a seat to spare. I think Kentucky as Likely R is reasonable for now. We haven no idea what will happen in the primary but until its done I think it's safe to say McConnell wins that seat almost every time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Troy Queef posted:I can't find it on Youtube, but back in '03 WWE decided to have an in-ring "debate" on the Iraq War. It was better when the war in Iraq was decided in the ring and for the WWF title: http://youtu.be/y5Rs6HpyHvY
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
axeil posted:I think Kentucky as Likely R is reasonable for now. We haven no idea what will happen in the primary but until its done I think it's safe to say McConnell wins that seat almost every time. Grimes had two pretty strong polls in a row, I don't know how hard I would fight for lean but I don't think it is a strong likely at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Grimes had two pretty strong polls in a row, I don't know how hard I would fight for lean but I don't think it is a strong likely at all. The KDP is really good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory when it comes to congressional races. See Mongiardo, Conway and Chandler.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Yeah, you can argue that his models and ratings aren't quite as rigorous as ~*~Nate~*~, but he's not in Rove/Morris/Chambers territory.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Grimes had two pretty strong polls in a row, I don't know how hard I would fight for lean but I don't think it is a strong likely at all. Likely GOP isnt a bad projection. There are a lot more variables for that race than other likely GOP pickups (how bruising a fight Bevin picks up, whether Grimes can raise enough cash, whether tea partiers will still be OUTRAGED come next november) but until they come to pass, its hard to see McConnell losing. The GOP is going to go balls to the wall to defend him
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
Emanuel Collective posted:Likely GOP isnt a bad projection. There are a lot more variables for that race than other likely GOP pickups (how bruising a fight Bevin picks up, whether Grimes can raise enough cash, whether tea partiers will still be OUTRAGED come next november) but until they come to pass, its hard to see McConnell losing. The GOP is going to go balls to the wall to defend him Granted, part of the GOP will, yeah I am not going to fight to hard to lean but I think there is still some weakness there. If anything, I wish there were more "grades" on those maps. Anyone here about any new house projections?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
That's really good news. If NC and LA don't flip for the Republicans, their ceiling is probably 50. My current thinking is it'll end up 49 R, 51 D, as Begich from Alaska pulls out a squeaker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:It's not a indictment of his data-based forecasting, but days before Election Day 2004 he said Barack Obama was too liberal to be elected President and Evan Bayh had a bright future. The latter was very obvious UVA homerism and should not reflect too badly on him. I don't think that that was a bad prediction. Days before Election Day 2004, we were seeing George Bush heading into re-election by two points having lead the country from the right and promising to be just as neoconservative in his second term, with Republicans gaining in both houses of Congress. Predicting that the Democrats would need to field a consistent moderate to be electable was a reasonable reaction to seeing Kerry successfully attacked as a too-liberal flip-flopper in a conservative environment. This was the high-water mark of the Bush-era neoconservatives. Now obviously the events of 2005-2008 changed that dynamic. Bush's Social Security plan died when it hit 2/3rds public disapproval, Iraq and Afghanistan went totally to poo poo, and Katrina hit New Orleans. I'm sorry, did I say "2005-2008"? Because that was actually just 2005. In 16 months, Bush's approval ratings went from high-40s down to the mid-30s. Sabato's prediction was based on how the world looked at the time. It's only wrong because 2005 marked a massive shift in the country's politics and mood due to Bush getting hit by a a perfect poo poo-storm of unforeseen events.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
I think he put too much weight on a state senate voting record or campaign speech policy and discounted Obama's personal appeal. The latter was an odd thing to downplay in the context of Kerry vs. Bush. But he may have only said it would hurt him but wasn't a deal breaker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:Look, say what you want about his debate abilities, but the man is a mathematical genius. What would expect from a man that went to a highly educated university and has wrestled a lot of countries? (Both of these are actual Steiner quotes, the latter of which came from the aforementioned Iraq War "Debate")
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
There's been an interesting development in the generic 2014 House race trendline since August.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's been an interesting development in the generic 2014 House race trendline since August. Although if you go back to the start of the trendline, there's hardly any gain for the Democrats. It's obvious what helped it bounce back, but what pulled the Dem poll numbers down to begin with?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 23:46
|
|
|
Ballz posted:Although if you go back to the start of the trendline, there's hardly any gain for the Democrats. It's obvious what helped it bounce back, but what pulled the Dem poll numbers down to begin with?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
Ballz posted:Although if you go back to the start of the trendline, there's hardly any gain for the Democrats. It's obvious what helped it bounce back, but what pulled the Dem poll numbers down to begin with? It's typical for a party to get a boost coming off a successful election, as they had in 2012. The decline over the spring was the natural shedding of loose partisans. Meanwhile, see if you can guess which of the candidates in this video is the current mayor of St. Paul Minnesota, running for re-election, and which ones are the challengers. Hint: he's the one who can't stop laughing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's typical for a party to get a boost coming off a successful election, as they had in 2012. The decline over the spring was the natural shedding of loose partisans.  I would pay money to attend that event. Do you think they serve drinks?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
That lady rockin' the Kenny Powers blade shades is a hoot and a half.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's typical for a party to get a boost coming off a successful election, as they had in 2012. The decline over the spring was the natural shedding of loose partisans. I don't think Obama's (obviously played up) "scandals" and the Syrian war scare helped very much either. Granted, there is still plenty of room for the Democrats to take another dive in the very near future. The GOP has been talking up offering revenue as a part of a grand bargain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
Joementum posted:It's typical for a party to get a boost coming off a successful election, as they had in 2012. The decline over the spring was the natural shedding of loose partisans. Even in mayoral candidate wackiness, St. Paul is still playing second fiddle to Minneapolis
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 06:03
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There's been an interesting development in the generic 2014 House race trendline since August. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but won't it take a 10%+ victory in the nationwide popular vote to flip the house? If you look at the results from last time, there's still barely enough D-leaning seats left to make a majority. A lot of the seats won in 2006-08 as well as more than a dozen or more other old line D seats were already R leaning and are now gerrymandered even further out of reach. Remember, the last D majority had 3 seats in MS, 3 in AL, and 5 in TN. Now those states are 1, 1, and 2, respectively, and zero of those seats are anything but solid red. What I'm trying to say here is that the path to majority is still very narrow, especially compared to the last majority. The Ds may not even be close now and may not get there for a while barring more shutdowns or scandals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Depends entirely on if the events in congress depress the turnout for Rs. If the churches decide not to maximize GOTV results... all those 'safe' R zones that are 60% R and 40% D could flip at once, without people changing party alignment. It's the flip side of gerrymandering - it assumes a stable crowd voting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
That and two years of solid R voters aging out of the electorate with fewer to replace them. Going by the past decade of trends the electorate next year should be fairly close to 2008's in demographic makeup, assuming no big wave one way or the other.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Going by the past decade of trends the electorate next year should be fairly close to 2008's in demographic makeup, assuming no big wave one way or the other. I'm not saying this isn't out of the question, but I'd like to see the data suggesting that 6 years means that much to turn a 60-40 R district into something that much more favorable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but won't it take a 10%+ victory in the nationwide popular vote to flip the house? 7%, apparently To what degree is the claim that Democrats were just as bad about this in the 70s and 80s true?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:I'm not saying this isn't out of the question, but I'd like to see the data suggesting that 6 years means that much to turn a 60-40 R district into something that much more favorable. Probably not for the super-gerrymandered districts, but for 55-45 ones they're potentially flippable provided good candidates run and the necessary machinery's in place, and that's as always a big if. The other question is how serious Heritage and pals are about funding primary challengers from the right. I'd still bet against the house flipping next year, and probably against dems getting a net gain at all. Just saying the potential's definitely there to pick off a few seats.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Just saying the potential's definitely there to pick off a few seats.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
Stormagetiton posted:7%, apparently For most of the 80s Gingrich was the only republican congressman from Georgia. But the post-civil rights realignment hadn't yet finalized itself at the congressional and state level in the south.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Which is itself kind of impressive; usually, the second-term midterms result in a lot of seats lost for the President's party (the famous "Six Year Itch") Yea taking the house is a pipe dream, but if they can pick some seats up that'd be a huge rally for Dems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:I'm not saying this isn't out of the question, but I'd like to see the data suggesting that 6 years means that much to turn a 60-40 R district into something that much more favorable. a twenty point spread is tens of thousands of votes. I know the GOP has an older electorate but unless the Death Panels start operating soon we aren't going to see GOP districts depopulate
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Yea taking the house is a pipe dream, but if they can pick some seats up that'd be a huge rally for Dems. I'd say it's only mostly probably a pipe dream. There is always more, and it is always worse. If... WHEN the Republicans put their foot in it worse, and double-redouble down on their insanity, things could, in fact, get worse for them. The chance of this happening close enough to the elections they can't rebound in time is... pretty good, actually. One bad witchburning on Halloween could do it. Or Ted Cruz going for himself over party and dangling his balls somewhere. Not great odds of it, but the fact that there are odds of it at all is pretty darn weird.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:48
|
|
|
The House is electorally 234-201 right now, so the Democrats would have to win a net plus-17 seats to get control. There were 17 Republicans who were elected in 2012 by 6.1 percent or less, and the Democrats won the nationwide vote by 1.2 percent, so that's where you get the "Democrats need to win by 7-plus" idea. The problem with that idea is that all vote shifts are not equal; even without looking at macro vs. micro trends, there are seats that the Dems could easily pick up that they lost by more than 6 in 2012, especially seats opened by incumbent retirement or death, and there are seats the Democrats only lost by a couple points in 2012 that they'd have a hard time picking up in 2014.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Cross-posting because it's about local voting: In local voting news, Texas has 9 propositions up for vote, so my family and I went to go early vote. Something really ironic is that the Republican voter ID bullshit aimed at women in Texas actually ended up nabbing my dad, because his voter card and his ID didn't match: one had his middle name while the other only had his middle initial. He was able to sign an affidavit and vote, and when I went to vote I noticed an older white woman who also had to fill out an affidavit to vote. Both my and my mom's ID poo poo all matched up so we had no problems, but the new Voter ID bullshit is doing its job: you can still vote, but it's aggravating and takes longer!  If you're a Texas goon please go and vote, the Propositions traditionally have a turnout of about 5%, so your vote can actually make a difference between the Propositions passing or not!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Cross-posting because it's about local voting: Yeah, I'm gonna make sure I get out to vote on them some time this week, though they appear to be mostly pretty uncontroversial this year. The one I'm kind of unsure on is 6. Sounds like a decent thing on its face, and most of the opposition I've seen to it looks to be Ron Paul types, but then I hear ads from real estate lobby pacs pushing for it, which leaves me questioning it a bit. I really haven't dug too deep into it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:The one I'm kind of unsure on is 6. Sounds like a decent thing on its face, and most of the opposition I've seen to it looks to be Ron Paul types, but then I hear ads from real estate lobby pacs pushing for it, which leaves me questioning it a bit. I really haven't dug too deep into it. Disclaimer, this is my personal opinion: My view is to vote for it, since my thought process is that the money will likely go to both helping people and into the real estate people's pockets, and that it's not worth loving over a bunch of people without water just to cut into a lobbyist's profits.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Big man endorses bigger man. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cskCKa3S8y0
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Big man endorses bigger man. Yup, yes he did, it is tough to be a LA native and like basketball.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
Does this matter much? Not really, but it's still funny as hell. In 2014 there will be a new political party taking mid-term elections by storm!  They're called the Restore Recess Party. http://dianeravitch.net/2013/10/27/will-mark-naison-run-for-governor-of-new-york/ Where did the Restore Recess Party come from? Why, this is the 30,000 strong national group known as Badass Teachers! This is taken from the super secret squirrel BAT Admin/Mod group on Facebook. quote:ITS official!!! We are going to ask BATs nationwide to consider running as WRITE IN CANDIDATES for any school, local, state, or federal office under our RESTORE RECESS PARTY! This should be fun to watch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
BAT are actually alright folks, even if that does sound a little doofy and some of their tactics self-negating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
Highspeeddub posted:Does this matter much? Not really, but it's still funny as hell. You know, most of their platform seems alright to me. I mean, they sure as hell won't win, but I hate to make fun of people who just want schools to be better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2013 19:04
|
|
