Polliwonks: Wasserman, his eyes uncovered!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Polliwonks: Wasserman, his eyes uncovered!

«‹›3 »

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

VitalSigns posted:

And the Biden screenshot is from before the Wray letter

Wray is a dead man walking in a second Trump term. He's not saying poo poo.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2020 16:21

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:24

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

If you're tired of fake skewed polls check out this hot new forecaster:

https://statespoll.com/post/632648150736404480/presidential-election-2020-electoral-college-map

# ¿ Oct 22, 2020 19:04

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

He was rotting in 2015. Republicans like the rot, and there will probably be a similar dynamic with a bunch of non-Trump candidates splitting the vote.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2020 21:08

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Rigel posted:

Hopefully it won't be as crucial if HR1 is passed and not hosed with by the SCOTUS, but an epic national wipeout of the GOP in state legislatures in a redistricting year would be an excellent backup plan. The next ten years are going to be a hell of a lot more fair, one way or the other.

HR1 will be 100% hosed with by SCOTUS. In fact the only provision that I would bet money on surviving a court challenge with Kavanaugh/Gorsuch as swing voters is the one making election day a federal holiday. Everything else is doomed.

# ¿ Oct 23, 2020 20:29

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Grondoth posted:

I expect HR1 to be hosed with too, but I also expect that it will make people angry when they do. The republicans have gone to war against the concept of fairness, but the rest of the country has an issue with them doing that.

Campaign finance isn't nearly as sexy as the big social issues, people don't get angry about it. Citizens United made a lot of people in the blogosophere upset but didn't really affect ordinary people in an obvious way that stirs anger. And they'll uphold district court rulings enjoining any enforcement of the registration or voter roll rules so people won't get accustomed to any of the convenience provisions and won't realize anything's been taken away.

# ¿ Oct 23, 2020 20:40

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

I'm unreasonably annoyed by how literally all of the poll aggregator accounts split their tweets by which candidate the results are more favorable to for purposes of likes and retweets

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1319756862854696968
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1319757901666332677

# ¿ Oct 23, 2020 23:19

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

That's my take. At this point the *total* early votes are pointing towards overall high turnout but that's all you can say about them this year. Any conclusions about party ID or demographic subsamples based on past elections should be treated as not applying this year.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2020 13:50

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

TwoQuestions posted:

I said I'd wait to be happy until after the SCOTUS weighs in, and now they have with a quickness, and not the way I expected!

This is a story from earlier this week. There's already a new lawsuit cooking for next week when ACB is confirmed. There's still a significant chance for those ballots to not count.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2020 18:32

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Handsome Ralph posted:

Speaking of that,
https://twitter.com/FinancialTimes/status/1320217099512516608?s=20

It's surprising that the Tory Government is just now starting to figure out that Trump has a solid chance of being booted from office next week, but then again, they haven't really shown the ability to look more than 2 weeks ahead for awhile now.

Still a week left to announce a US-UK free trade deal! Just print several blank binders full with headers labeled "TBD" and have a press conference.

# ¿ Oct 25, 2020 14:51

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Texas doesn't have party registration. There is "affiliation" which just means that you've either affirmatively sworn an oath (which isn't part of the normal registration form and almost no one does except people intending to be actual officials/candidates) or voted in that party's primary that year. (It also expires every year). If pollsters are using actual affiliation data to derive R+6 or whatever that might be accurate but out of a denominator excluding the vast majority of registered voters (who don't participate in primaries). If they're instead modeling it from county or precinct level data blending 2016/2018 that will account for non-primary voters but of course depend on their modeling assumptions.

Blue Texas is still pretty unlikely but Texas' early voting will tell you much less than even other states' early voting patterns.

Elotana fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Oct 27, 2020

# ¿ Oct 27, 2020 15:51

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Since affiliation expires every year they'd be going off this year's primaries, which were about evenly split participation-wise

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/03/06/just-quarter-registered-voters-texas-participated-2020-primary/

# ¿ Oct 27, 2020 16:04

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

TwoQuestions posted:

It seems everyone not on this forum was expecting another stimulus package to get Trump's autograph, for some reason.

The POLITICO Playbook guy has been screaming at "markets rally on stimulus hopes" headlines for months now. It's more like only equities guys were expecting it.

# ¿ Oct 28, 2020 20:12

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

DutchDupe posted:

Some Republican candidates in Texas are trying to get +100,000 votes thrown out in Harris County

https://twitter.com/chucklindell/status/1321517036309270533

They couldn't get SCOTX to bite on ending the drive-thru voting, so I doubt they'll get anywhere on throwing the banked votes out

# ¿ Oct 28, 2020 20:15

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Zore posted:

Its really not an outlier, almost every live caller poll is showing those margins.

That's just because TRUMP voters are scared the pollster will cancel them on Twitter!

# ¿ Oct 28, 2020 21:25

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

FL already has a built-in blue mirage effect from the Panhandle being on Central Time. You're best off not believing anything about FL until the next morning.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 14:20

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Rea posted:

To expand on others' answers: Handicappers like Cook can serve as barometers for an election, without having to actually reference public data. If you want to get the word out about data you don't necessarily want to publicly release, but do want the general gist disseminated, giving enough data to Cook et. al. can be a good way to do that.

Yeah right now Cook is basically acting as a go-between for Republican pols who can't bad mouth Trump in public to scream "LIBERA TE TUTEMET EX INFERIS"

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 17:38

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Cicero posted:

Sorry, what is this? I know that various states have non-partisan/bipartisan/independent redistricting, but is there some proposal at the federal level too?

The HR1 bill has various provisions like requiring states to use non-partisan commissions and instituting standards in federal law for notice/comment and expedited challenging. However with RBG gone I expect very little of it will survive SCOTUS. The most recent case upholding the right of a state to delegate its own redistricting to a commission was a 5-4 decision where Kennedy flipped and Roberts dissented. With him gone it's dead meat, and the conservative bloc there now won't blink at extending the logic to "if states can't divest themselves of this power the feds can't either"

EDIT: I checked and Roberts explicitly says this in his dissent. So while HR1 might be beneficial in other ways the redistricting stuff is a dead letter.

quote:

The constitutional text, structure, history, and precedent establish a straightforward rule: Under the Elections Clause, �the Legislature� is a representative body that, when it prescribes election regulations, may be required to do so within the ordinary lawmaking process, but may not be cut out of that process. Put simply, the state legislature need not be exclusive in congressional districting, but neither may it be excluded. The majority�s contrary understanding requires it to accept a definition of �the Legislature� that contradicts the term�s plain meaning, creates discord with the Seventeenth Amendment and the Constitution�s many other uses of the term, makes nonsense of the drafting and ratification of the Elections Clause, and breaks with the relevant precedents. In short, the effect of the majority�s decision is to erase the words �by the Legislature thereof � from the Elections Clause. That is a judicial error of the most basic order. �It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such a construction is inadmissible.� Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 174 (1803). II The Court also issues an alternative holding that a federal statute, 2 U. S. C. �2a(c), permits Arizona to vest redistricting authority in the Commission. Ante, at 19�23. The majority does not contend that this statutory holding resolves the constitutional question presented, see ante, at 23, so its reading of Section 2a(c) is largely beside the point. With respect, its statutory argument is also hard to take seriously. Section 2a(c) does not apply to this case. And even if it did, it would likely be unconstitutional.

Elotana fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Oct 29, 2020

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 18:56

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

eke out posted:

yeah, it includes like

- Mandatory early voting hours everywhere for at least two weeks
- Mandatory no-excuse vote by mail
- Easier registration (online registration, automatic registration at DMV, same day registration for fed elections, pre-registration starting at 16 so you dno't have to do anything to be allowed to vote when you turn 18)
- Voting rights for all felons not currently in prison
- Independent commissions for all redistricting
- Election day is a national holiday
- Snaps back into place a bunch of VRA stuff killed in Shelby County
- Campaign finance reform
- A bunch of other poo poo

it would massively increase our long term power and basically everything in it is broadly popular and will only be opposed by chuds

HR1 passed without court-packing will be useless. Everything in it will be gutted within two years. If you want to bring about a big structural change that SCOTUS can't touch admit PR and DC.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 19:05

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

cheetah7071 posted:

can't wait for prison populations to triple to make sure minorities stay disenfranchised

They'll just adopt FL's poll tax strategy since it's already been blessed by the courts.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 19:06

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

eke out posted:

I mean, you posted at least some support for your claim that the redistricting aspects won't survive, but I think you have to at least put some effort in rather than just flatly declaring everything else will be killed especially considering the vast majority of it is clearly legal

I'm exaggerating when I say "everything" but there's not much beyond the federal holiday that you can't at least get Alito, Thomas, and possibly Barrett on board for. I'm not gonna write a whole drat brief, at least not now, but by way of example it wouldn't be a stretch for the conservatives to combine Citizens United (money is speech) with McIntyre (anonymous speech is protected) and kill most of the campaign finance provisions requiring disclosures. The other big finance provision is matching funds for elections which Roberts already nixed at the state level under McComish so as with redistricting I doubt he'd bless a federal version.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 19:23

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

vyelkin posted:

I think redistricting does affect the presidential vote, though. Because redistricting makes state-level elections fairer too, and fairer state-level elections could mean a less reliably Republican state government that does less voting suppression, which would have dramatic effects on Senate and presidential races.

If Texas does go blue this year you will be able to trace a direct line of causation to Beto's run in 2018, where his coattails wiped out every single Republican in Harris County, including county judges and election clerks, whose Democratic replacements have blessed massive expansions of voting hours, voting sites, and drive-thru voting.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 19:31

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Rea posted:

Kavanaugh keeps siding with Roberts and the liberals on this. I'm wary of what his game is, he has to be doing this for a reason.

Kavanaugh is just a slightly more right-wing version of Roberts. He's a politically conscious judge who isn't going to YOLO into anything crazy enough that it makes court-packing a fait accompli, and right now I'm guessing they think that the margins aren't close enough to save Trump so why burn any of your capital on them

Gorsuch can bamboozle too but he's a radical who just gets slightly perpendicular with the GOP on things like tribal sovereignty and LGBT rights, he always comes home for the real structural power plays.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 19:43

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

JosefStalinator posted:

There was a good study done that showed that generational effects vary in a pretty non-linear fashion - the most fascinating finding was that whoever was President when you turned 18 years old skewed your voting patterns your entire life.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2020 23:16

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

The MN case is different and more worrying than the PA case because in the PA case it was a state court acting alone to override the PA legislature directly. In MN it was a state court enforcing a consent decree with a Board of Elections explicitly empowered by the MN state legislature. This reads some bizarre mini-non-delegation doctrine into the Elections Clause that has zero basis, it's not even well-supported by Kavanaugh's concurrence (although that might not stop him from embracing it).

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 02:12

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Fojar38 posted:

Pennsylvania is the most likely hinge on which election night is either "Well it's 9:30 pm and congratulations President Elect Biden" or "3 am drunken hellworld"

Nah, the sun belt is. FL/GA/NC count their mail votes first and if two of them go blue on election night Trump is cooked even with PA.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 04:25

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

SoggyBobcat posted:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1322030330216357892
Wasserman thinks Biden's margin in Harris County (Houston) could be as large as +350,000. Beto's margin in Harris was 201,298 and he lost Texas by 214,921, so if Biden is getting ~+150,000 more votes over Beto in Harris alone...

2018 was a good midterm as far as they go but it was still a midterm, don't go projecting its raw margins onto a general election

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 06:15

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

I suspect the third-party candidate is bleeding some votes, which isn't a big deal because Maine uses instant runoff ranking. (I wonder if the models account for this in the odds)

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 06:21

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Mainwaring posted:

Chapo also predicted a comfortable Biden win this week, so make if that what you will.

Gotta say it took me out of the immersion a little bit to hear them mis-pronounce "Tuberville" and "Cornyn" while making predictions about their races

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 15:34

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1322196908853649410?s=19

Ras inching towards the window

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 16:22

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

We'll get a ton of them Monday I'm sure

# ¿ Oct 30, 2020 16:23

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

With 538 now at 90/10, it's worth noting that their final projection for 2012 was 90.9% Obama, and Nate has definitely baked *more* uncertainty into his model since then.

# ¿ Oct 31, 2020 18:47

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Grouchio posted:

I wonder how much thought he's put into it. And if Yang becomes Tech secretary/FCC head, or if say Warren or Bernie get a cabinet spot for healthcare or environment.

Warren or Bernie in the cabinet would be good but their states have Republican governors, and even squishy New England Republicans are too tempted by chud-tier obstructionism (see Collins and Snowe lining up against Obamacare)

# ¿ Nov 1, 2020 21:14

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

TyrantWD posted:

Their numbers people who make the calls that their pundits get to say on air are legit. The on air people might try to get a little creative with their words to play Trump's game, but I'm sure the legal department will have already given all of them an earful about what lines they cannot cross.

If FOX wants to declare Trump the winner at 8pm and have every single talking head say mailed ballots are fraudulent there's absolutely nothing illegal about that

# ¿ Nov 1, 2020 21:46

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Undecided voters are always massive for anything other than the Presidency and a big-money Senate race

# ¿ Nov 2, 2020 17:07

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

SgtSteel91 posted:

Just to steel myself for tomorrow: at what point in the 2016 counting did sentiment go from �Clinton�s got this� to �uhhh maybe she doesn�t have it in the bag�?

Right around when the FL panhandle came in

Don't listen to Carville, he's a hack's hack and any resemblance between his statements and reality is purely coincidental

# ¿ Nov 2, 2020 23:16

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

My understanding from someone's hasty transcript on Twitter is TX early vote law uses the word "structure" and election-day law "building" and that's Hanen's grasped straw, that the drive-thru tents are a "structure" but not a "building"

I'm guessing that if even the worst chudge of SDTX is still punting on standing, SCOTUS would too

# ¿ Nov 3, 2020 02:12

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

RCP is a chud website. This is clear if you look at any of their other RealClear type sites. Their ownership group apparently heavily overlaps with the Federalist.

# ¿ Nov 3, 2020 04:50

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

zoux posted:

About the RCP "revolt" on twitter last night, one thing that's always puzzled me is what good it does to skew poll results in any direction. You want the clearest possible picture of the state of the electorate - good or bad for your campaign - in order to make the most informed spending and media choices. The only things I can think of, because RCP is clearly putting its finger on the scale to make the race look closer than other polling indicates, is that 1) it's part of the conservative media strategy of easing the president's fears to gain favor or 2) conservative voters are less likely to turn out if they think they're guy is dead meat.

It's the opposite for liberals, I know for sure that at least Mark Kelly and Biden are both using Trafalgar polling in their fundraising emails, in order to scare Democrats into voting.

Personally, I don't find either to be a particularly compelling argument so: What do you guys think it is?

Ockham's razor: They want clicks.

# ¿ Nov 3, 2020 20:54

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1323738217384796160?s=19

Ralston tweet bad number :smith:

# ¿ Nov 3, 2020 22:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:24

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

Potato Salad posted:

It is not important until he starts talking about the 90k+ wall

My understanding of past Ralston tweets is that Clark is the firewall cancelling out the rural counties, and Washoe is the swing county

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1323741469815971841?s=19

# ¿ Nov 3, 2020 22:39

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Polliwonks: Wasserman, his eyes uncovered!

«‹›3 »