-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News
- Thread starter bananas
- Start date
- Status
So badass Liam Neeson played him in a movie.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
#newGOP
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/03/steve-king-dreamers_n_5086143.html
Why are you giving speeches praising known communists, Cyan? Are you loyal to your country?
Aaron Strife
Banned
More bad news for Mark Pryor:
Oh, right, doomed.
I had put Arkansas as Lean R mentally for a while now but it's good to see Pryor back in the lead, even if he'll have to fight to keep it. But if everything goes well Democrats might only lose a net of 1 Senate seat.
It's mentioned that the undecideds are heavily African-American (if undecided AAs broke for Pryor as they have in previous elections, his total would be 49%) and women (who Pryor is currently leading with).
Oh, right, doomed.
I had put Arkansas as Lean R mentally for a while now but it's good to see Pryor back in the lead, even if he'll have to fight to keep it. But if everything goes well Democrats might only lose a net of 1 Senate seat.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
What a damn train-wreck this law is.
What a damn train-wreck this law is.
It's certainly not dealing with overpopulation, that's for sure.
That's a good one.
That said, it's easy to see how by 2016 these types of numbers, even if close, will make the law set in stone.
If you come into the 2016 elections and you can say "20 million people and 1 in 10 seniors will lose their insurance if ACA is repealed as my opponent wants" that is a demolishing argument against any anti-ACA as a whole stance. Any opposition will have to provide for solid alternatives.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
I'm not a huge fan of the ACA and I do believe that even 89% percent coverage is fucking shameful for a developed country, but still, you can't deny that this is a pretty big step in the right direction and it helps a fuckton of people.
What a damn train-wreck this law is.
Now let's get a
WayneMorse
Banned
RustyNails
Member
GOP spreading FUD? You dont say.
The fucking irony. I hope he loses. Then he will be a loser in 2 states
NYCmetsfan
Banned
http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/14/obama-goofs-facts-on-jesus-christ-resurrection/
Some Christian Obama is!
Some Christian Obama is!
Aaron Strife
Banned
Safe Democrat. This is pathetic.
speculawyer
Member
Obama is a Muslim confirmed.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Christians have been saying Jesus died 2,000 years ago for ages. Gee I wonder why it has suddenly come under question by conservatives.
speculawyer
Member
Well, the speechwriter screwed up with the "more than" part. "2000 years" is a decent approximation but 'more than 2000' adds additional information that is wrong.
speculawyer
Member
Yep. But I do think there are some practical applications for it. Well, I guess we have lots of street signs that run on solar and batteries already.
There is much hype about Thorium. But the fact is that there is no commercial Thorium reactor running so this is all very theoretical. There could be some unforeseen issues. But someone should go ahead and build one! I'm not sure why it hasn't happened. Can't Bill Gates fund such a project? Or the DoE? Or maybe they know something that all the internet thorium fans don't know?
shadowsdarknes
Member
I watched her for the first time yesterday.
Her show was awesome. It's good to see some diverse panels for a change, too.
JesseEwiak
Member
In a weird way, I almost get depressed when I watch MHP's show, because that's what Meet the Press could be, only replace a panelist with a white conservative, instead of what we get now, which is a never ending panel of John McCain, Lindsay Graham, a red state Democrat, and Chuck Schumer if we're lucky.
RustyNails
Member
Obama doesnt know when Jesus died so he's a Muslin confirmed (like spec said).
PhoenixDark
Banned
I've heard countless Christians and religious figures use the exact same language. Dunno if you're trolling though.
speculawyer
Member
Well then those others were wrong too. I'm not trolling . . . it is an incorrect statement. But it is pretty damn nit-picky and as you point out, many others have said the same (incorrect) statement.
Is the Turtle-man really gonna lose?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gop-mutiny-could-unseat-boehner-184400965.html
That would be amazing. Kentucky. I mean . . . Kentucky!
That would be both amazing and depressing. Making fun of him is pretty easy, I'll miss all the turtle jokes.
WayneMorse
Banned
I think you have to take into account a big part of McConnell's low approval rating are Tea Partiers who hate him for being a filthy RINO but would still vote Republican no matter what in November.
speculawyer
Member
I agree that his low approval rating is misleading. But rifle-shooting lady Grimes seems have some pull . . . and if she wins enough of the lady-folk . . . well, she may pull it off. The success of Obamacare in Kentucky is probably helping.
Aaron Strife
Banned
That surveyusa poll is a bit old though. There was a recent one from PPP that had Grimes leading by 1, I believe.
I think a lot of analysts were bearish on Grimes' chances because these polls don't mean much this far out, but it's starting to reach the point where McConnell should be pulling away. Instead Grimes is beating him or tying him in most polls and he can't break out. If this were an open seat race (like Georgia) I'd be more inclined to call it leaning Republican but I think Grimes might have the tiniest advantage - certainly no guarantee that she'll win and could very well change but I really think it'll stay this close.
As long as the incumbents can hold on (Pryor, Begich, and Landrieu are looking good - Hagan's in a bit of trouble and Walsh is a question mark) and Nunn and Grimes have a legitimate chance, the Senate elections could end up pretty good for the Democrats. It's all about shoring up for 2016 - imagine Democrats breaking even or only losing a couple seats this year and then winning 6-8 seats in two years.
I think a lot of analysts were bearish on Grimes' chances because these polls don't mean much this far out, but it's starting to reach the point where McConnell should be pulling away. Instead Grimes is beating him or tying him in most polls and he can't break out. If this were an open seat race (like Georgia) I'd be more inclined to call it leaning Republican but I think Grimes might have the tiniest advantage - certainly no guarantee that she'll win and could very well change but I really think it'll stay this close.
As long as the incumbents can hold on (Pryor, Begich, and Landrieu are looking good - Hagan's in a bit of trouble and Walsh is a question mark) and Nunn and Grimes have a legitimate chance, the Senate elections could end up pretty good for the Democrats. It's all about shoring up for 2016 - imagine Democrats breaking even or only losing a couple seats this year and then winning 6-8 seats in two years.
WayneMorse
Banned
I'm gonna shoot for the moon and predict a 12 seat gain in the Senate and a 40 seat gain in the House in 2016.
Joe Molotov
Member
5 flaming Pinocchios!
Aaron Strife
Banned
Would be nice.
This far out? I'll say 7 Senate seats... House elections depend on this year's. I think if Hillary runs though her coattails will bring Democrats into the majority.
Fenderputty
Banned
This is shooting for the stars with hopes of hitting the moon.
Jesus fuck. NPR news just had a segment on the West explosion at the ferilizer plant. No springler systems were present, and when asked if there was a possibilty of passing a law requiring them, A republican representative said "Maybe. It depends".
Fucking Texas and their lack of even the most basic of safety regulations.
Fucking Texas and their lack of even the most basic of safety regulations.
Even if the Dems lose a seat in the Senate (which I think is realistic, though might not happen), then there are 12 realistic seats in play in 2016. The GOP nominates a poor candidate and Hil Dawg does what Hil Dawg does, you could have a 60+ seat majority in the Senate and a slimmer, but existence, majority in the House.
That's insane.
That's insane.
Well, as of right now, all GOP choices are shitty. The gop is handing the white house to Hildawg on a silver platter.
Aaron Strife
Banned
As long as 2018 isn't a bad midterm for Democrats, things should be okay.
Why 2018? If 2014 is good for gubernatorial elections, Democrats can at least expect to pick up Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, as well as possibly Ohio and Wisconsin (There are others of course, but these states would be the most important). The Democrats would have incumbency advantage, and if they held on for a second term in 2018, they'd have a hand in redrawing the maps after the 2020 census. Similarly, Walker and Kasich (who I think are favored to win re-election but could still be bumped off this year) would be on their way out, creating an opportunity for Democratic candidates in an open seat. Democratic victories would force neutral maps in big swing states and that would go a long way to having a durable House majority - right now Democrats would have to completely run the table just for a small one.
Other states where Democrats can get better maps: New Jersey (Christie appointed a tiebreaker to their commission, producing a slight GOP-leaning map), New York (fuck Cuomo and the Republican minority that controls the Senate with the help of some turncoat Democrats), Texas (if it's ready for a Dem governor in 2018), Georgia (ditto - maybe even this year!), Virginia (let's hope they'll stay a Lean D state for a while).
Obviously this shit's all a long ways off but that's the game, I guess.
Much of it has to do with everything being geared towards the way we've been doing things since the 1950's and American nuclear energy having close ties to nuclear weapons manufacturing. Retrofitting is non-trivial. Basically, our version of nuclear power is high on death, but it doesn't need to be that way.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Census data's not released until the following year. So it's after the 2020 election that things get redrawn.
Obviously every election is important, but it seems 2018 is one of the less important ones for the democrats, unless there's a chance for a senate supermajority and/or a house majority.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Most governors have 4 year terms though. The class elected in 2018 would still be in office after the Census and would sign new maps into law that would be used for the 2022 elections.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
I was going to say that governors from 2020 affect it too, but I didn't know most governors are elected in midterm elections, so I guess you're right. Of the swing states, only North Carolina and Wisconsin are at risk of redistricting with the 2020 election, and Virginia in 2017.
speculawyer
Member
Sure, that explains the current designs. But if this Thorium system is so great . . . then why hasn't anyone built it? I don't know, I have no idea how to judge its feasibility. But I'd really like it if someone gave it a serious try. A safer nuke with less proliferation risk would be great.
I guess there may be some project in India where they are trying to build one. I hope they can pull it off.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I think you're gonna see a lot of movement at the end of the decade for a new way of drawing maps. Rural voters are gonna have way to much say and I think you'll see a movement to limit that either with non-partisian districts are maybe even a move for multimember districts. Its a position dems should seriously start to move on. Its vital for democracy and a responsive congress.
Land shouldn't vote
But the governors are elected in 2018. Not the same year as they were this census. And Govs have a veto power over stupidly drawn maps. We didn't have that in Ohio, NC, Florida in 2010
Jeez, TMP continues to go to crap. I posted this article earlier in the week. Its clearly in jest and a joke. How anyone could read that and think otherwise is amazing.
Aaron Strife
Banned
North Carolina wouldn't matter, the legislature draws the maps. We had a Dem governor in NC after 2010.
Ironically that decision was made by the Democrats who thought McCrory would win in 2008 and wanted to still be able to draw the maps.
Anyway as for nonpartisan maps i think it's a nonstarter. The Republicans certainly won't surrender the ability to gerrymander states they have a trifecta in, Democrats would be fighting with one hand behind their back to enact something like that in Illinois. Ideally yes every state would have this but that would be like when Feingold restricted spending in 2010 after getting pummeled by ads.
Ironically that decision was made by the Democrats who thought McCrory would win in 2008 and wanted to still be able to draw the maps.
Anyway as for nonpartisan maps i think it's a nonstarter. The Republicans certainly won't surrender the ability to gerrymander states they have a trifecta in, Democrats would be fighting with one hand behind their back to enact something like that in Illinois. Ideally yes every state would have this but that would be like when Feingold restricted spending in 2010 after getting pummeled by ads.
WayneMorse
Banned
Maybe I'll go a bit further and say the Hillary will win the biggest Democratic victory since 1964, and then pulls an LBJ on us and goes from conservative Dem to progressive hero.
RustyNails
Member
By then we will also be due for another good 'ol economic downturn.
benjipwns
Banned
The reality is that you can control the distribution of districts merely by where you start drawing the lines from.
And with the desire to draw majority-minority districts it's win-win for both parties.
speculawyer
Member
And the better thing will be that if Scalia drops off the court then Clarence Thomas will probably self-destruct like that guy in A Few Good Men when he didn't have his buddy to coach him.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked