Wendy Davis vs. Greg Abbott debate streaming tonight at 6pm CT.
http://www.wendydavistexas.com/debate/
Think it's thread worthy for TexasGAF?
http://www.wendydavistexas.com/debate/
Think it's thread worthy for TexasGAF?
PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News
- Thread starter bananas
- Start date
- Status
Sure, I agree. In these races that margin prediction isn't exposed, though, and I think it would be more useful to say "well, Wang predicted 51% and it was 49%" or "and it was 40%" than "Wang predicted a 75% chance of a win and actually it was a loss." Information gets lost.
Basically, I think that you're right about the information present in the model, but benji is right about the information that's being communicated.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
parody post?
Black Mamba
Member
As usual, I agree with you,
I say go for it. I think it'd be good if for no other reason to remind other Texans on GAF that there's an election this year, and it's really important to participate. If no one else is really interested, the topic will just drop off and disappear. Not a bad price to pay to just let people know it's happening, even if they just scan the headline.
So I asked this earlier:
and today we get this:
Dave Helling
@dhellingkc
KAN SoS office says 67 ballots with Chad Taylor's name on them were sent to overseas voters. "Corrective action has already been taken."
and today we get this:
Dave Helling
@dhellingkc
KAN SoS office says 67 ballots with Chad Taylor's name on them were sent to overseas voters. "Corrective action has already been taken."
WayneMorse
Banned
Man if Charlie Crist manages to lose to fucking Rick Scott I'm gonna be pissed.
I've given up all hope here in Ohio for a Dem victory in any of the statewide offices though I'm absentee voting in a week or two and I'll be voting Dem right down the ticket for what it's worth. God I can't believe Josh Mandel is going to be re-elected as Treasurer, that little shit.
I've given up all hope here in Ohio for a Dem victory in any of the statewide offices though I'm absentee voting in a week or two and I'll be voting Dem right down the ticket for what it's worth. God I can't believe Josh Mandel is going to be re-elected as Treasurer, that little shit.
I think he's going to lose. And it's fucking depressing.
Yeah it sucks I think most of Florida hates scott but crist being republican then independent and now democrat means he might not get many dems motivated enough to go out and vote.
WayneMorse
Banned
You would think having a governor not named Rick Scott might be a good enough motivator, I guess not.
Avon Barksdale
Member
I think Crist will win. The Latino vote should put him over the top.
I don't care about whether you're a Republican, I care about whether you're a conservative. As of now, these two terms seem to be synonymous, but they haven't always been and won't always be. For me, the entire history of the US is by and large a conflict between the progressive movement and the conservative movement with an apathetic unmotivated center. The political parties change constituency groups over time, it's about ideology.
Libertarians can be easier to stomach because they're traditionally more socially progressive than your average conservative, but because they need the conservative base to win elections, they're essentially as much a slave to that group as any conservative is. I also think of Libertarians as irrational ideologues, and you don't seem to be that at all.
Polling of Economics Professors consistently has a breakdown of something like 55-65% Democrat and only 3-5% Libertarian. That tells me that Libertarian economic policies are what I think they are, childish and irrational. Sure you have some prominant libertarian economists, but you also have scientists who posit that the earth is only 6000 years old, so that's not saying much.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Man all of Kobach's antics just makes it painfully obvious how desperate the GOP is getting about the Kansas seat. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if the state party was putting him up to it seeing as how his own reelection is a tossup at best and he probably can't afford looking like such a whiner.
Speaking of desperate whiners, Mike Rounds' behavior in South Dakota is a little bizarre. An outside Dem-affiliated group has spent 200k on ads attacking him over his EB-5 scandal, and he's running ads now saying it's a lie. Ads that restate the attack and just add "nuh-uh" at the end. I wonder if Democrats hit a real weakness here. The last time PPP polled the state, Rounds was only up by 6, and in a two-way with third party candidates excluded, by 3 over the Democrat Rick Weiland. Maybe we'll have another Kansas on our hands.
Speaking of desperate whiners, Mike Rounds' behavior in South Dakota is a little bizarre. An outside Dem-affiliated group has spent 200k on ads attacking him over his EB-5 scandal, and he's running ads now saying it's a lie. Ads that restate the attack and just add "nuh-uh" at the end. I wonder if Democrats hit a real weakness here. The last time PPP polled the state, Rounds was only up by 6, and in a two-way with third party candidates excluded, by 3 over the Democrat Rick Weiland. Maybe we'll have another Kansas on our hands.
Everything the GOP has done for the last decade is about desperation.
1) They've segregated districts by age and race, 2) they've attempted to neutralize the fundraising advantage that Dems have with average middle class donors with Citizens United, and 3) they've attempted to keep poor people and minorities away from the polling booths with Voter ID.
Every single one of these efforts weakens our core democratic process but they whole heartedly accept them as solutions to deal with the browning of america. Rather than changing their policies to be more inclusive of minorities and immigrants, they're attempting to neutralize their political effectiveness.
The Librarian
Banned
You'd think Scott would be reason enough.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Progressives are just so much better at governing that conservatives, it's really not even close.
That image doesn't match the text below
Aaron Strife
Banned
Btw I think Crist will win. Scott's only leading because he hammered Crist for months, who's only started advertising recently. Scott's ads didn't help himself though, it just hurt Crist.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Assuming they show up after the executive order disappointment.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Its a close race. Its cliche but crist will win if turn out is high. Or scott's is down
Aaron Strife
Banned
You mean 50 years of history doesn't apply because of a catastrophic economic collapse? 10 Presidents - progressives consistently outperforming conservatives with one exception
NYCmetsfan
Banned
no, that low deficit spending has any relation to good governance
zero shift
Banned
Unless the state is a deep blue state like Vermont or a deep red state like Wyoming there is no point. The real conflict in America isn't North vs South, it's country vs city with a hint of race.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Vermont was deep red till the 80s. FYI
And the second thing is a north-south divide, its how the two areas are by and large organized. Yes, there are rural areas in the north but they don't have the weight in the north they do in the south.
Also
zero shift
Banned
Republicans Nixon and prior were very different from Republicans of today.
Exactly. The South in general is more red than the North but the reason for the blowout is because of demographics and the fact that there are simply more rural areas in the South IIRC.
speculawyer
Member
$40/week insurance for a family of 4 is obviously garbage insurance that doesn't really pay for anything.
speculawyer
Member
Demand no longer on Kansas ballot? Did GOP chance of winning Senate just dissappear?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
People keep saying this. They were anti-federal immigration and less amenable to "social solutions". Nixon republicans weren't really that liberal by any stretch, look up Robert Taft.
You're transfixed by the fact the people were liberal and rewarded liberal politics more than conservative policy and seem to transplant that on to the party at large. They weren't liberal and socialist, the president doesn't write policy. Dems controlled the house from 1952 till 1994, you want to know why "nixon republicans' were different? they didn't have congress or state houses
It’s Hoover’s party — and Madison’s — not Calhoun’s
Avon Barksdale
Member
If any Southern states want break off, go right ahead.
Like I said in the main thread.. the North will want river control (and, as a bonus) an island playground/vacation spot, so you'd really want to keep New Orleans in the union.
We voted 80% for Obama.. aside from some cultural inertia from the past, we really don't belong with the hillbillies around us.
Aaron Strife
Banned
blegh, heard Davis' debate performance was a bust. Oh well, it's not like the race was really winnable.
She could have been Lincoln's second coming and it wouldn't have mattered.
Avon Barksdale
Member
I just saw the thread. I'm surprised that only 30% of Republicans are in favor of secession, figured it would be a lot higher.
Those percentage numbers don't really mean what people think they mean.
People think of them in terms of rolling a dice, you know, if you I roll a dice 3 times I have 50% chance for it to land on the number 4.
But that doesn't really applicable for elections, you can't re-run election 100 times under the same conditions (and if you could, you'll get the same results).
They all are however use mathematical tools that were designed to measure the probability of a random repeatable event like a dice roll.
It's not a terrible way to express confidence in a result, but what you're expressing really is the degree in which polls have been wrong in the past.
Which by the way, encompass two very different phenomenons - poll bias and actual change in public opinion.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I feel like in Texas this would have even been a drag on her candidacy.
zero shift
Banned
Good point. My point still stands though. The divide is more city vs country than it is regional.
Eh. He didn't answer the question and that doesn't look like anything we haven't seen in a more national debate.
She doesn't look very comfortable talking, though. Really, really flat.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
She's important for building the party there. Texas will be blue again
Those comments. Wow.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
And vermont? New Hampshire? Western Mass? Its cultural that is often geographical, not always
Southern conservatives didn't reject social programs until after LBJ. And they did so because Nixon in 1968 found a way to play dog whistle politics and get a bunch of pissed off racist southern whites to look at social spending as handouts for black people.
The south voted for FDR (and so did everyone) but they also voted against Coolidge.
The South by and large supported Democrats because the Republican Party represented Emancipation to them. And they accepted social welfare programs because they by and large were given to white people.
Nixon used the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Act as well as the perception that the enhanced social welfare programs were going to blacks in inner cities to win in 1968 with the "silent majority"
If you think Conservatives are for fiscal responsibility or for small social spending, you won't understand it. They support medicare and they supported Reagan (who blew up the debt and deficit way worse than Carter). Fiscal conservatism isn't about fiscal responsibility, it's about fiscal priorities.
"Give money to us hard working white folks and don't give it to the poor lazy blacks and mexicans" is the entirety of their agenda. So when Paul Ryan proposes a plan that dramatically increases the national debt by 5 trillion he's hailed as a fiscal conservative because he cuts funding in programs typically associated with helping poor people and minorities. Same with Reagan.
There is Ideological conservatism - small federal govt, state rights, free markets, individual liberty, low taxes, and constitutional literalism
And then there is what conservatives actually support and believe - white superiority, christian superiority, hetersexual superiority, male superiority. They want a government that pushes those values, and what they value as multi culturalism, the gay agenda, the feminist movement, etc - they just see as a leftist agenda designed to destroy what's noble about this country.
.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I don't know where I disagree with the majority of this. (though I think your over selling the uniformity of the souths love of welfare and socialism and not giving enough to the fact that they just voted democratic because of the civil war.)Southern conservatives didn't reject social programs until after LBJ. And they did so because Nixon in 1968 found a way to play dog whistle politics and get a bunch of pissed off racist southern whites to look at social spending as handouts for black people.
The south voted for FDR (and so did everyone) but they also voted against Coolidge.
The South by and large supported Democrats because the Republican Party represented Emancipation to them. And they accepted social welfare programs because they by and large were given to white people.
Nixon used the Civil Rights Acts and Voting Rights Act as well as the perception that the enhanced social welfare programs were going to blacks in inner cities to win in 1968 with the "silent majority"
If you think Conservatives are for fiscal responsibility or for small social spending, you won't understand it. They support medicare and they supported Reagan (who blew up the debt and deficit way worse than Carter). Fiscal conservatism isn't about fiscal responsibility, it's about fiscal priorities.
"Give money to us hard working white folks and don't give it to the poor lazy blacks and mexicans" is the entirety of their agenda. So when Paul Ryan proposes a plan that dramatically increases the national debt by 5 trillion he's hailed as a fiscal conservative because he cuts funding in programs typically associated with helping poor people and minorities.
I was saying that nixon wasn't liberal and that republicans back then were conservative. I was responding to Vermont being red and being conservative until the 1980s. I wasn't talking about dems
This is just wrong though, they don't and never have supported medicare, they tolerate it for electoral reasons while trying to dismantle it every 5 years. The last statement is very accurate though
Conservative Politicians, sure. But Conservatives overwhelmingly support medicare. Some 75% of Tea Party members consistently say they don't want Medicare messed with.
Same with Social Security. Conservative Politicians struggle with their ideological positions which should be against Medicare, but the conservative base overwhelmingly supports it.
I agree that Nixon wasn't Liberal. Eisenhower is some ways was, and Teddy in A LOT of ways was, but Nixon wasn't. He was definitely more liberal than today's conservatives, as was Reagan. The movement has gone further to the right as they've felt more attacked by minorities and the liberal value system.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
You're confusing conservative with republican voters. You can't just say they're the same. The republican party and conservative ideology in the US has never consented to the idea of Medicare and even social security. They've actively pushed laws that in essence eliminate their current public structure
I'm not, I highlighted the difference between conservative ideology and conservative voters. All those people label themselves as conservatives, it's just that southern and in a broader respect rural conservatism in all practicality is just a selfish white/christian supremacy movement. Always has been.
Give it 30 years, The conservatives will love Obamacare. They have no problem with handouts, as long as they think it goes to them and makes their lives better. Their problem was they thought it was going to be given to illegal immigrants and crash our health care and our country to the ground. That perception will change, and they'll support it as much as your average liberal would. (They'll even start to take credit, as they always do).
I differentiate between ideologically pure conservatives and the conservative voting block and the ideologically pure ones represent like 5%. The rest are just selfish, racist, homophobic, xenophobic bigots.
- Status