• 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 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair

Status
Not open for further replies.

kirblar

Member
Pew Research Center‏Verified account @pewresearch

44% of Republicans say life is better today ”for people like them" than 50 years ago, up from 18% under Obama https://t.co/tz8HDnI2Rk
DGZsxASXUAAOkq3.jpg
"people like me"
 
You know who has a good Dem party?

Kansas.
The talent is always wasted on the states with a low ceiling. The Montana party, while significantly more successful (can elect governors and Senators), is also pretty handicapped by its state's PVI.

Who's ready to obsess over pollzzzzz? Supposedly Quinnipiac has a fresh one for the Virginia gubernatorial race coming soon (later today? Not sure). Their last one in June had Northam up 8.

Evers has filed the paperwork to run. He just hasn't declared yet.
I know, I just get skittish until it's official.

I hope Wisconsin doesn't suddenly remember that they like Walker like they have for his other reelections. It's been a pattern that his approval ratings are mediocre in every year except when he happens to be on the ballot.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
I wonder if instead of term limits, you could implement a system where incumbent politicians need to win a slightly larger margin of the vote each consecutive time they run.

There's some politicians who are beloved enough that they could garner 70% of the vote going into their sixth term, while you'd punish the partisan hacks who tread just a few points above their opponents.

That'd kinda go against the whole idea of the vote then, wouldn't it?
 
I feel like considering that the West Virginia dems nominated and ran a dude who switched parties 9 months after the election, they should really be in the running here.

3. Oklahoma
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma

This is one of those "bad vs. nonexistent" questions, isn't it?

How good can a state Dem party be in a state with no Democrats?
 

Ogodei

Member
This truly is the darkest timeline

You figure Trump wouldn't want to associate with a jailed-for-fraud ex-con at this point.

Dem parties that do way worse than they should: Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Maine, New Mexico.

Dem parties that do better than they should: Nevada, Montana, Arizona, Kansas, Nebraska, New Hampshire.
 

Zukkoyaki

Member
It's getting progressively harder for them as the state gets more hick but Missouri has a stellar Dem party as well. People are already starting to show some buyers remorse with Greitens so we may some Dems make some gains sooner than later.
 
Yeah bashing OK Dems is like bashing Idaho Dems, yeah, they don't really win but it's hard when there is literally no blue counties in your state.

That's why, say, Montana's Democrats stand out as good or why Florida's are so fucking bad.
 
I hope Wisconsin doesn't suddenly remember that they like Walker like they have for his other reelections. It's been a pattern that his approval ratings are mediocre in every year except when he happens to be on the ballot.

Walker's a dummy but one smart thing he does is he always moderates as election time draws nearer, then goes hard right again after the election. He swore up and down that right-to-work wasn't part of his agenda in his first term when he needed to drive a wedge between public and private sector unions. Then he signed a right-to-work bill into law shortly into his second term. Now he's pulling the same act again with education funding.

Contrast to Bruce Rauner who recently purged his staff to install hard right think tank people. Not sure what he's trying to accomplish with that as there's no need to move further right from where he already was in order to run his strategy of setting the election up as him vs. Madigan and pitting downstate against Chicago.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Worst Dem parties.

1. Florida
2. Wisconsin

What states round out the 5 worst?



Flake has been the least liked Republican Senator for all of the last two years.


1. Florida

Just incompetence of the highest order

2. Ohio

Despite its purple presidential status the party aside from 06 which at this point was an exception have been drubbed repeated since 1990.

3. Michigan

Despite its most recent blue presidential tilt since 1992 until 2016 has only won 4/14 gubernatorial elections going back to George Romney in 1962.

4. Wisconsin
Walker. Enough said

5. Any random flyover state such as Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri etc or South such as Arkansas, Mississippi etc

Realignment resulting in the utter destruction of the party and/or the state being historically Republican since inception
 
The Democratic Party of Illinois is an interesting example. They're plenty competent at what they do, it's just that what they do (act as an instrument through which Mike Madigan wields power) is not really what you'd want a state party to be doing.

Either way, Illinois Dems have had more than enough success at the state level to keep them out of the bottom five conversation.
 
There's no counterfactual, I just think by observation that Flake's recent actions have been part of prepping a primary bid against Trump. I also expect Kasich to do the same kind of exploration. Not sure if anyone else will.

Sasse I think is more about career building in the mean time and I wouldn't expect him to jump at 2020 with or without Trump to challenge. Kasich is clearly about running.

The 2020 primary will be Pence vs. Kasich vs. Cruz.

Trump will get impeached in 2018 or 2019.

Everyone sleeping on McMuffin, or just think he'll go independent rather than R?
 
Manchin gives me hope that the right dem could steal a seat in oklahoma. Republicans fucked our economy up, our schools barely function, everyone is poor and lives paycheck to paycheck.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
The Texas Lieutenant Governor, ladies and gentlemen:

DGaAzZcUwAEPKCQ.jpg


1. Florida

Just incompetence of the highest order

2. Ohio

Despite its purple presidential status the party aside from 06 which at this point was an exception have been drubbed repeated since 1990.

3. Michigan

Despite its most recent blue presidential tilt since 1992 until 2016 has only won 4/14 gubernatorial elections going back to George Romney in 1962.

4. Wisconsin
Walker. Enough said

5. Any random flyover state such as Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri etc or South such as Arkansas, Mississippi etc

Realignment resulting in the utter destruction of the party and/or the state being historically Republican since inception

I agree with this.
 
Indiana used to have a very well run Democratic Party that used the Kansas strategy (exploit the divisions in the state Republican Party) to great effect. Then Evan Bayh came along, repurposed the state party as his personal machine, and ultimately let the organization wither. They're not the worst state party by any means, but they don't punch above their weight the way they used to.
 
A McMullin candidacy would win Idaho and Utah and get like one percent of the vote in every other primary.

That sort of performance hasn't stopped many other people from entering primaries in the past. I certainly don't think he wins a repbulican primary, but I think he runs in 2020 as an R or an I, and he's got perhaps better anti-Trump credentials than most everyone else you guys have been mentioning, largely because he doesn't hold any office that could demand him working with Trump on anything
 
It's a really weird contrast between red state governors and Trump.

Trump's pitch was "your lives suck, you're all addicted to heroin, your jobs were stolen by free trade and you have no jobs, rural America is a joke" and then red state governors are like "the economy is booming, rural America is doing great!"

It's really kind of confusing and I think some local journalists should ask red state governors about this.

Scott Walker constantly talks about how great the economy in Wisconsin is doing and Trump constantly talks about how he won Wisconsin because Wisconsin was a drug infested hell hole with no jobs.
 
Suppose you're Jeff Flake. You have a 2018 re-election bid, but you aren't going to be seriously challenged because despite your state trending a little blue and some demographic shifts happening, you're well liked, the AZ Democratic Party doesn't fully have their shit together, and you won your previous elections by huge margins. You hedged your bet on Trump before the election by nominally supporting the Republican candidate but calling for Trump to withdraw after the tape. You are being primaried from the right for 2018, but it's not serious.

You're 54 years old and you have a solid congressional record with five terms in the house and a full term in the senate. You are in good health and good shape.

You release a memoir / policy manifesto in book format in 2017.

Your ideological background in terms of voting is that you're basically the Median Republican: conservative, but not off with the wing-nuts.

You come out against the Muslim ban. You were part of the bipartisan immigration working group which, by the way, should have worked. You come out swinging with a widely shared op-ed calling for a repudiation of Trumpism and a return to bipartisanship and better relations across the aisle. You are in favour of the employment non-discrimination act, despite being publicly against same-sex marriage. You then very publicly become the go-to guy for a pull-quote on how Republicans deserve to win, but have to do better at working with the rest of the country. You also notably reached out to Gabrielle Giffords when she was shot, and then you were shot at but ultimately not hit by a wacko gunman. In the wake of this, there is wide media reporting about how former president Obama wished you well and that you seem to have a good personal relationship with Democrats and solid, good guy principles. Put it this way -- you're not a Maverick, you're still clearly a Republican, no one is saying you're not conservative, but you seem to be willing to work towards what you think is a better country rather than just laugh and burn it down.

The president (and leader of your party) is extremely vulnerable and unlikely to recover or win re-election. Will he run for re-election? Maybe, but it's not a guarantee.


Are Jeff Flake's actions in the last year consistent with someone who is going to run a primary campaign against the sitting president of his own party? Yes. Are his background and personal characteristics consistent with a good platform to launch such a bid? Yes.

Apparently his approval ratings in Arizona are now 18/63

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/08/03/poll-jeff-flakes-approval-rating-arizona-now-1863/

Christ
 
He seems toast. His and Heller's seats are definitely winnable. If the 5 Romney Dems holds, that could guarantee at least a 50-50 split in the Senate.

Don't forget McCain's seat likely being in contention.

AZ + AZ + NV = Senate majority without having to fret over winning Texas.
 
DGaAzZcUwAEPKCQ.jpg


Rural America = opioid addiction and people who feel entitled for the government to create jobs for them where they live (despite being descended from Europeans who were willing to move to find work). The cities are literally feeding the country; wealth is distributed from the cities to rural America.
 
Don't forget McCain's seat likely being in contention.

AZ + AZ + NV = Senate majority without having to fret over winning Texas.
I think this is an easier path than winning Texas.

That being said, I don't think it quite pans out that way - it's probably more likely that enough swing voters will figure "eh, I can vote for one from each party" and then you get a D and an R Senator elected.

But if it's Flake and Kelli Ward or something, I like our chances. Especially if Sinema and Kelly both jumped in.
 

Kusagari

Member
I'm not super worried about the rest of the seats, but even in a wave I could see us still losing Donnelly and McCaskill's seats.
 

kirblar

Member
I'm not super worried about the rest of the seats, but even in a wave I could see us still losing Donnelly and McCaskill's seats.
Yeah. Like, getting to 50 and Murkowski going D/I seems like the most likely path to a majority, but we'd likely have to flip at least 4 seats to get there. McCain retirement/Heller/Flake is only 3.
 
I'm not super worried about the rest of the seats, but even in a wave I could see us still losing Donnelly and McCaskill's seats.
They're still at risk, for sure, but incumbents from the minority party have a pretty good record of getting reelected in midterms, even in states that are getting worse for them on paper. The fact that McCaskill can barely draw a decent challenger suggests to me the candidates there aren't liking what they're seeing in internal polling.

Cohn actually said on Twitter today that a Senate R defection is probably the easiest path to a majority. Frankly I think Murkowski is tired of Trump's shit and if she was the deciding vote I think she'd flip, but obviously we should try to get to 51 without her.

Don't Senators in the opposing party have like a 90% reelection rate during midterms?
It's like 97%.

We're spread pretty thin this year though.
 
Why is everyone afraid of mccaskill losing?
She punches well above her weight for a Missouri senator (no bullshit Heitkamp/Manchin games), and the state has been lurching rightward very quickly.

I think she's an incredibly shrewd politician but worrying about a Dem senator in a state that went for Trump by 20 points is hardly irrational.

Murkowski definitely would not go D but I is a possibility.
"I caucusing with D" is pretty much a meaningless distinction. There's a reason there are no straight-up Independents in the Senate, you lose all clout.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom