• 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.
Initial Decision Desk model has Dems picking up 12 net seats. What's striking, of course, is how many of the GOP held seats are juuuust under 50% odds.

https://twitter.com/decisiondeskhq/status/900777155574980608
Add the seats with a 45% higher chance of winning and you get 17.

40% chance of winning, 22, just two short.

35% chance of winning and we're at 30 for a 224-211 Dem majority.

This would easily give Dems majority in the House correct?
That's only half of what we need - Democrats need to net 24 seats.
 

Ithil

Member
I feel like if Trump gets criticized over any handling of this hurricane in Texas, he's going to get mad and complain that it's not his fault because it's a natural disaster and make it about himself. You know then the WH releases a milquetoast statement about how they're supporting everyone with thoughts and prayers.
 
I mean Trump still has literally not faced a crisis that wasn't his own fault in some way, so it's impossible to know how he'd react to a natural disaster.

Odds are pretty poorly, though.
 
Is there even a FEMA director right now? I know lots of agencies are in disarray.
Brock Long was confirmed in June IIRC.


Jesus CHRIST Why the fuck does this have to be so flipping difficult?

If you ever wonder why so much attention is being given to the Wisconsin gerrymandering SCOTUS case, think back on this question and the importance of the outcome of that case.

Partisan gerrymandering is an outright scourge on our democracy.
 

They also have (% are % chance Dems have to win the seat, not % they project Dems to win by)

CA-45: 44%
CA-48: 40%
AZ-02: 48%
TX-07: 46%
KS-03: 47%
IA-01: 47%
IL-06: 44%
PA-06: 41%
PA-08: 43%
NJ-07: 47%

That's +22 total, which would put them 2 seats from a majority.
 
By the way, with the announcement of an insurer filling the last marketplace hole in Ohio, Obamacare no longer has any bare counties that lack an option for coverage.

DIA5Z4iVoAAVj1C.jpg



Is he from the WWE?

Yes, his ring name is Le Generico Caucasian....

 

Ac30

Member
They also have (% are % chance Dems have to win the seat, not % they project Dems to win by)

CA-45: 44%
CA-48: 40%
AZ-02: 48%
TX-07: 46%
KS-03: 47%
IA-01: 47%
IL-06: 44%
PA-06: 41%
PA-08: 43%
NJ-07: 47%

That's +22 total, which would put them 2 seats from a majority.

Ugh.

Jesus CHRIST Why the fuck does this have to be so flipping difficult?

Let's hope Kennedy finds it equally ridiculous. Leading the generic ballot by 8% and still losing the house is obscene.
 
Labor is back, baby!

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/...t&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0

Challenging the Republican ascendance in states where labor once carried enormous sway, a prominent union plans to spend tens of millions of dollars during the 2018 campaign cycle to reverse the trend.

The Service Employees International Union, one of the largest and wealthiest unions in the United States with roughly 2 million members, will fund an extensive campaign over the next 14 months to elect politicians with labor-friendly stands on the minimum wage, unions and health care.

The effort will primarily aim at the traditionally industrial states of the Midwest and Rust Belt, where labor’s political influence has come under a furious assault from conservative forces in recent decades, culminating in President Trump’s electoral sweep of the traditionally Democratic states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Since 2010, four states in the region have enacted so-called right-to-work legislation that allows workers to opt out of paying fees to unions that bargain on their behalf. Elected leaders in several states have acted to block or reverse minimum-wage increases.

“If you think about what the No. 1 job of an elected official ought to be, it’s raising the standard of living of citizens they’re elected to represent,” said Scott Courtney, an executive vice president of the union, which will formally unveil the initiative on Labor Day. “But if you look at what has been happening in battle ground states in the Midwest, it’s just the opposite.”

The high-profile involvement of S.E.I.U., whose membership in the Midwest has steadily increased over much of the past generation, is in some sense a reflection of the changing economic landscape of the region, where health care has replaced manufacturing as the top employer in many states.

But in another way, the effort is a matter of survival: with industrial unions depleted by globalization and automation, the stronger position of public- and service-sector unions has made them bigger targets for the right. Several Republican governors elected since 2010 embraced legislation that would restrict what public-sector unions can bargain for or would rein in their members’ pensions.

Recent polling suggests a climate in which Democratic candidates may regain momentum. A recent NBC News/Marist poll showed Mr. Trump with a net negative approval rating of roughly 20 percentage points in the three typically Democratic states he carried. The Republican governors of Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin also appear to be unpopular, though term limits prevent the Michigan governor from running again.

Some public opinion experts believe that Republicans have overreached on the narrower issue of unions in particular.

“In Midwestern states, the battlegrounds, people really like unions,” said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster who has done work for unions, including the service employees. “That doesn’t mean they’re uncritical, but they like them, they cannot imagine a world without unions.”

The key to the union’s program for 2018, Mr. Courtney added, will be to expand the universe of voters who turn out on Election Day.

The S.E.I.U. conducted a pilot project during the 2016 campaign in which it canvassed groups of voters largely in two heavily African-American wards of Detroit using a small-scale version of the campaign it plans for the year ahead.

Over all, about 62 percent of voters the union talked to during the pilot project cast ballots in the presidential election, versus turnout of about 38 percent of voters who it did not talk to, according to data provided by the union.

Applying the same percentage to all of Detroit’s voters would have produced about 40,000 more total votes in 2016, an amount that would have almost certainly secured the state for Mrs. Clinton.

Two people briefed on the initiative said the overall budget would approach $100 million, though that figure includes a substantial portion of money that the union was already likely to spend in these states. Even so, the initiative ensures that the political spending will primarily support outreach to voters on key issues, which would not necessarily have been the case.
 
Charlottesville keeps on giving for the Trump brand...

David Fahrenthold‏Verified account
@Fahrenthold

Charity events planned at @realdonaldtrump's Mar-a-Lago, per season.
2013/2014: 45
2014/2015: 52
2015/2016: 43
2016/2017: 38
2017/2018: 6
 
I'd say the overall results are a good sign for Democrats. It's hard to say where we will be in 2018. However, I imagine Democrats chances will only continue to rise with Trump in charge. Heck even if they impeach Trump, it's still gonna wreck the GOP base in 2018.

In all honesty, I imagine Trump is one major disaster from the GOP fully turning in him. Whether it's a poorly handled natural disaster, Budget/Debt Ceiling/The Wall/Government shutdown shenanigans, or terrorist attack. I imagine once the budget plans blow up in the GOP/Trump's face, that they will be done with him. They will see that he can't accomplish any major policy goals and the only thing he was good for was a Conservative SC Justice.
 
David Fahrenthold‏Verified account
@Fahrenthold

Charity events planned at @realdonaldtrump's Mar-a-Lago, per season.
2013/2014: 45
2014/2015: 52
2015/2016: 43
2016/2017: 38
2017/2018: 6

That's too bad.

lol the SEIU also basically admits endorsing Hillary so early was a mistake.

Next time they should wait and see which candidate the Russians are running a psy-ops disinformation campaign against.

Oh, wait. It'll be which one is going to win the nomination.
 
jesus my brother is a miserable fuck.

He was like lets say trump gets impeached or close to it, he's going to bomb the senate and kill everyone and stay in power and then its nazi germany.

I'm like... da fuq, you sound like a crazy ass conspiracy theorist, like trump is some mastermind.

he's a fucking idiot, and your always negative, you didnt even vote shut up.

then he goes well if what your saying is true and his connections to russia is true its not a far stretch that hes going to bomb the senate.


jesus, I'm so sick of hearing him of all people talk about politics, I dont give a fuck about your opinion you didnt vote, you gave up your right to complain.

and he always says "them" i.e. some super powerful group in the government that helps trump and when you ask him who "them" is he is like.. "THEM"
/rant
 

Joe

Member
PoliSci professor draws an interesting comparison between Trump's first term as president and Bush's second term in 2005:

Brendan Nyhan @BrendanNyhan
10:33 PM · Aug 17, 2017
https://twitter.com/BrendanNyhan/status/898372343969480710
Trump's first term is similar to George W Bush's second term in his approval ratings and legislative situation. Consider the similarities

Trump's approval ratings are declining in a fairly consistent linear trend like Bush's during his 2nd term (& most of post-9/11 period).

And Trump, like George W. Bush, is being propped up by hyper-polarized approval ratings with high poll numbers among Republicans only.

Trump 36% approval - 79% Rs, 29% Is, 7% Ds. In mid-Nov. '05, GWB 37% - 80% Rs, 28% Is, 7% Ds

And Trump, like George W. Bush in 2004, narrowly won after an identity-based campaign that did not yield a clear policy mandate.

Both GWB and DT then pursued an unpopular bill with the Congressional GOP that ended in failure (Soc Sec private accounts / ACA repeal)

Now Trump, like Bush in late '05, is dead in the water, sinking in polls, party distancing itself from him, heading for bad midterm.

Bush is not like Trump. But his second term may be a better precedent for what we're seeing than what happened during Watergate.

Addendum: 9/11 may have masked incoherence of GOP & its agenda. Bush had nothing left after tax cuts & education. By August '01: stem cells.

The inability to coordinate on a governing agenda resurfaced after 9/11->Iraq->'04 election and is back with a vengeance now.

Addendum 2: Important point. Katrina + Iraq dramatized competence Qs for GWB. Trump obviously faced from beginning.

(He's very good to follow on Twitter if you use it)
 

Vixdean

Member
While Trump is an idiot who has no clue how the legislative process or really anything in DC works, it's sort of funny to hear McConnell and Ryan complaining about it considering neither one of them have ever passed any legislation of note. Other than saying no to everything for 8 years, their claim to fame is blocking Garland and passing a CR. They don't know dick about actually crafting and passing tough legislation either.
 
Did Bush win in 04 on identity based issues? The economy was fine and his approval numbers were okay. The country's approval towards Iraq hadn't quite cratered yet.
 
PoliSci professor draws an interesting comparison between Trump's first term as president and Bush's second term in 2005:

Brendan Nyhan @BrendanNyhan
10:33 PM · Aug 17, 2017
https://twitter.com/BrendanNyhan/status/898372343969480710


(He's very good to follow on Twitter if you use it)
Sounds about right.

The funny thing is Bush actually did have a vision for the country - he sold himself as the "compassionate conservative" and wanted to pass immigration reform and increased foreign aid as a way to reach out to minorities and make the party more inclusive. The base didn't want this. What the base did want is Trump's populist white nationalism - ban all the Muslims and Mexicans and replace Obamacare and coal jobs with magic - but this time, it's the establishment who wants nothing to do with it.

Did Bush win in 04 on identity based issues? The economy was fine and his approval numbers were okay. The country's approval towards Iraq hadn't quite cratered yet.
Can't underestimate the role gay marriage had in getting him elected. He probably would have won even without the party making a big deal out of it, but I'd say it was the defining wedge issue behind the war.
 

kirblar

Member
Did Bush win in 04 on identity based issues? The economy was fine and his approval numbers were okay. The country's approval towards Iraq hadn't quite cratered yet.
No he won primarily because Iraq hadn't crashed and burned yet and people didn't want to make a change.
 

kess

Member
Add the seats with a 45% higher chance of winning and you get 17.

40% chance of winning, 22, just two short.

35% chance of winning and we're at 30 for a 224-211 Dem majority.


That's only half of what we need - Democrats need to net 24 seats.

Meanwhile, there's a 99.99% chance Trump doesn't know what he is doing.

By the way, the Schaivo situation in early 2005 hurt Bush at least as much as the Trump's travel ban did. Lots of buyers remorse. It was the first step in peeling a lot of Republican leaning independents from Bush after the election.
 

Joe

Member
Sounds about right.

The funny thing is Bush actually did have a vision for the country - he sold himself as the "compassionate conservative" and wanted to pass immigration reform and increased foreign aid as a way to reach out to minorities and make the party more inclusive. The base didn't want this. What the base did want is Trump's populist white nationalism - ban all the Muslims and Mexicans and replace Obamacare and coal jobs with magic - but this time, it's the establishment who wants nothing to do with it.

There's also the now long-forgotten notion of 'George W. Bush the businessman' as the first US president with an MBA.


NYT (June 2000) | Bush, Harvard Business School And the Makings of a President
If he gets the job, George W. Bush would be the first president with a master's degree in business administration.
 

Zolo

Member
This has not stopped.

"I'm going to ban trans people from serving in the military, a policy with only 27% approval, bwahaha, WHAT SAY YOU DEBBIE STABENOW" - Trump (paraphrased)

It was weird how people in the WH thought that would be some big issue for Democrats to own. I think even most Republicans fall under 'I think anyone should be allowed to serve'.
 
It's really odd how they grab these weird niche issues nobody cares about and makes them to be the second coming. And then just like that, they forget they were ever an issue.

They've been doing it consistently

Well one of their consistent issues that never goes away is abortion. Stem Cell research at the time was a splinter from that central belief for them. IIRC, they made enough of a stink though, that scientists created different ways to harvest the fetal stem cells so abortions weren't the primary source. I would imagine that had a large effect on why the issue died but ... maybe not.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
It's really odd how they grab these weird niche issues nobody cares about and makes them to be the second coming. And then just like that, they forget they were ever an issue.

They've been doing it consistently

Ah, the "War on Christmas." That takes me back.
 
It was weird how people in the WH thought that would be some big issue for Democrats to own. I think even most Republicans fall under 'I think anyone should be allowed to serve'.
Someone did a national poll on the issue and there's not even one state with majority agreement with the trans ban. Not only that but it severely disarms one of the biggest justifications liberals had for supporting or at least being indifferent to Trump, "well at least he's not as bad as other Republicans on LGBT rights." Oh yes, he is.

In fact, that's often what's brought up when people talk about impeaching Trump and having Pence take his place. At this point, what's the difference?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom