• 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 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyways, I bet that Northam wins 52/47/1 and you all freak out until the end of the night when NoVA comes in.
Tuesday, November 7, 2017

News: With 50% of the vote in, Gillespie clings to a fragile 1% lead

You, me and Box of Kittens: Actually this is pretty good fo-

Rest of PoliGAF:

giphy.gif
 

kirblar

Member
Hillary’s failure always scares me on undecideds now
It's VA. We were basically the state that Hillary's campaign was banking on the rest of the country looking like. (Unfortunately, the rest of the country is not a former red state w/ only 43% native-born residents that's quickly going blue due to an influx of outsiders.)
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
No vote on G-C bill confirmed now.
It's dead folks, pack it up.

https://twitter.com/byrdinator/status/912738202129190913

http://www.thedailybeast.com/senate...ir-last-obamacare-repeal-bill-before-the-vote

"The decision was a joint one between Lindsey and Bill and the other two sponsors and also the leader that if the votes are not there, not to have the vote, but not to give up," said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS). "We're going to try to do this in some form in this session of Congress."

Looking forward to seeing that, Pat.

I mean, you already had a bipartisan group working on it until your leader had you take the ball and go home.

The CNN special must have went great.

If democrats were republicans, today's talking points would have been all about Bernie saving the ACA.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
That's built into expectations.

The only professed no vote I have accepted is Collins'. That almost even strikes me as unreasonably optimistic.

Murkowski has been a no all this time. She just didn't say anything because last time Trump called and bullied her, and she's probably had enough of that garbage.
 
Graham says he’s going to attempt to pass it through regular order, which will never happen but could eat up a few months of the GOP’s time. So I’ll take it.
 

Teggy

Member
So uh. Is there any particular reason Trump continues to insist the PR response is so awesome? I assume it's because his advisors tell him it's going great, because by any media accounts I've seen for this past week there's like zero federal presence there yet. CNN went to the second-largest city and they were asked if they were FEMA when they arrived because it was the first people who had come in. He mentioned next week as the first chance after first responder work, but there are like no first responders to get in the way of.

I'm sure he'll be received warmly, in that there are no power or other basic services on most of the island so the news will never reach people that Trump is visiting and the temperatures will be high.


Edit: Trump: "All I do is work"

Because he lies? He lies all the time about every little thing. Notice he never mentions a single name? Just “many people are saying.”
 

dramatis

Member
Well, some technically non-political good news about Virginia is that they're taking threats to their election systems pretty seriously.

Learning 2016's Lessons, Virginia Prepares Election Cyberdefenses
One of the most drastic steps was a decision by the Virginia Board of Elections earlier this month to order 22 counties and towns to adopt all new paper-backed voting machines before November. The board decided that the paperless electronic equipment they had been using was vulnerable to attack and should be replaced.

[...]

Bjerke says this should make voters more confident that the election is secure, although he admits in his small town — which has only 10,000 registered voters — most people believe the threat of a foreign nation hacking their system is pretty remote.

"Hey, we don't have to worry about it. It's not like they're going to target us," he says many voters think. But, he adds, "unfortunately, we've seen localities get targeted."

He notes a leaked National Security Agency report that Russian intelligence agencies sent malicious e-mails last year to more than 100 local election offices as part of a phishing attack. There's no evidence any of those offices were compromised.

Then this summer, hackers at a convention in Las Vegas easily broke into some of the paperless voting machines used in Virginia, which is one reason the state banned them so abruptly.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
I think PR statehood will happen in our lifetimes

Didn't PR vote it down multiple times?

Graham says he’s going to attempt to pass it through regular order, which will never happen but could eat up a few months of the GOP’s time. So I’ll take it.

They must believe that they can get McCain on board by going through normal order, and can then make it conservative enough to get Paul on board. Voila, you get your 50+1. Basically, prepare for a repeat in early 2018, which will be much harder to stop.
 

Teggy

Member
They should switch back to the mechanical machines with the levers and curtain, not just because they can’t be hacked, but because they are the all time GOAT voting machine.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Graham says he’s going to attempt to pass it through regular order, which will never happen but could eat up a few months of the GOP’s time. So I’ll take it.

This is what they should have done last time.
 
Didn't PR vote it down multiple times?

Things have changed. Also their last vote was weird, and you could interpret that they they wanted statehood. But a straight up or down vote is needed now.

They must believe that they can get McCain on board by going through normal order, and can then make it conservative enough to get Paul on board. Voila, you get your 50+1. Basically, prepare for a repeat in early 2018, which will be much harder to stop.

IMO repeal in 2018 is much more difficult.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
IMO repeal in 2018 is much more difficult.

And stupid, considering the run-up to the mid-term elections is right there. They'll only end up hurting themselves more.

Which I'm fine with, but it makes no logical sense.
 
The non-euclidean monstrosity of GC isn't going to get a vote?

That which is not dead may eternal lie.

At least the good guys earned a reprieve.
 
Why? The worst very rarely ever happens. So you've just done a bunch of worrying for nothing.

The worst has been progressively happening since 2010, though. First, they took the house. Then the Senate. Then the Presidency, which then allowed them to steal a Supreme Court seat.

They'll maintain power in 2018, extend it in the Senate in all likelihood, and who knows how Trump and the DOJ will try to stifle voting in 2020.

The worst is a given until the next time young people care enough to vote. When that happens, I can afford myself the luxury of being optimistic less pessimistic.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
The worst has been progressively happening since 2010, though. First, they took the house. Then the Senate. Then the Presidency, which then allowed them to steal a Supreme Court seat.

They'll maintain power in 2018, extend it in the Senate in all likelihood, and who knows how Trump and the DOJ will try to stifle voting in 2020.

The worst is a given until the next time young people care enough to vote. When that happens, I can afford myself the luxury of being optimistic less pessimistic.

Neither of those is guaranteed. We have already seen races with like a 20-point swing. Right now the average democrat lead in Congressional polling is around 8 points.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Didn't PR vote it down multiple times?



They must believe that they can get McCain on board by going through normal order, and can then make it conservative enough to get Paul on board. Voila, you get your 50+1. Basically, prepare for a repeat in early 2018, which will be much harder to stop.
If Trump ends the CSR subsidies, can it make it an easier sell?
 
Neither of those is guaranteed. We have already seen races with like a 20-point swing. Right now the average democrat lead in Congressional polling is around 8 points.

It's going to take well over 10 point swings across the board to make up the ground. Democrats need 24 seats in the House, and there weren't 24 seats even within 10 points in 2016. The 24th closest seat I found (courtesy of Google data) was 12.8%. And Democrats are going to have to do it in a year when the voter base is older and whiter, if history of midterm voting patterns is any indication.

Good luck. I'm not holding my breath thinking it will happen.
 

DTC

Member
It's going to take well over 10 point swings across the board to make up the ground. Democrats need 24 seats in the House, and there weren't 24 seats even within 10 points in 2016. The 24th closest seat I found (courtesy of Google data) was 12.8%. And Democrats are going to have to do it in a year when the voter base is older and whiter, if history of midterm voting patterns is any indication.

Good luck. I'm not holding my breath thinking it will happen.

Lol, that's not how swings work. If we get 8% in 2018, which is +9% better than 2016, we're not gonna get +9% in every district, because some districts esp in places like Washington DC, NYC, etc. are already pretty much maxed out for democrats.The biggest swings will be in districts that were more republican (but still competitive) on average.

Also, our candidates should generally be higher quality than in 2016 because a lot more people are running, good candidates see they actually have a chance of winning so they're incentive to run, etc.

Also I can't wait to see people poop their pants when Northam only wins by a few % pts and say 2018 is doomed. That's like saying because we lose the safe blue gubernatorial state of Massachutes in 2018, dems are never gonna win again. The reality is gubernatorial races tend to be fairly different from the national environment, although still related.
 
The worst has been progressively happening since 2010, though. First, they took the house. Then the Senate. Then the Presidency, which then allowed them to steal a Supreme Court seat.

They'll maintain power in 2018, extend it in the Senate in all likelihood, and who knows how Trump and the DOJ will try to stifle voting in 2020.

The worst is a given until the next time young people care enough to vote. When that happens, I can afford myself the luxury of being optimistic less pessimistic.

You do this in every thread for everything.

You have a theory, for example, "if young people don't vote, we can't win." From this theory, you find the data that backs this up, IE, the last two midterms we've lost, young people didn't vote, and then extend it out to fulfill your hypothesis, "not only are we not going to regain power, we're actually going to lose more power." Because young people don't vote. Not based on anything else, just this one bullet point you happen to have the bar charts for.

But this ignores 2006, coincidentally never mentioned by you (where young people also didn't vote), and that the trend has always been that the opposition to the president does better in midterms for various reasons that aren't "young people don't vote in midterms." Young people never vote. They never have. And yet liberals have found a way to win many, many, many times over the course of our history.

The same thing with healthcare
"The GOP unanimously supporters repealing the ACA!" and find a poll showing "generic repeal" is supported by 60%. While no actual repeal has ever polled over 50% for the GOP. But that's just ignored because everything is terrible and it's always terrible and just roll over and die right now I guess, might as well, right? See, the GOP supports the repeal!

You find this to be rational, I just find it as cherry picking data to support ridiculous pessimism.
 

Zona

Member
Pessimism used as an excuse to not try and improve things is shitty, but that's never been my personal brand of pessimism. One should always do ones damnedest to improve matters. Pessimism to me just means if thighs do go badly I was expecting it and have the mild comfort of being right, and if things go well I get to be pleasantly surprised.

The Shaw quote seems good here, "Both optimists and pessimists contribute to society. The optimist invents the aeroplane, the pessimist the parachute.”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom