Well it's Friday, someone has to be fired today.
-
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
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
Well it's Friday, someone has to be fired today.
This.
Box of Kittens
Banned
Well, you're certainly not going to change that if you're unwilling to invest in any statewide races there. I'm not saying you dump a ton of money in there and I'm not saying this will be anything other than a very difficult race for Jones.
What I am saying is that a variety of factors that wouldn't be present in an ordinary Alabama race give Jones a boost (bad opponent, bad political environment for Republicans), there's nothing else for the DSCC (which does not spend on House or school board races) to invest in this year, the marginal value of a single Senate seat is quite large (especially in such a closely-divided Senate) and the traditional strategy of pouring money into a narrow list of races the consultants deem winnable wastes money (by pumping money into races well past the point of diminishing returns, see GA-6) and leaves opportunities on the table.
Given all that, yeah, I think it's worth making a small investment in the race rather than say "we should invest everywhere, but not actually."
balladofwindfishes
Member
The Democrats held a senate seat in Alabama until Sessions won in 1997 after Heflin retired.
Which wasn't that long ago.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
That's like 9 years plus 9 months of trump which translates to an extra 20 years.
Fuck sessions though, seriously despise this POS guy.
IggyChooChoo
Member
Right, but that means Heflin last won in 1990, which is 27 years ago. A lot of old weird southern democrats have died off since 1990.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/swing-voters-and-elastic-states/
Massachusettes elasticity is 1.19. Alabama's elasticity is 0.67. This means that if the nation swings to one side by 10%, on average, Massachusettes will swing by 11.9, whereas Alabama would swing by 6.7%. That's a big difference! This is because Massachusettes has far, far more independents than Alabama.
Parties have limited resources to allocate for races. It'd be smarter, in 2017, to invest some of that money in Virginia's statewide races (17 of which are held by Republicans in Clinton-won areas!), where we can plausibly pick up multiple seats. State races aren't nearly as sexy as the nationwide races, but they are just as important!
Or even better yet -- save that money for 2018! 2018 is increasingly looking like a big blue wave, but a lot of the races are fundamentally tough for Democrats to win in. Invest in those states and districts! Don't invest in literally the second most inelastic state in the United States! I'll change my tune if a bunch of more polls say the election is close, but from what I've seen so far, this poll is a big outlier. You can't just ignore the bad polls.
@Plinko -- that's the attitude Democrats need! Under 6% Moore victory would be a great sign for Democrats! Unfortunately, a lot of people don't understand this.
Also @ people saying Democrats recently won in Alabama -- remember southern Democrats didn't die off until later 2000's! There were many ancestral democrats from before 1960. While the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a turning point for democrats in the south, it took a very long time for democrats to lose their institutional power there on the state level (Remember -- Georgia always elected a democrat governor from 1872-2003!) While many of them often voted republican in presidential elections, they were still willing to vote for the right democrat. Most of those ancestral democrats have died off, although democrats seem to be starting to make a recovery in the south (mostly in Georgia / North Carolina, but the trends could start to get better in most southern states as people get less racially polarized.)
whyamihere
Banned
@MysteryPollster
Trump approval bump fades in @surveymonkey tracking: 40 approve (-5), 57 disapprove (+4) https://www.surveymonkey.com/blog/2017/09/29/trump-approval-bump-fades/
womp
Aaron Strife
Banned
Bomp bomp.
The last time a Democrat won a statewide election in Alabama was 2008 for Public Service Commission President.
Last time a Republican won a statewide election before Brown won in Massachusetts was 2002, so you know. Precedence.
1) We're arguing the DSCC should invest in Alabama. They have nothing to do with the Virginia House of Delegates. That's the DLCC. These separate branches exist precisely so there's no bickering about whether a US Senate seat is more important than 10 State Senate seats. It's all a separate thing.
2) 2018's races are a ways off and many of our vulnerable Senate incumbents are running in states where Trump racked up similar numbers, if not significantly higher. Granted, those states are often more elastic like you say, but Alabama would serve as a good trial run.
3) Law of diminishing returns is a real thing. We're already likely to spend tens of millions of dollars on these other Senate races, doubling that amount isn't going to move the needle any further. The amount people want the DSCC to invest in AL-SEN seems pretty paltry anyway.
Think of all the money that was poured into GA-6, on paper the most winnable House special election this year. Spreading that money out to SC-5 or KS-4 probably wouldn't have closed the gap enough, but it could have! We never know unless we try, and it's not like the US Democratic Party is so strapped for cash that they can't invest a little token sum into a potential upset.
Nazgul_Hunter
Member
Special elections are weird though. If there was a time to go all in on Alabama it's on this one. Is it gonna be the only major election before 2018 no?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Oklahoma,_1990
Last time Oklahoma elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Mississippi,_1982
Last time Mississippi elected a Democrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alabama,_1992
Last time Alabama elected a Democrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Georgia,_1996
Last time Georgia elected a Democrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Louisiana,_2008
Last time Louisiana elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Carolina,_1998
Last time South Carolina elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Tennessee,_1990
Last time Tennessee elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Kentucky,_1992
Last time Kentucky elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Arizona,_1988
Last time Arizona elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_North_Carolina,_2008
Last time North Carolina elected a Democrat
Last time Oklahoma elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Mississippi,_1982
Last time Mississippi elected a Democrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alabama,_1992
Last time Alabama elected a Democrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Georgia,_1996
Last time Georgia elected a Democrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Louisiana,_2008
Last time Louisiana elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Carolina,_1998
Last time South Carolina elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Tennessee,_1990
Last time Tennessee elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Kentucky,_1992
Last time Kentucky elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Arizona,_1988
Last time Arizona elected a Democrat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_North_Carolina,_2008
Last time North Carolina elected a Democrat
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
I have this thought noodle floating through my head and want to see what the reaction is: what's stopping some set of liberal activists from copying the Russian Fake News strategy of divide and conquer through social media to suppress turnout and sew chaos? Why not fight fire with fire, or hell fire with napalm? It's not like this shit is illegal.
Simple answer is we don't/shouldn't need to. There are more Democrats + left leaning Independents out there than anything else. All liberals need to do is stop bickering among themselves (thanks Bernie), run good candidates, and execute a smart electoral strategy. Michelle wasn't wrong about going high, but we have to avoid self inflicted wounds.
Thank god its Fireday
IggyChooChoo
Member
I forgot Richard Shelby used to be a Democrat. Damn.
WiiredShawn
Member
What are liberal activists supposed to do, spread fake news about Trump being Hillary's bestest buddy?
Republican voters don't seem to be generally bothered by their politician's shittiness. In some ways, they're voting for these people because they're shitty. So you can spread propaganda about a liberal highlighting this or that character flaw, but it's hard to work that on conservatives when their constituents have few expectations of dignity and a penchant for self-delusion.
Maybe moderates would be swayed, but then you know conservatives would really push the "fake news" angle, hypocritical as it might be - which also doesn't seem to bother a lot of voters because Trump is president.
Divide and conquer works against the left because the left runs on inspiration, which is easy to deflate. The right runs on fear or hatred, which is why they'll always hold their nose and vote because in their mind the alternative is 100x worse (or, in a more flattering light, you could say that the right understands that elections have consequences which the left has a hard time grasping).
The other thing is that the fake news hounds found that the left (outside a certain section of activist leftists) is not susceptible to fake news. Fact-checking happens too fast before the story reaches anything like critical mass.
The other thing is that the fake news hounds found that the left (outside a certain section of activist leftists) is not susceptible to fake news. Fact-checking happens too fast before the story reaches anything like critical mass.
IggyChooChoo
Member
What would be effective? Say "Trump caught donating to Planned Parenthood" got spread around FB -- would GOP voters really care?
https://twitter.com/JeffYoung/status/913839976089096192
Also note, if the GOP had the votes, they would have voted on Graham-Cassidy even with a partial CBO score. It wasn't having or not having a score that will ever stop them, it is the political blowback that will be an issue (that a late CBO a score will still impact)
It's because there is Russia news dropping. These people love creating distractions.
Glad to see some clarification. I still don't trust the GOP or their tax plans (or their healthcare plans or any of their plans), of course.
Box of Kittens
Banned
I am well aware of the concept of elasticity and the particular problems it causes in the Deep South. Again, neither I, nor anyone else in this topic are expecting Jones to win. The DSCC's resources aren't so limited that they can't afford to put a little money into this race (and again, I'm not suggesting they spend big, just throw in a little that might, say, help the GOTV operation). I agree on the importance of state legislative races and in particular this year's elections in Virginia. I mean, it's a pretty common topic on conversation on this board. And I'm just going to point out that the "this race is unwinnable" attitude has historically led to Democrats not even fielding candidates in a large number of VA legislative races. Not to mention it isn't the DSCC's function to fund state legislative races.
There are also long term considerations at work here. If you keep writing off large swathes of the country, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy where voters are only hearing one side make their case, and losing an "unwinnable" district 60-40 instead of 80-20 may just be the difference between winning and losing, say, the governorship. Also, you need to be prepared for changes in the political environment. When a previously uncompetitive state/district suddenly becomes competitive due to realignment, you don't want to be caught with no organization and desperately playing catchup. Yes, I know Alabama won't be a purple state any time soon, but the point is you need to be prepared to compete everywhere because you never know when an opportunity will arise.
I also disagree with the notion of saving the money for the 2018 cycle, especially as the amounts I'm talking about are ultimately small potatoes. Even an unexpectedly close loss can help drive enthusiasm (and ultimately more donations) on the Dem side. We'll have plenty of money to spend in AZ and NV when the time comes.
Regarding polls of the race, I count four (one of which is a Google Consumer Survey). Two of them show a close race and two show Moore up big. Pretty hard to call any result an outlier when n=4. Yes, the polling taken in total says it's Moore's race to lose and Alabama is very unfriendly terrain (and no one is denying either of these things), but the facts taken in total say we shouldn't just be waving the white flag in this race.
Mercury Fred
Banned
I have thought about this quite a bit. I would love to get the rumor that DJT is the actual father of Ivanka's children to take off.
TheAbsolution
Member
Tom Price is a goner. He said something will definitely occur.
Greigor The Fellhand
Member
old whiteman, checks out
Aaron Strife
Banned
Man Price getting fired would be hilarious. Guy gave up a safe(ish) House seat just to be thrown under the bus when the President is a moron.
Like I can't believe how many Republicans ended their own careers for Donald Fucking Trump.
Price would be the first Secretary to vacate, right? I'm not counting Kelly since he became Chief of Staff, so it was a sideways move.
Like I can't believe how many Republicans ended their own careers for Donald Fucking Trump.
Price would be the first Secretary to vacate, right? I'm not counting Kelly since he became Chief of Staff, so it was a sideways move.
Mark Andrew
Member
Probably shouldnt have hired someone being investigated for insider trading if you expected ethicality.
Requirement for CBO score before vote being repealed apparently.
https://twitter.com/davidckamin/status/913825150080110592
https://twitter.com/davidckamin/status/913825150080110592
This is mostly false. If there's one lesson of the last two years besides "America has a lot of racists," it's that parties have a huge amount of money and candidates have an enormous capacity to raise small dollar donations off the Internet.
If there's a second lesson, as always, it's that money has diminishing returns, so giving a dollar to a candidate with none is probably worth ten times as much as giving a dollar to a candidate with a million.
Just abandon the idea that we have limited resources, because it is intrinsically tied up with the idea that it's only worth giving huge amounts of money to races. Both of these ideas are not just dumb, they're actively sabotaging the Democratic Party and depriving people in red states of even having the opportunity to vote for Democrats.
Nazgul_Hunter
Member
I would say corruption isn't really being thrown under the bus. He does look cartoonishly greedy though. Like he jumped straight out of a 1929 version of Monopoly
Him and Zinke. In Hillaryverse, Zinke would have been a Senator by January 2019. Now his career will be ended sometime before 2021 (next time Trump needs a scapegoat).
Pompeo's low profile enough that he could live through this, though.
Massachusetts has a Republican governor right now.
To be fair, three seconds is not too long ago.
Box of Kittens
Banned
Between Indiana being a red state and Lugar's bipartisan support we can't win that Senate seat. I wouldn't even bother fielding a candidate at all. We need to focus on the important races instead.
aspiegamer
Member
Uh. We only have 25 military helicopters and 5000 troops in PR? The hell? It's been over a week! The excuses they're still parading around today are day 1-2 material. Not day 9. Yeah, okay, it was way worse than anyone was anticipating a few days before it happened. You could have organized half the Atlantic fleet and a hundred thousand military police to patrol the place by now.
Who is we. Its almost as if a party made up of many people all who can focus on different important things that can be targeted by locality or issues they care about.
Imagine if Saban and the Alabama players took a knee.
Speaking of, they are currently working on overriding 60 of Bakers 162 line item vetoes in the budget.
Box of Kittens
Banned
Whoooooooosh
Deuce Deuce
Member
It take, like, takes time to clear roads, y'know.
*Looks up*
*is too late to see what it was*
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked