Support NeoGAF

[Aaron Strife]

It's behind a paywall, but Republican insiders are a lot more bearish on the Senate map next November:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/657150/republicans-lower-their-senate-expectations

• Only McCaskill, Donnelly and Heitkamp (thanks for the endorsement!) are considered vulnerable
• Hoping to put Manchin, Tester and Nelson's seats in play but they're not quite there yet
• Casey and Baldwin's seats are reach targets, Brown and Stabenow apparently aren't on the radar (nor is any other Democrat mentioned)
• Arizona (Flake) and Nevada (Heller) very competitive

I mean, anything anyone here could have told you, but reassuring that everyone seems to be on the same page.

I'd consider Baldwin more vulnerable than Nelson in a vacuum, but Nelson has the honor of seemingly being the only Democrat next year to face a decent opponent, so I get the logic.

 

[Box of Kittens]

This is why local elections are always more volatile. People use different metrics for electing Governors and Reps than Presidents and Senators. I live in VT and we haven't voted for a Republican in the General since what, Reagan? Nixon maybe? Yet it's not uncommon for Republicans to win Gubernatorial elections. A lot of people will vote for different parties for their own government than they will for the national government. VT overwhelmingly votes for Democratic candidates for President, but Phil Scott still won the Gubernatorial race.

Spoiler

I voted for Scott.

Vermont voted for Bush in 1988, although it voted more Democratic than the nation as a whole and was part of Dukakis's last ditch "18-state strategy."

When Vermont went for Clinton in 1992, it was only the second time it had gone Democratic ever. The previous time being LBJ in 1964. They even voted against FDR all four times. Their loyalty to the Republican Party was strong enough that they were one of only two states to stick with Taft in the three-way election of 1912, and before the GOP was founded they were safe Whig. Clinton's victory in the state was treated as indicative of his success in states that normally vote Republican, but Vermont's trip from Solid Republican to Solid Democratic was pretty quick.

 

[Teggy]

What the what

 

[Spoiled Milk]

I know everyone's already agreed on what's going to happen this winter but can you all please at least sympathize with me when I say I'm so confused about why Trump killed DACA and then decided he's going to sign it?

 

[Box of Kittens]

Good god, why did Hillary have to acknowledge Verrit? Everything about all that has been a disaster.

I'm not one to say Hillary needs to disappear or anything like that, but she needs to realize the ways in which she is divisive and that endorsing media outlets isn't likely to do any good. I suppose it doesn't matter when it's as ill-conceived as this, but still.

It's behind a paywall, but Republican insiders are a lot more bearish on the Senate map next November:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/657150/republicans-lower-their-senate-expectations

• Only McCaskill, Donnelly and Heitkamp (thanks for the endorsement!) are considered vulnerable
• Hoping to put Manchin, Tester and Nelson's seats in play but they're not quite there yet
• Casey and Baldwin's seats are reach targets, Brown and Stabenow apparently aren't on the radar (nor is any other Democrat mentioned)
• Arizona (Flake) and Nevada (Heller) very competitive

I mean, anything anyone here could have told you, but reassuring that everyone seems to be on the same page.

I'd consider Baldwin more vulnerable than Nelson in a vacuum, but Nelson has the honor of seemingly being the only Democrat next year to face a decent opponent, so I get the logic.

Yeah, as unfavorable as the map is for Democrats, Trump is going to drag Republican chances down badly. I remember an article from early this year about Elizabeth Warren's supposed vulnerability (lol) which discussed Republican prospects for getting to 60 in 2018. My thought was that 60 would be a potentially realistic goal if Hillary Clinton were president, but with Trump?

 

[metalslimer]

Who the fuck asked for Veritt? This is the first time I've been on the Hillary should have just kept quiet on that one train, or she can do what she wants but what a dumb idea.

 

[Mike M]

What the what

What was Zaid representing Mensch on?

 

[Dan]

Tom "DNC Chair Needs To Be A Full Time Job" Perez is taking teaching job at Brown. Yeesh.

http://bit.ly/2gNj2M6

Meh, this is one of fluff gigs universities and the people take them simply use to boost their credentials.

Titled "Governance and Leadership in Challenging Times," the group will meet for an hour and a half seven times this semester. During those sessions, Perez will help students see how theory informs practice as they explore compromise, ethical issues, and conflict resolution with guest speakers "from the trenches." Speakers will include Denis McDonough, former Chief of Staff to President Obama; Gina Raimondo, Governor of Rhode Island; Michael Steele, former Chair of the Republican National Committee; Sharon Block, former member of the National Labor Relations Board; and Chris Lu, former senior aide to Senator and President Obama. Though participants will not receive course credit, there will be suggested readings, and Perez will hold informal lunches and office hours. Several public events will also take place.

So let's be real, he might spend a whopping 7 days actually doing anything related to this study group.

 

[Crocodile]

I don't really understand what Verritt is and I think I like keeping it that way. Seems something easy to ignore if its stupid

Tom "DNC Chair Needs To Be A Full Time Job" Perez is taking teaching job at Brown. Yeesh.

http://bit.ly/2gNj2M6

Why? I'm not sure I get this. Even if the time commitment isn't obscene the optics are so bad >_<

SMH

It's behind a paywall, but Republican insiders are a lot more bearish on the Senate map next November:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/657150/republicans-lower-their-senate-expectations

• Only McCaskill, Donnelly and Heitkamp (thanks for the endorsement!) are considered vulnerable
• Hoping to put Manchin, Tester and Nelson's seats in play but they're not quite there yet
• Casey and Baldwin's seats are reach targets, Brown and Stabenow apparently aren't on the radar (nor is any other Democrat mentioned)
• Arizona (Flake) and Nevada (Heller) very competitive

I mean, anything anyone here could have told you, but reassuring that everyone seems to be on the same page.

I'd consider Baldwin more vulnerable than Nelson in a vacuum, but Nelson has the honor of seemingly being the only Democrat next year to face a decent opponent, so I get the logic.

I don't dispute this but I'd feel better after the actual midterms. It seemed we couldn't lose the WI, PA and IN Senate races last year until we did >_<

 

[pigeon]

I don't really understand what Verritt is and I think I like keeping it that way. Seems something easy to ignore if its stupid

tl;dr Peter Daou started a blog

 

[Teggy]

What was Zaid representing Mensch on?

People have sued her for calling them Russian agents (which is her basic reflex move any time someone criticizes her).

 

[Box of Kittens]

Daniel Biss just shot himself in the foot.

I don't know how much the rest of you know about Illinois politics (I'm an expert), but honor and shame are huge parts of it...

Seriously though I doubt he recovers from Eagletoning himself. He was already something of an underdog candidate anyway but he at least had a pretty clear lane he was going for as the "Bernie candidate" (and then using that to get himself in position to consolidate the "Not-Pritzker" vote). But now that he's pissed off the DSA it's hard to see how that's going to work. And trying to reposition himself as the competent technocrat (which is much more in line with his record and pre-gubernatorial run brand anyway) is dicey when the biggest decision of his campaign showed him to have either improperly vetted his running mate, or simply not understood the impact of the selection.

The real question is now if anyone other than Pritzker can capitalize. Kennedy would seem to be the natural beneficiary as the most prominent non-Pritzker candidate, but I still have a hard time seeing him maintain his position when his last name is pretty much all he has going for him, and besides he's running to the right of Pritzker so I don't see Bernie voters flocking to him. I suppose this might open the door for Pawar to become the "Bernie candidate," but he needs to really improve his fundraising if he's going to have any chance.

 

[whyamihere]

It's really only existed since 2010, when it was redistricted pretty significantly (although this made it more conservative).

It isn't largely rural at all, whyamihere, unless you mean by geography. The majority of the population is in once-rural areas that are now pricey Seattle suburbs. The conservatives here are very moderate and not Trump supporters. I expect a fairly easy Dem win in this environment.

I meant by geography -- that's why I said land doesn't vote. I think if Dems don't win, then it's a terrible night for them. They have a very clear advantage.

It's behind a paywall, but Republican insiders are a lot more bearish on the Senate map next November:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/657150/republicans-lower-their-senate-expectations

• Only McCaskill, Donnelly and Heitkamp (thanks for the endorsement!) are considered vulnerable
• Hoping to put Manchin, Tester and Nelson's seats in play but they're not quite there yet
• Casey and Baldwin's seats are reach targets, Brown and Stabenow apparently aren't on the radar (nor is any other Democrat mentioned)
• Arizona (Flake) and Nevada (Heller) very competitive

I mean, anything anyone here could have told you, but reassuring that everyone seems to be on the same page.

I'd consider Baldwin more vulnerable than Nelson in a vacuum, but Nelson has the honor of seemingly being the only Democrat next year to face a decent opponent, so I get the logic.

Heitkamp is only vulnerable because McConnell is obsessed with beating her. But they see the same numbers we do.

 

[Maengun1]

It's behind a paywall, but Republican insiders are a lot more bearish on the Senate map next November:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/657150/republicans-lower-their-senate-expectations

• Only McCaskill, Donnelly and Heitkamp (thanks for the endorsement!) are considered vulnerable
• Hoping to put Manchin, Tester and Nelson's seats in play but they're not quite there yet
• Casey and Baldwin's seats are reach targets, Brown and Stabenow apparently aren't on the radar (nor is any other Democrat mentioned)
• Arizona (Flake) and Nevada (Heller) very competitive

I mean, anything anyone here could have told you, but reassuring that everyone seems to be on the same page.

I'd consider Baldwin more vulnerable than Nelson in a vacuum, but Nelson has the honor of seemingly being the only Democrat next year to face a decent opponent, so I get the logic.

Sounds good to me.

Re: Stabenow, I really hope Kid Rock keeps teasing a run but then ultimately doesn't (which seems the likeliest scenario rn tbh), when it comes to the actual election all the Republicans will be like "who is THIS bore?"

I would be so, so, so happy if through some freak miracle wave we ended up with 51 senate seats somehow. God that would be delicious. Let a couple supreme court seats open up then and let them stay open.

 

[Box of Kittens]

On the one hand I don't really think this Perez thing is that big a deal but at the same time there's an awful lot of indicators that he doesn't really "get" the DNC's problems.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

What the what

ah fuck yea, this is my drug

tl;dr Peter Daou started a blog

tumblr

 

[Spoiled Milk]

ah fuck yea, this is my drug

Yay, you're a member again

 

[The Chosen One]

Trump is getting A LOT of bad press about the debt ceiling deal.

Is it too late for Trump to reverse his decision?

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Is it too late for Trump to reverse his decision?

If the deal really includes DACA then it's already a reversal

 

[jack_package_200]

Trump is getting A LOT of bad press about the debt ceiling deal.

Is it too late for Trump to reverse his decision?

His usual sycophants love him no matter what.

I don't think he minds a few headlines if he got to stick it to Mitch and Paul.

 

[neurosisxeno]

:v

I've met Phil Scott, and I don't consider him exceedingly dangerous from a political perspective. Although I wish he would just fucking legalize weed. I've met him a few times and he is a incredibly nice guy--also in a distant way he is a friend of my family on one side. Sue Minter I was not very familiar with and I wasn't sold on her 2 Free Years of College Plan. She was firmly behind Scott from the beginning so her losing by 9.9999 points instead of 10 probably didn't matter much.

He wasn't the only Republican I voted for, but the other ones I had legitimate reasoning behind as well--knew one and greatly respected the platform of another a socially liberal Republican (pro gay rights and pro choice).

 

[leroidys]

It's really only existed since 2010, when it was redistricted pretty significantly (although this made it more conservative).

It isn't largely rural at all, whyamihere, unless you mean by geography. The majority of the population is in once-rural areas that are now pricey Seattle suburbs. The conservatives here are very moderate and not Trump supporters. I expect a fairly easy Dem win in this environment.

Literally none of these places are wealthy Seattle suburbs. Sammammish and Issaquah are wealthy Bellevue suburbs if anything, and Bellevue skews much more Republican than the west side in general. Then you have Wenatchee, Ellensburg, Chelan and Auburn which are rural.

I meant by geography -- that's why I said land doesn't vote. I think if Dems don't win, then it's a terrible night for them. They have a very clear advantage.



Heitkamp is only vulnerable because McConnell is obsessed with beating her. But they see the same numbers we do.

How do they have a clear advantage in a non-presidential election when they only went for Hillary Clinton by 3 points against Donald Fucking Trump?

The Dem apparatus is terrible in Washington. Can't even hold the senate in one of the most liberal states in the country.


Not saying they won't pull it out, but this is nowhere near the slam dunk you guys are making it out to be.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Little nugget from that NJ article: Donnelly apparently is doing well in private polling on both sides. Seems he's maintaining decent bipartisan support.

 

[Teggy]

Trump is getting A LOT of bad press about the debt ceiling deal.

Is it too late for Trump to reverse his decision?

If Hannity and Fox and Friends are on board he probably won't know about anyone else's opinion.

 

[jack_package_200]

If Hannity and Fox and Friends are on board he probably won't know about anyone else's opinion.

If Lou Dobbs is anything to go by, they will say that Trump will do anything to get the job done including side stepping dead weight like congressional republican leaders.

 

[Sirpopopop]

I've met Phil Scott, and I don't consider him exceedingly dangerous from a political perspective. Although I wish he would just fucking legalize weed. I've met him a few times and he is a incredibly nice guy--also in a distant way he is a friend of my family on one side. Sue Minter I was not very familiar with and I wasn't sold on her 2 Free Years of College Plan. She was firmly behind Scott from the beginning so her losing by 9.9999 points instead of 10 probably didn't matter much.

He wasn't the only Republican I voted for, but the other ones I had legitimate reasoning behind as well--knew one and greatly respected the platform of another a socially liberal Republican (pro gay rights and pro choice).

-Is for bullshit tough on crime measures.
-Vetoed legal marijuana legislation. (well this isn't too bad, per se, but combined with bullshit tough on crime measures, well...)
-Wants insurance to cross state lines.
-Not an environmentalist. (no carbon tax. waffled on whether global warming is man-made)

Yeah no. Rather vote the Democrat, unless they are really corrupt.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Good news about Scott - You get another chance next year!

 

[neurosisxeno]

Good news about Scott - You get another chance next year!

That was the other factor. I'm voting against him now because the overwhelming consensus is VT wants legalized marijuana for recreational use, and his "requirements" are completely unreasonable. He's managed to piss off the left and right in VT in record time too, so I imagine any solid challenger will take his job.

I know it's silly, but I also hoped being Lt. Gov under Shumlin would soften his views a bit, but I was absolutely wrong. So I won't be voting for him again.

 

[ctothej]

On the one hand I don't really think this Perez thing is that big a deal but at the same time there's an awful lot of indicators that he doesn't really "get" the DNC's problems.

Agreed. Starting to wish we had Ellison.

 

[BoboBrazil]

Agreed. Starting to wish we had Ellison.

Ellison is co-chair. Perez is giving him equal input.

 

[wutwutwut]

The next President of the US is guaranteed a Nobel Peace Prize. They will probably get two since Obama got one for not being Bush, and we'd all take Bush right now.

 

[whyamihere]

How do they have a clear advantage in a non-presidential election when they only went for Hillary Clinton by 3 points against Donald Fucking Trump?

The Dem apparatus is terrible in Washington. Can't even hold the senate in one of the most liberal states in the country.


Not saying they won't pull it out, but this is nowhere near the slam dunk you guys are making it out to be.

I did not say it was a slam dunk. I said that if Dems can't take this seat, then it's a terrible night for Democrats and the entire party should rethink their entire reason for being. Also, this seat went to Obama by 2 points against Mitt fucking Romney. A Republican who won the presidency did not get blown out of the water and actually did well in some areas. I'm sorry that this seat did not go to Clinton by 70 points, but that's the reality of almost every single seat in the country.

I also think this is another case of people fundamentally misunderstanding the boringness of their own state and the ebbs and flows of midterms and how so much of this is tied to presidential favorables. Maybe it's because we've had a Democratic president for 8 years and people don't understand how midterms work.

Anyways, it seems like the GOP wants to nominate Dino Rossi, so by decree, he cannot win. Case closed.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Tom "DNC Chair Needs To Be A Full Time Job" Perez is taking teaching job at Brown. Yeesh.

http://bit.ly/2gNj2M6

I have absolutely zero confidence in this man

Ellison is co-chair. Perez is giving him equal input.

It's basically an honorary position. He can give input but Perez doesn't have to listen. Ellison was ready to resign his seat to take the position. But he still is in congress so he's not putting the time into this he would have otherwise

 

[ErasureAcer]

Perez should resign.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Meh, this is one of fluff gigs universities and the people take them simply use to boost their credentials.

So let's be real, he might spend a whopping 7 days actually doing anything related to this study group.

I personally would call into question a person's judgement if they were concerned about boosting their resume while currently having a job in which millions of lives and potentially the future fate of the free world depends on him being good at.

 

[Takuhi]

Not saying they won't pull it out, but this is nowhere near the slam dunk you guys are making it out to be.

I doubt Reichert would have quit if his polling hadn't shown him he was dead in the water. And when he did, he himself said it would be "hard for a Republican to hold the seat."

It's not a slam dunk, especially if it's going to be one of the current some-guy candidates against Dino Rossi, but it's a very solid Lean D opportunity.

 

[Sirpopopop]

I get quite a few of those emails from Ellison as well as Perez.

From the debates, I liked Mayor Pete. Perez & Ellison never "wowed" me. Especially Perez talking about policy on Israel during one of the debates.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I doubt Reichert would have quit if his polling hadn't shown him he was dead in the water. And when he did, he himself said it would be "hard for a Republican to hold the seat."

It's not a slam dunk, especially if it's going to be one of the current some-guy candidates against Dino Rossi, but it's a very solid Lean D opportunity.

I mean, I'd call it a Tossup, but it's a top 10 seat for sure. If we lose it, we're probably having a bad night.

 

[leroidys]

I also think this is another case of people fundamentally misunderstanding the boringness of their own state and the ebbs and flows of midterms and how so much of this is tied to presidential favorables. Maybe it's because we've had a Democratic president for 8 years and people don't understand how midterms work

Could you be any more condescending? I'm correcting the factually false information and irrational exuberance in here and giving context. Ive seen enough hackneyed political prognostications to know that you're not Nostradamus.

 

[ErasureAcer]

CNN has Clinton's book.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-what-happened/index.html

She doesn't understand why she's a lightning rod but presumes her gender is part of the reason.

SMH.

You're a politician Hillary. You live the part changing tone and stances to whomever you're speaking to. It's not personal...you're as dense as many of your ilk. You do however go beyond some colleagues of yesteryear because it's hard to say you believe in anything. Marriage is a "sacred bond" between a man and a woman and yet a few years later you say you're a champion for LGBT rights and always have been! Your drastic swings of opinion are not fit for the moniker of "Queen" unless "Mad" is right before it. Your desire to be loved is a tragic lesson to all who watch: be yourself and not the clown that plays a roll for whatever crowd is still willing to watch. You're an actress, fake, and people see right through your act. You're not dynamic, you're what everyone hates about politics and politicians. That is the reason people don't like you. It's ironic you were defeated by a clown. I guess people want the real clown, not the fake one.

 

[bananas]

CNN has Clinton's book.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-what-happened/index.html

She doesn't understand why she's a lightning rod but presumes her gender is part of the reason.

SMH.

You're a politician Hillary. You live the part changing tone and stances to whomever you're speaking to. It's not personal...you're as dense as many of your ilk. You do however go beyond some colleagues of yesteryear because it's hard to say you believe in anything. Marriage is a "sacred bond" between a man and a woman and yet a few years later you say you're a champion for LGBT rights and always have been! Your drastic swings of opinion are not fit for the moniker of "Queen" unless "Mad" is right before it. Your desire to be loved is a tragic lesson to all who watch: be yourself and not the clown that plays a roll for whatever crowd is still willing to watch. You're an actress, fake, and people see right through your act. You're not dynamic, you're what everyone hatea about politics and politicians. That is the reason people don't like you.

Wow. Real hot take there, bro. &#128293;

 

[Suikoguy]

CNN has Clinton's book.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-what-happened/index.html

She doesn't understand why she's a lightning rod but presumes her gender is part of the reason.

SMH.

You're a politician Hillary. You live the part changing tone and stances to whomever you're speaking to. It's not personal...you're as dense as many of your ilk. You do however go beyond some colleagues of yesteryear because it's hard to say you believe in anything. Marriage is a "sacred bond" between a man and a woman and yet a few years later you say you're a champion for LGBT rights and always have been! Your drastic swings of opinion are not fit for the moniker of "Queen" unless "Mad" is right before it. Your desire to be loved is a tragic lesson to all who watch: be yourself and not the clown that plays a roll for whatever crowd is still willing to watch. You're an actress, fake, and people see right through your act. You're not dynamic, you're what everyone hates about politics and politicians. That is the reason people don't like you. It's ironic you were defeated by a clown. I guess people want the real clown, not the fake one.

An unprovoked anti-Clinton diatribe, in September of 2017. Amazing.

the very definition of

Just replace eating crackers with writing a book.

Could you be any more condescending? I'm correcting the factually false information and irrational exuberance in here and giving context. Ive seen enough hackneyed political prognostications to know that you're not Nostradamus.

If you found that condescending, I highly suggest you don't engage in any conversations with Crab. His superior European intellect is no match for us Americans.

 

[Officerrob]

CNN has Clinton's book.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/06/politics/hillary-clinton-what-happened/index.html

She doesn't understand why she's a lightning rod but presumes her gender is part of the reason.

SMH.

You're a politician Hillary. You live the part changing tone and stances to whomever you're speaking to. It's not personal...you're as dense as many of your ilk. You do however go beyond some colleagues of yesteryear because it's hard to say you believe in anything. Marriage is a "sacred bond" between a man and a woman and yet a few years later you say you're a champion for LGBT rights and always have been! Your drastic swings of opinion are not fit for the moniker of "Queen" unless "Mad" is right before it. Your desire to be loved is a tragic lesson to all who watch: be yourself and not the clown that plays a roll for whatever crowd is still willing to watch. You're an actress, fake, and people see right through your act. You're not dynamic, you're what everyone hates about politics and politicians. That is the reason people don't like you. It's ironic you were defeated by a clown. I guess people want the real clown, not the fake one.

Jesus man, what is wrong with you?

 

[Future Foundation]

Jesus man, what is wrong with you?

He's...had a history with Hillary.

 

[pigeon]

An unprovoked anti-Clinton diatribe, in September of 2017. Amazing.

the very definition of

Just replace eating crackers with writing a book.



If you found that condescending, I highly suggest you don't engage in any conversations with Crab. His superior European intellect is no match for us Americans.

This random Crab swipe is a little out of nowhere. He hasn't even posted in the thread in hours!

 

[Deleted member 231381]

This random Crab swipe is a little out of nowhere. He hasn't even posted in the thread in hours!

Even worse, that was a pretty racist comment. My superior intellect has absolutely nothing to do with the fact I'm European.

 

[bananas]

Even worse, that was a pretty racist comment. My superior intellect has absolutely nothing to do with the fact I'm European.

It's because you're a crab. We all know what's up. &#129408;

 

[neurosisxeno]

It's because you're a crab. We all know what's up. &#55358;&#56704;

The TRUE Master Race.

It's best to just ignore ErasureAcer. His haterection for Hillary Clinton knows no limits.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I wonder if the debt ceiling "deal" will effect his approval numbers

 

[neurosisxeno]

I wonder if the debt ceiling "deal" will effect his approval numbers

If it goes down as detailed I see no way his base isn't pissed.