Senate Election Thread (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    One thing I'm curious about is if there indication of any significant group of people that are voting this year that may not have voted in the past or that doesn't vote in large numbers normally? Significant enough to not show up in polls but make a difference?
     
    MT15 said:
    This would be the second time I’ve seen a clip of him on Fox begging for money. He feels entitled to keep his seat, seemingly, and thinks his hypocrisy will go unnoticed. The polling trend isn’t in his favor, and although he might still keep his seat, I fervently wish he will not. His contempt for his constituents is obvious.
    Click to expand...
    Harrison just needs about 1 to 2% increase in votes to beat Graham, and hopefully his complete hypocrisy in the Supreme Court vote will motivate just enough voters to vote him out. Even if you agree with him on more topics, maybe integrity and honesty will matter more to just enough voters. Of all of the Trump sycophants, I think Graham's and Cruz's about faces make me the most sick.
     
    JimEverett said:
    You live in Baldwin County? I consider it to be one of the greatest places on earth
    Click to expand...
    Yes I do, been living in this county for the last 14 years, but have costed since 1985.
    zztop said:
    Not really, that is like saying gerrymandering is a fair and accurate representation of districts. At least in my opinion, you can have a state (such as GA) trying to retain and even increase their (R) power over a population that isn't as lopsided in favor of (R) beliefs and ideals. If you have a state that has...oh, say tossed out thousands of votes, passed voted laws and had purges that impacted overwhelmingly those that were mostly (D) ...and the end result after elections was overwhelmingly in favor of (R) then taken at face value a person might go "oh that is a state increasingly becoming conservative" but is it really? Or just a consequence of all this meddling
    Click to expand...
    I was making a lame joke, I agree with you.

    I'm not saying Jones is going to win, but I think it will be closer than most people think.
     
    Lapaz said:
    Harrison just needs about 1 to 2% increase in votes to beat Graham, and hopefully his complete hypocrisy in the Supreme Court vote will motivate just enough voters to vote him out. Even if you agree with him on more topics, maybe integrity and honesty will matter more to just enough voters. Of all of the Trump sycophants, I think Graham's and Cruz's about faces make me the most sick.
    Click to expand...

    This is from August but it lays out the situation pretty well.

    www.politico.com

    Is Lindsey Graham Actually in Trouble in South Carolina?

    Anger at his support for Trump and a strong Democratic challenger have some wondering if the three-term Republican is in real jeopardy of losing in November.
    www.politico.com www.politico.com
     
    coldseat said:
    One thing I'm curious about is if there indication of any significant group of people that are voting this year that may not have voted in the past or that doesn't vote in large numbers normally? Significant enough to not show up in polls but make a difference?
    Click to expand...

    18-27 year olds? (I actually don't know the % of something in that bracket, just a guess)
     
    suburban women are probably done with Graham, much like Trump. I sincerely hope that is enough to put Harrison over the top.
     
    projects.fivethirtyeight.com

    2020 Senate Election Forecast

    Latest forecasts and polls for the 2020 Senate elections by Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight
    projects.fivethirtyeight.com projects.fivethirtyeight.com


    1601004394777.png
     
    MT15 said:
    suburban women are probably done with Graham, much like Trump. I sincerely hope that is enough to put Harrison over the top.
    Click to expand...

    I think one very real, practical drag on Harrison's chances is the fact that some voters who would likely vote for Harrison (either as a vote for him or a vote against Graham) once they got into the voting booth but aren't principally motivated to cast a vote in the Senate race might stay home because they know that South Carolina isn't really in play for Biden. It's the old "my vote doesn't matter anyway" view, and while that might be right about the president, it's certainly not right about the Senate race. But if they're not thinking about the Senate race, it might not motivate them.
     
    One thing I think is sort of helpful is looking at which Republicans are polling under, even, or above Trump. IMO, conventional wisdom right now would say if you are polling under Trump then the SCOTUS fight will help; if you are polling over Trump then the SCOTUS fight will hurt you if you support the President
    The idea being that the SCOTUS fight gives you the chance to align with the President while your opponent does not, or allows you to break with the President and show you are more independent and will stand up to him.

    Right now it looks like:
    McSally is polling slightly under Trump
    Gardner is polling slightly ahead of Trump (but most polls put him far behind)
    Georgia's open election messes it up somewhat - but it looks like the Republicans are polling a little above Trump, although I am not clear on that.
    Ernst seems to be polling a good 5 points or so below Trump (although a few weeks ago she was even or just slightly above Trump)
    Collins is polling substantially higher than Trump
    James in Michigan looks to be polling just a hair better than Trump
    Daines is consistently polling under Trump
    Tillis is polling a good bit lower than Trump
    Graham is polling under Trump
    Cornyn is polling ahead of Trump

    I think the SCOTUS fight helps Tillis and Graham a lot. It could end up helping McSally and especially Ernst, and also probably helps Daines. It also, I think, helps Collins - although that is debatable.
    It effectively kills Gardner's chances and could possibly push Cornyn lower.

    Obviously this is all just supposition, and it can easily be seen how the polls move in the coming weeks.
     
    JimEverett said:
    One thing I think is sort of helpful is looking at which Republicans are polling under, even, or above Trump. IMO, conventional wisdom right now would say if you are polling under Trump then the SCOTUS fight will help; if you are polling over Trump then the SCOTUS fight will hurt you if you support the President
    The idea being that the SCOTUS fight gives you the chance to align with the President while your opponent does not, or allows you to break with the President and show you are more independent and will stand up to him.

    Right now it looks like:
    McSally is polling slightly under Trump
    Gardner is polling slightly ahead of Trump (but most polls put him far behind)
    Georgia's open election messes it up somewhat - but it looks like the Republicans are polling a little above Trump, although I am not clear on that.
    Ernst seems to be polling a good 5 points or so below Trump (although a few weeks ago she was even or just slightly above Trump)
    Collins is polling substantially higher than Trump
    James in Michigan looks to be polling just a hair better than Trump
    Daines is consistently polling under Trump
    Tillis is polling a good bit lower than Trump
    Graham is polling under Trump
    Cornyn is polling ahead of Trump

    I think the SCOTUS fight helps Tillis and Graham a lot. It could end up helping McSally and especially Ernst, and also probably helps Daines. It also, I think, helps Collins - although that is debatable.
    It effectively kills Gardner's chances and could possibly push Cornyn lower.

    Obviously this is all just supposition, and it can easily be seen how the polls move in the coming weeks.
    Click to expand...

    Seems fairly astute to me.

    The timing of Ginsburg's passing seems to me to be quite a boost for Trump, all things considered. Not only does it reinvigorate the elements of the electorate that care more about long-term issues like the Court, but it pulls the attention away from him, individually, which is where he's weakest (ironically).

    Once he puts the nomination out there, the confirmation process is going to be US politics topic 1 or 1A, along with the presidential race. That's very unusual and for a candidate with such risk every time he takes to a microphone, it has to help him IMO.
     
    Vote.org, a nonpartisan nonprofit that allows people to register through its website, processed more than 40,000 new voter registrations on Saturday and Sunday, a 68% increase from the prior weekend, according to its spokesman. The website saw more than 35,000 mail ballot requests on Saturday and Sunday, a 42% increase from a week earlier.

    On National Voter Registration Day, Vote.org processed over 74,000 new voter registrations and 41,000 mail-in ballot requests. After the story was first published, the group later provided CNBC with their key final data points for what turned out to be a historic day. In the full 24 hours of National Voter Registration Day, Vote.org registered 135,000 new voters. That’s double their voter registration day success during the 2018 elections.

    Just over 62% of those they helped register were female. Those who registered the most through Vote.org were between the ages of 25 and 34. Close to 25% were between the ages of 18 and 24
     
    Battleground Senate and Presidential polls out for Reuter’s. Only one that surprised me was Tillis down 5 points.

    graphics.reuters.com

    Battleground polling

    Polling in six key states for the 2020 election
    graphics.reuters.com graphics.reuters.com

    ETA- another interesting tidbit is that every one of the states biggest concern was Covid19. That is a big problem is you are Trump
     
    Last edited:
    MT15 said:
    RGB response. Bank on it. I see it as a net negative for Trump, can’t agree with chuck or Jim Everett.
    Click to expand...
    To be clear - I think it might be a net negative for Trump. I do think it gives Trump a chance to shake up the race and that is why I am saying it is helpful to him. If it is Barrett - good chance you are right. If it is Lagoa I think it is less likely you are right.
    I do, however, think it can help a few Republican Senate candidates - and will hurt a few as well.
     
    MT15 said:
    RGB response. Bank on it. I see it as a net negative for Trump, can’t agree with chuck or Jim Everett.
    Click to expand...
    It depends on the state. Whether they like Lindsey Graham or not, the majority of people in South Carolina absolutely want an extremely conservative judge on the Supreme Court. This is true for most southern states -- on election day Louisiana has a ballot initiative to amend the Louisiana Constitution stating that nothing in it can be construed to support a right to abortion. It's basically paving the way in anticipation for the Court to overturn Roe/Casey.
     
    Last edited:
    SaulGoodmanEsq said:
    Greenfield

    It depends on the state. Whether they like Lindsey Graham or not, the majority of people in South Carolina absolutely want an extremely conservative judge on the Supreme Court. This is true for most southern states -- on election day Louisiana has a ballot initiative to amend the Louisiana Constitution stating that nothing in it can be construed to support a right to abortion. It's basically paving the way in anticipation for the Court to overturn Roe/Casey.
    Click to expand...


    If those voters would spend just as much time working to protect and support poor, abused and unwanted children after birth as they did before, I might respect them more. But they don't
     
    Dragon said:
    If those voters would spend just as much time working to protect and support poor, abused and unwanted children after birth as they did before, I might respect them more. But they don't
    Click to expand...
    I don't know if that is true. Just anecdotal but when I lived in a more liberal urban environment around mostly non-religious people I encountered very few adopted kids. When I moved out to the conservative and more religious suburbs I encounter numerous adopted children.
     
    I can only speak to Oregon currently and California circa 2016 when my wife works in the Foster care (Foster to adopt more specifically) systems.

    The overwhelming majority of Foster to adopt couples are from two groups- same sex couples and those that would be considered very religious. Like 85% come from those two groups.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom