Senate Election Thread (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    efil4 said:
    @LA - L.A.

    Click to expand...

    Thanks for that. There were at least 9 Senators at the White House announcement last weekend and a whole slew of top level people from the executive branch. Let's hope those who tested negative stay negative. There's 2 senators that testing status is publicly unknown.
     
    These are the lamest "sexts" I have ever seen. This dude was having a romantic affair, not sexting. Of course that actually makes it worse IMO.

     
    superchuck500 said:
    These are the lamest "sexts" I have ever seen. This dude was having a romantic affair, not sexting. Of course that actually makes it worse IMO.

    Click to expand...

    Saw that a new PPP poll came out today for North Carolina:
    Biden: 50 Trump: 46
    Cunningham: 48 Tillis: 42

    For a while I have thought North Carolina would decide the Senate. But I think Democrats could lose there and still win given how Iowa, South Carolina, and Montana are playing. Although I still think NC is their best shot, but this stuff with Cunningham will hurt some.
     
    superchuck500 said:
    These are the lamest "sexts" I have ever seen. This dude was having a romantic affair, not sexting. Of course that actually makes it worse IMO.

    Click to expand...

    It may take a couple of weeks for this to hit polling. Dems just put out new polling saying the needle hasn’t moved from D+6, but I don’t buy it. Republicans will push poll Cunningham infidelity and you will see a drop.

     
    GrandAdmiral said:
    This will hurt Republicans come next mid-terms. Pennsylvania might turn blue for a while.

    www.politico.com

    Sen. Pat Toomey to retire from politics in blow to GOP

    The move puts Republicans at an immediate disadvantage as they survey the 2022 Senate landscape.
    www.politico.com www.politico.com
    Click to expand...
    He stood a good chance of losing so this isn't too surprising. Lot of vulnerable GOP seats up in 2022 and hardly any vulnerable Democrat seats except maybe New Hampshire.
     
    SaulGoodmanEsq said:
    He stood a good chance of losing so this isn't too surprising. Lot of vulnerable GOP seats up in 2022 and hardly any vulnerable Democrat seats except maybe New Hampshire.
    Click to expand...

    2022 is an eternity in politics though. I think it will depend on who's President. If Trump wins, I think 2022 will be a big pop up for the Democrats. If it's Biden, I think the calculus will flip. A lot hinges on this election in determining how 2022 will look.
     
    DaveXA said:
    2022 is an eternity in politics though. I think it will depend on who's President. If Trump wins, I think 2022 will be a big pop up for the Democrats. If it's Biden, I think the calculus will flip. A lot hinges on this election in determining how 2022 will look.
    Click to expand...
    A lot more depends on the US Census outcome, what party has control of state governments after this election, gerrymandering and the success of voter suppression efforts. How the Supreme Court does and does not rule in all of those areas will also have more of an impact than which president wins this election.
     
    LA - L.A. said:
    A lot more depends on the US Census outcome, what party has control of state governments after this election, gerrymandering and the success of voter suppression efforts. How the Supreme Court does and does not rule in all of those areas will also have more of an impact than which president wins this election.
    Click to expand...

    Possibly, but, quite frequently you'll see midterm elections swing the opposite of the party occupying the WH. Doesn't happen every time, but it's usually a pretty good indicator. Your points are well taken. I hadn't given much thought to the census, so that's likely going to have a big impact on to what degree gerrymandering will continue. The direction of SCOTUS will certainly be an issue. I'm wondering how that will pan out.
     
    LA - L.A. said:
    A lot more depends on the US Census outcome, what party has control of state governments after this election, gerrymandering and the success of voter suppression efforts. How the Supreme Court does and does not rule in all of those areas will also have more of an impact than which president wins this election.
    Click to expand...

    On Senate elections?
     
    DaveXA said:
    Possibly, but, quite frequently you'll see midterm elections swing the opposite of the party occupying the WH. Doesn't happen every time, but it's usually a pretty good indicator. Your points are well taken. I hadn't given much thought to the census, so that's likely going to have a big impact on to what degree gerrymandering will continue. The direction of SCOTUS will certainly be an issue. I'm wondering how that will pan out.
    Click to expand...
    The first election after a census is one of those exceptions, because it mixes things up quite a bit. The party in control of a state's government has control of the redistricting in their state that happens after the census. If that party is not the same party after the previous census, then it changes the dynamics in the state quite a bit.

    That's why elections right before or in the same year of the census are the hardest fought elections at the state level.
     
    Last edited:
    LA - L.A. said:
    The first election after a census is one of those exceptions, because it mixes things up quite a bit. The party in control of a state's government has control of the redistricting in their state that happens after the census. If that party is not the same party after the previous census, then it changes the dynamics in the state quite a bit.

    That's why elections right before or in the same year of the census are the hardest fought electoins at the state level.
    Click to expand...

    Good points. I'll be interested in seeing how that pans out.
     
    Doug Jones is a popular as a Democrat could be these days in Alabama.
     
    TaylorB said:
    The best explanation I've heard on this is what Yale history prof. Timothy Snyder describes as "sadopopulism," where a party inflicts pain on its own supporters and blames "enemies" for said pain (liberals, non-whites, etc.). It's fascinating:


    This is 100% true: a paralegal I knew needed a neck surgery after a car accident, and actually bought herself an ACA policy with her settlement money to pay for the surgery, which she was able to do despite her pre-existing condition. Then she voted for Trump while admitting to me that he would actively work to eliminate coverage for pre-existing conditions, and that she could not otherwise afford coverage, and her best explanation was that she didn't like that the Obama administration handed out brand new Iphones to everyone that was getting welfare.
    Click to expand...

    Which, was false.
     
    GrandAdmiral said:
    Interesting it's running like that in Alabama. Biden has no chance of winning that state.
    Click to expand...
    Yeah, seems like a waste of money. Even Doug Jones probably doesn't think he will win. The reality is he barely beat Roy Moore (which is sad). Any generic Republican -- which Tuberville is -- will handily defeat him.
     

    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