U.S. politics. thread

[Kalbear]

5 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

I can accept that. No ads. No rallies.

Voter registration is perfectly logical.

Rallies aren't a bad idea either, provided that you're doing them not to earn kudos for your candidate, but earn kudos for the party. Yeah, you're not gonna flip Texas, but you can certainly flip a congress seat or two, and you can flip some local elections too. Having events with big names like the POTUS does drive a lot of energy. 

[Red Tiger]

30 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Huh? This is your tipping point? You know it doesn't matter right? That kid is dead and there's a lot of real estate available in North Korea. He has to make a deal!

Tread on me Daddy!

I know this is meant as a joke, but I have a hard time laughing at this, Jace.

[Jace, Extat]

Just now, Kalbear said:

Rallies aren't a bad idea either, provided that you're doing them not to earn kudos for your candidate, but earn kudos for the party. Yeah, you're not gonna flip Texas, but you can certainly flip a congress seat or two, and you can flip some local elections too. Having events with big names like the POTUS does drive a lot of energy. 

I'd rather win the presidency, personally. The one that requires commitment to a select number of states? The Dem candidate can visit Texas in the midterms when their time is less important.

[lokisnow]

38 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Dude. That's literally what it means.

Can we stop with this fucking insanity of flipping these shithole states?

NO!

if your opponent is blocking your jabs, go for the kidneys.

[Jace, Extat]

1 minute ago, Red Tiger said:

I know this is meant as a joke, but I have a hard time laughing at this, Jace.

Fair. I don't think Fox News hosts will laugh either as they say basically the same thing on air, if they address it at all. Dark Horse candidate for such a comment has to be Lindsay Graham.

[Jace, Extat]

Just now, lokisnow said:

NO!

if your opponent is blocking your jabs, go for the kidneys.

That makes no sense. Texas, Georgia, Carolina? That's like the elbows of Republicans.

Elbows are sharper and tougher than fists. And Florida needs to be written off as the loss it is. Right next to Ohio. Focus on saving Pennsylvania and repairing the northern holdings.

[lokisnow]

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Rallies aren't a bad idea either, provided that you're doing them not to earn kudos for your candidate, but earn kudos for the party. Yeah, you're not gonna flip Texas, but you can certainly flip a congress seat or two, and you can flip some local elections too. Having events with big names like the POTUS does drive a lot of energy. 

we aren't going to flip texas, but with a three month effort in voter turnout, scaled at 1/3 the manpower of Obama's 2012 national campaign, O'Rourke generated 1 million new democrat voters, which closed the vast majority of the republican/democrat gap. 

If democrats invested in Texas for 18 months at 1/10 the manpower of Obama's 2012 campaign, we should be able to find another million, Add in a bigger push in the last 3 months and you might get a few hundred thousand more. This isn't enough because you have to Assume republicans are panic investing 20% of their national resources in Texas as a result of democrats having found the votes, this puts republicans over the top again, but the gap is probably down to about a half a percent in texas.

 

[lokisnow]

5 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

That makes no sense. Texas, Georgia, Carolina? That's like the elbows of Republicans.

Elbows are sharper and tougher than fists. And Florida needs to be written off as the loss it is. Right next to Ohio. Focus on saving Pennsylvania and repairing the northern holdings.

Nah, the confederacy is definitely the kidneys, full of piss. And needing to be punched.

And you need to hit them where they are strong to open up vulnerabilities in their weak spots.

and sometimes you might get lucky and unexpectedly drop them to their knees if the punch connects right.

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Rallies aren't a bad idea either, provided that you're doing them not to earn kudos for your candidate, but earn kudos for the party.

Sure, one or two would be fine, it's not that big of a deal.  What there should be are more than a handful of rallies by surrogates, and the Dems should have a lot of pretty good surrogates once the primaries are over.

3 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

And Florida needs to be written off as the loss it is. Right next to Ohio.

Ohio should be written off, but Florida?  No.  That's knee-jerk thinking.

2 minutes ago, lokisnow said:

If democrats invested in Texas for 18 months at 1/10 the manpower of Obama's 2012 campaign, we should be able to find another million, Add in a bigger push in the last 3 months and you might get a few hundred thousand more. This isn't enough because you have to Assume republicans are panic investing 20% of their national resources in Texas as a result of democrats having found the votes, this puts republicans over the top again, but the gap is probably down to about a half a percent in texas.

I get what you're trying to do here, but voter turnout is not an equation.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

57 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Tread on me Daddy!

That's amazing.  The ball-gag is a nice touch. 

[Jace, Extat]

8 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

Ohio should be written off, but Florida?  No.  That's knee-jerk thinking.

 

I say you're pining after strategic options which are no longer viable. A bunch of school children were murdered a year after a bunch of undesirables got massacred and that weeping abscess of a state not only stayed Republican but ousted their Democrat senator.

If going after Texas and the like would be Barbarossa, treating Florida like it isn't a reservoir of human filth is a Second Ardennes.

There are very specific advantages available to Democrats versus a MOUNTAIN of challenges, any number of which are crippling in their own right. Resources need to be allocated specifically and with clear possibility of results.

[DMC]

23 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

I say you're pining after strategic options which are no longer viable.

Saying Florida isn't a viable strategic option isn't really an argument worth entertaining.  Even though turnout was historically high, the midterm electorate is still fundamentally not the same as the presidential electorate.

25 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

There are very specific advantages available to Democrats versus a MOUNTAIN of challenges, any number of which are crippling in their own right. Resources need to be allocated specifically and with clear possibility of results.

A cynical GOP-er could say the exact same thing about their side.  And there is still a clear possibility of results in Florida.

[Jace, Extat]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

Saying Florida isn't a viable strategic option isn't really an argument worth entertaining.  Even though turnout was historically high, the midterm electorate is still fundamentally not the same as the presidential electorate.

A cynical GOP-er could say the exact same thing about their side.  And there is still a clear possibility of results in Florida.

I can't stop you from committing to wistful dreams of a Democratic Gallipoli.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

I can't stop you from committing to wistful dreams of a Democratic Gallipoli.

And I can't stop you from constantly making esoteric references to hide your bad arguments.

[Kalbear]

9 minutes ago, DMC said:

Saying Florida isn't a viable strategic option isn't really an argument worth entertaining.  Even though turnout was historically high, the midterm electorate is still fundamentally not the same as the presidential electorate. 

And to be fair, the elections in both were within about 100k votes. That's a lot, but it's not like Florida is entirely gone. 

9 minutes ago, DMC said:

A cynical GOP-er could say the exact same thing about their side.  And there is still a clear possibility of results in Florida.

To illustrate that, this map has a good view of how people have shifted from the 2012 senate vote - and the 2016 POTUS vote. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/election-results/florida/?utm_term=.0588373c5c21

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Now we know how Jared got back to saving the world for all of us:

Quote

WASHINGTON — President Trump ordered his chief of staff to grant his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, a top-secret security clearance last year, overruling concerns flagged by intelligence officials and the White House’s top lawyer, four people briefed on the matter said.

Mr. Trump’s decision in May so troubled senior administration officials that at least one, the White House chief of staff at the time, John F. Kelly, wrote a contemporaneous internal memo about how he had been “ordered” to give Mr. Kushner the top-secret clearance.

The White House counsel at the time, Donald F. McGahn II, also wrote an internal memo outlining the concerns that had been raised about Mr. Kushner — including by the C.I.A. — and how Mr. McGahn had recommended that he not be given a top-secret clearance.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/us/politics/jared-kushner-security-clearance.html

[Jace, Extat]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

And I can't stop you from constantly making esoteric references to hide your bad arguments.

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

And to be fair, the elections in both were within about 100k votes. That's a lot, but it's not like Florida is entirely gone. 

 

In a wave year. A wave year and Florida was within half a percentage of turning. What happens in a non-wave year? When the national evisceration campaign gets a singular entity on which to focus besides the nebulous Pelosi? When every red, white, and more red American gets their glorious Daddy to tell them directly he needs their vote? 

These dreams are not only disadvantageous, they're outright sad.

I'm not saying Florida should be abandoned entirely, of course the Dem candidate should make token appearances as there's still pools of sanity to be engaged on behalf of House Reps. But it is not a battleground state. It's a meat grinder.

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

In a wave year. A wave year and Florida was within half a percentage of turning. What happens in a non-wave year? When the national evisceration campaign gets a singular entity on which to focus besides the nebulous Pelosi? When every red, white, and more red American gets their glorious Daddy to tell them directly he needs their vote? 

 

Again, 2016 was pretty close for Florida too. I absolutely and horrifically think Ohio is gone, but Florida appears to be actually getting perhaps bluer. I think a lot of it depends on the candidate. Sanders, I suspect, would be hated too much for his Cuban views to win Florida, but Harris or Biden might be able to win there. Especially Biden, given the old people. 

1 minute ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

These dreams are not only disadvantageous, they're outright sad.

I'm not saying Florida should be abandoned entirely, of course the Dem candidate should make token appearances as there's still pools of sanity to be engaged on behalf of House Reps. But it is not a battleground state. It's a meat grinder.

Ultimately there's only so much you can do in the other states. Obviously PA, WI and MI are big priorities for dems in a way they hadn't been, but keep in mind that winning Florida means basically you just win, right then, and the rest of the night you can take off. It also requires the other side to work hard on it in a lot of ways. 

Plus, ya know, Trump kind of sucks in Florida right now.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-florida-voters-donald-trump-approval-morning-consult-20190107-story.html

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

a singular entity on which to focus besides the nebulous Pelosi

Why is Pelosi nebulous?  Seems they clearly defined her as the enemy pretty damn quickly.

[DMC]

35 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

These dreams are not only disadvantageous, they're outright sad.

In 2016 18-44 year olds accounted for 44% of the electorate and voted 53-39 Hillary.  In 2018 18-44 year olds accounted for 35% of the electorate and voted 61-36 Dems.  This is why it's not only not a sad dream, it's not a dream at all.  It's properly evaluating data.