US politics: Rovenber is coming.

[Wade1865]

1 minute ago, Week said:

"A" not "the". DWS is not the one being dishonest here.

Week -- yes; I literally said, "a". And I never argued unions were only about wages; there's obviously other factors involved with unions.

2 minutes ago, Week said:

No, they don't. 

Yes, they do. Your opinion doesn't contradict their success. Starbucks is by far the most successful coffee chain in the world, with their closest competitor far behind. They sell about 4 million cups of coffee a day. We're talking about a 2021 revenue of $29 billion USD, a third of the US market share. Credit where credit is due.

[Wade1865]

@Week -- here's another example of a recent union fight I mentioned days ago, which highlights unions doing more than just securing higher wages. Although wages do seem to be the most notable gains, benefits were also a part of the deal.

Quote

RAIL STRIKE -- AVERTED

Looks like a good deal. Overall, a win for Uncle Joe and labor. Anything else would have caused significant hardships for the country, though I wonder how much of the costs will be passed on to the consumer.

Services are, or will be, restored. Pending union ratification:

• 24% wage increases over the next 5 years (unions wanted 31%)
• 14.1% immediate wage increase
• 5 annual bonuses of $1000 USD
• $122,000, average annual employee compensation (including healthcare and employer retirement contributions)

• No change to health insurance copays / deductibles
• Limited change to paid sick leave

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, LongRider said:

The hell you say!            I can quit anytime I want to, I just don't want too,       

Guess we have to watch you around the glue too.

Oh wait, did I touch on a sensitive subject  there?

[Martell Spy]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Or just stop drinking coffee you drug addicts.

Now I know you hate America.

[LongRider]

33 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Guess we have to watch you around the glue too.

Not since the second grade, hater. 
 

 

 

 

No spoiler, fat fingers. 

Spoiler

[IheartIheartTesla]

3 hours ago, Maithanet said:

According to 538's model (dangerous words I know), it is now more likely that the Democrats hold the House (29%) than the Republicans take the Senate (28%).  That feels too optimistic to me, I think that right now Democrats have a fairly clear path to 49 seats (winning PA and AZ), but getting to 50 means holding one of GA/NV and both of them feel shaky. I'm still pretty gunshy about assuming that the polling will hold up for Democrats.  The last 4 cycles have been 3 losses and 1 draw on that regard, and that certainly makes me uncomfortable.

I agree with most of that, but I also think that since WI is poised to vote on whether the 1849 abortion law/ban will be the law (Evers and the AG will provide clemency to any physician, for example, that will be charged) it could mean that Barnes will outperform his polls.

However, the polls in WI have been pretty bad, and abortion is lower on voters priorities than inflation, crime and gun violence, so it may end up being a wash.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

44 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Now I know you hate America.

Real Americans drink scotch. 

34 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Now I know you hate America.

I knew you were that kid. And also, you really ate your own kind?

[ThinkerX]

7 hours ago, Ormond said:

Just unfortunately got my first email from the Ron Johnson campaign, which blames the Democrats' fundraising success on "radical billionaires." As if there really were any such people.

I have been getting emails from him (and Rubio) for months. Johnson in particular is sounding increasingly desperate.

[DMC]

4 hours ago, Maithanet said:

getting to 50 means holding one of GA/NV and both of them feel shaky. I'm still pretty gunshy about assuming that the polling will hold up for Democrats.  The last 4 cycles have been 3 losses and 1 draw on that regard, and that certainly makes me uncomfortable.

Georgia and Nevada are definitely tossups and the shakiest Dem seats, but I saw Nate Cohn assert recently that Dems seem to be overperforming in the same states where the polls were most off in 2020.  Even if that's the case, the states where the polling was most off were in the midwest - namely Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan, along with Florida.  That's bad news for Barnes and Evers in Wisconsin, but unless you were counting on Demings winning in Florida, it otherwise doesn't really matter.

Georgia, OTOH, was quite accurate.  Nevada was much closer than the polls suggested as well, but the two polls thus far showing Laxalt leading are the GOP firm Trafalgar and Emerson - the latter of which (well, both, but Trafalgar is a given) has shown much more of a GOP skew this cycle than other pollsters.  The other thing is that poll just had weird results with the spread Laxalt 42 to 41 for Cortez Masto.  I have a hard time believing so many voters are undecided considering the name ID of both candidates.

[Wade1865]

RCP -- PROJECTIONS

Senate 48 D; 52 R. GOP +2

Governors 20 D; 30 R. GOP +2

House not a projection, but it looks like the GOP will secure at least a slight majority.

I'm a little surprised RCP projects that the GOP might gain a couple seats in the Senate. This goes against what I've been hearing (and anticipating), especially considering Uncle Joe's recent string of successes (e.g., student loans, providing $10-20K USD; rail strike averted, unions providing substantial wage increases; et al).

edited: Add in the abortion question, and it's a bit surprising the Democrats don't have the Senate in the bag.

[ThinkerX]

It is almost like the GOP is trying to tick off large segments of voters.

 

First up, we have this judge in Delaware who ruled all mail in voting to be unconstitutional (at least in his state). Wonder how that will go on appeal?

Delaware judge rules vote-by-mail law unconstitutional, cannot be used in November (msn.com)

In June, Delaware’s legislature passed SB 320, providing registered voters the ability to request a mail-in ballot ahead of an election without the need for an excuse. Democratic Gov. John Carney signed it into law on July 22.

Vice Chancellor Nathan Cook’s ruling came Wednesday, prohibiting mail-in voting in future general elections.

 

 

Next, we have a republican congress critter saying that Obamacare repeal will most definitely be on the R agenda should they win - despite dismal results last time.

House Republican says GOP will 'absolutely have to take a look at' Obamacare repeal if it wins midterms (msn.com)

"I will tell you this. Right now with inflation – which doesn't include food and fuel and other things that it should – is at about eight-and-a-half percent. It's probably closer to fifteen percent. It's historically high, at least forty years. But what's leading the Consumer Price Index right now is the cost of healthcare. The Affordable Health Care Act [sic] made healthcare unaffordable. Between that, energy costs, and food costs, many poor families and working-class families are really starting to struggle and as soon as energy becomes a real issue with wintertime coming, they're gonna have a hard time making ends meet," Perry replied.

 

Not bothering with a link here, but the (effective) total abortion ban in Tennessee looks to be causing serious blowback.

 

The R's keep this up, the D's might have a realistic shot at retaining both the House and the Senate. (Cue cries of 'Voter Fraud' and legislatures arbitrarily overturning elections)

[Week]

1 hour ago, Wade1865 said:

@Week -- here's another example of a recent union fight I mentioned days ago, which highlights unions doing more than just securing higher wages. Although wages do seem to be the most notable gains, benefits were also a part of the deal.

 

You seem to have lost the thread of this discussion. Ok.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Wade1865 said:

Senate 48 D; 52 R. GOP +2

Governors 20 D; 30 R. GOP +2

Their own polling average has Fetterman up by 4% in Pennsylvania but the projection has Oz winning.  Perhaps they assume the national environment will favor the GOP..but again, their own polling average has the generic ballot at Dems +1.2.  Perhaps they anticipate Fetterman's health problems will catch up to him, but they also "project" Mastriano beating Shapiro in the governors race, which is just..

In other words, those "projections" do not appear based on any data - even their own data - but rather just their hopes.

8 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

First up, we have this judge in Delaware who ruled all mail in voting to be unconstitutional (at least in his state). Wonder how that will go on appeal?

I can't imagine the Delaware Supreme Court upholding that ruling.

[Wade1865]

1 minute ago, Week said:

You seem to have lost the thread of this discussion. Ok.

Week -- I really have no idea what you're talking about. Lost the thread? I'm the one who introduced the subtopic. If there was any deviation, it's not on me; though I'm all for expansion as unions are front and center of US politics right now, especially given how much leverage they have at the moment.

My perspective and DireWolfSpirit's aren't actually incompatible re the reasons why unions exist. I did emphasize the importance of wages re Starbucks and the potential rail strike -- because it's true -- but that doesn't mean other factors aren't a part of it.

[Wade1865]

11 minutes ago, DMC said:

Their own polling average has Fetterman up by 4% in Pennsylvania but the projection has Oz winning.  Perhaps they assume the national environment will favor the GOP..but again, their own polling average has the generic ballot at Dems +1.2.  Perhaps they anticipate Fetterman's health problems will catch up to him, but they also "project" Mastriano beating Shapiro in the governors race, which is just..

In other words, those "projections" do not appear based on any data - even their own data - but rather just their hopes.

DMC -- yes, the aggregate polling seemed to contradict the RCP projection. I suspected RCP might be biased, but I don't know -- this will be the first time I track a non-presidential election. Add in the other factors (Uncle Joe's successes and the abortion question), and it seems unreasonable that the Democrats would lose the Senate. I'd still bet on the Democrats, but people seem to be shaky.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, Wade1865 said:

I suspected RCP might be biased, but I don't know -- this will be the first time I track a non-presidential election.

Yes, the people who run the site - namely Tom Bevan and Carl Cannon - are incredibly and flagrantly biased towards the GOP.  Their elections guy - Sean Trende - actually is a pretty good data analyst, but also has a decided GOP biased (and pretty much openly is a data guru for the party).  I strongly suspect those "projections" are coming from Cannon and not Trende.

8 minutes ago, Wade1865 said:

I'd still bet on the Democrats, but people seem to be shaky.

Right, like I said the other day, I think the Dems chances of holding the Senate are about 55-60% - in large part thanks to the expected PA pickup - but that's definitely still "shaky" and much more of a tossup than the 538 models are projecting.

[LongRider]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I knew you were that kid. And also, you really ate your own kind?

Dork.        I'm not the horse but the rider....LongRIDER.  Used to participate in an equestrian sport of long distance riding, known as endurance riding.  Hence, LongRider.  Most rides were 50 miles, one horse, one rider 12 hours to complete.  I rode one, 100 mile ride, 24 hours to complete on the same horse.  Then shit happened, don't do that anymore, or even ride or spend time around horses.  Shrug, so it goes.  

 

[James Arryn]

49 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Dork.        I'm not the horse but the rider....LongRIDER.  Used to participate in an equestrian sport of long distance riding, known as endurance riding.  Hence, LongRider.  Most rides were 50 miles, one horse, one rider 12 hours to complete.  I rode one, 100 mile ride, 24 hours to complete on the same horse.  Then shit happened, don't do that anymore, or even ride or spend time around horses.  Shrug, so it goes.  

 

Complete aside, but I rode for a few years when a boy, had a half-share in a horse*, shared in the grooming and so forth, and loved it. But my grandfather, who grew up around horses all his early life…his father and grandfather had been small town blacksmiths in farm country…and had far more riding experience than I could dream of, would reject what he called my romanticism of them, routinely insisting they were just ‘dumb animals’ and much preferring cars.

He definitely had a way with them, though…could gentle a nervous horse in a moment, get them to do w/e he wanted with a word or a touch. It always contradicted my assumption that good horsemen had to love horses, but to him they were just troublesome tools.

*named Pumpkin…NOT by me.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

27 minutes ago, LongRider said:

Dork.        I'm not the horse but the rider....LongRIDER.  Used to participate in an equestrian sport of long distance riding, known as endurance riding.  Hence, LongRider.  Most rides were 50 miles, one horse, one rider 12 hours to complete.  I rode one, 100 mile ride, 24 hours to complete on the same horse.  Then shit happened, don't do that anymore, or even ride or spend time around horses.  Shrug, so it goes.  

 

So you'd just ride our German friend into the ground and turn him into horse jerky if he came up lame. Got it!

Also, 50 miles in 12 hours sounds very doable. 

[LongRider]

10 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

So you'd just ride our German friend into the ground and turn him into horse jerky if he came up lame. Got it!

Also, 50 miles in 12 hours sounds very doable. 

Cheaper than vet bills.