i wouldn’t want to talk about them either.... watch November
What? No analysis of primary results?
- Thread starter Hoosier_Hack
- Start date
Not the best possible night for Dems in California, but still good and they're on track to do what they need to do.
The margins in California are going to increase once all the mail ballots come in over the next few days.
They got some good results in NJ at the House level with a couple Republicans winning that basically have no money in the bank.
The margins in California are going to increase once all the mail ballots come in over the next few days.
They got some good results in NJ at the House level with a couple Republicans winning that basically have no money in the bank.
I wouldn’t worry about the money issue. If they have a chance the money will come. California is interesting to me. I went to Jr High and High School in California and was stationed there after high school.... I remember the night I was discharged and my wife and I drove all night just to get out of the State. Gloria Allred was on the radio talking about a case where a guy was being accused of rape the next morning after meeting a girl in a bar. She was arguing because the girl had 1 drink that evening it became the guys responsibility to know her judgement was impaired.... that State is physcho ..... that said I have contributed to the succession nutz our there. I’d love to see it. They deserve whatever they bring on themselves
Been working since 6 am, but give me a few minutes and I'll provide some sound analysis that you probably won't understand.
Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe, of course. Gotta put in long hours if I want to make Michael Cohen bucks.
Serious response:
Despite yesterday being the midterm "Super Tuesday," it was a pretty boring primary day. Very few results were expected to surprise. The only thing really worth watching was the possibility that either party might shut itself out of a competitive district in California's jungle primary because of overcrowding. That appears not to have happened. As the results stand now, the Dems will be shut out of CA-8, and the Repubs will be shut out of CA-44, but neither of those were ever going to be competitive in November, so it doesn't really matter. There are several other races the GOP didn't even contest, but, again, those are districts they had no chance in, anyway.
The GOP was shut out of the Senate race, and that is interesting, but not because James Bradley would have had a chance in hell in November. It's interesting because, if Kevin de Leon can galvanize support among the Democratic base, Feinstein may need to court Republican voters in order to hold her seat. Strong emphasis on may.
For the most part, the establishment candidates did well yesterday. That's mostly a positive for Democrats who want to take back the House, but are worried that insurgent candidates will be seen as too liberal to win in purple districts. It might be a negative for those who still hold out some hope for winning the Senate also, since Menendez won the NJ primary, and the attack ads in the general against him pretty much write themselves. That's one case where an insurgent leftist would have been a better choice.
Overall: Meh. Things pretty much shook out how they were expected to. Both parties avoided disaster in California, and candidates endorsed by party leaders held their own against challengers from outside the establishment.
Last edited:
"flipped" a seat i Missouri? In a primary? Please advise how that happened.
I'm surprised a political insider like yourself wouldn't have been aware that Missouri had a special election for the state Senate yesterday.
Missouri State Senate seat flipped. Ahah! Earth shaking. Missouri Senate was quorum proof Republican 24-9 before. They're swill quorum proof after at 23-10. Dems don't even need to show up.
So you were involved and paying attention to that race? Zeke was?
Take heart Dems. Missouri is now up to 10 seats out of the 33 in the Missouri Senate. Blue Wave.
Don't you include such seats when you tout the 1000 or so Republicans seats gained nationwide since 2010?
No, I wasn't paying attention to it, although I at least knew it was happening. Perhaps you should have done at least that minimum level of research before being a prick to Zeke.
1. Research on the quorum proof Missouri Senate? When 1 seat means NOTHING? Nope.
2. Zeke gets a tiny fraction of what she earns around here - but cover for her. She's a reliably left extremist like the gang.
Listen douche nuts, you act like a high and mighty duck about everything politics. You just got bitch slapped for acting like a know everything ass when you had no idea what you were talking about.
Go back to your circle jerk civil discourse board.
There's a "civil discourse board" with Ladoga in it???
Shorter Ladoga: "I'm incapable of admitting I just got shown my own ass."
Not surprisingly it seems you missed the much broader implications of this race.First of all it is an area Trump won by 5 pts,and Arthur just won with 69% of the vote.That means there was a huge change-either in the way folks voted or the folks who actually turned out to vote.The Greitens situation played a huge role,which indicates Pubs in Missouri could face an uphill task in their bid to unseat Claire McCaskill in the fall.
This is not particularly about cutting into the current Pub lead in the Missouri Senate,as both candidates are currently members of the House.But it points out the issue pro-Trump Pubs may face running in the suburbs,in Missouri and elsewhere where Trump is wildly unpopular.The Missouri GOP Senate campaign tried to run Trump-like attack ads against Rep Arthur and rally their base,but going from +5 Trump in 2016 to -19 GOP now indicates that the main result may have been to turn out anti-Trump voters...
"Corlew’s official campaign has lagged in TV spending, but the Missouri Senate Campaign Committee spent tens of thousands on ads attacking Arthur.
Robin Martinez, a 54-year-old attorney from the Village of Oaks, said that the attack ads against Arthur, including ones that linked illegal immigration to violence, turned him off Corlew's candidacy.
"It was unseemly and uncalled for," he said about radio ads and mailers attacking Arthur."
http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article212508709.html
Since neither you or the combination of posters and bots that liked your post provided any context or links,it's hard to know what point you are trying to make?Trump stupidly pointed out Cox advancing to the Gov race in CA,seemingly ignoring the fact that Newsome and Villaraigosa finished 1 and 3,and basically outpolled Cox by a combined 1 Million or so votes.
On top of that is the fact that Newsome actually ran pro-Cox ads in hopes of allowing Cox to finish 2nd and avoiding a 1 on 1 battle with Villaraigosa.I'd have preferred a different strategy,because a Pub shut out in the Gov race would likely help other Dems down ballot by further decreasing Pub turnout in some contested races.But I imagine we'll see some level of that as a result of no Pub in the Senate race.
Issa's seat is definitely in play,since overall Dems garnered more votes than the Pub who finished first.And Rohrbacher looks to be in trouble as well.Remember these contested Pub seats in CA are in districts that HRC actually won,so Trump will definitely not be a positive for Pubs fighting to old the seats.The reality is the Dems advanced a challenger in each of these races,and the overriding fear was that having 6 or 7 Dem contenders would split the vote to the degree that Pubs would be able to finish 1,2 and insure the seat stayed Pub even with a low turnout in Nov.That clearly didn't happen,which means the Dem challengers should be able to run on an anti- Trump campaign platform that should resonate in districts where Clinton won in 2016.
Not sure how you could really draw too many conclusions from anywhere else,since CA is the only state that has an open Top 2 advance primary (Thanks Ahnold...),and everywhere else is strictly partisan.For the most part the Dems advanced electable challengers.And with increased Dem turnout across the board since 2016 including a willingness to unite behind either moderates or liberals in special elections (depending on the situation) I'd say the enthusiasm gap will still play a huge role.
The story of the midterms may turn out to be whether pro-Trump Pubs will turn out and support RINO Pubs in districts which RINO pubs AND HRC won in 2016.Without Trump on the ballot how many of these infrequent or first time voters are going to turn out to support someone that is not going to cozy up to Trump?
We've already seen ample demonstrations that Dems are going to turn out,and many of them are motivated by anti-Trump sentiment.Some Dems likely voted for the Pub in 2016 as a counter to their vote for HRC as POTUS.How likely do you think they are going to be inclined to vote for another member of Trump's party given the nearly universal disapproval of Trump by Dems?
Dems opening a lead back up in the generic ballot for the fall. Seems like it's been pretty steady since January or so on the 538 average if you drew a line through the middle of everything.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/?ex_cid=rrpromo
Historically, the incumbent party loses ground from here.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/?ex_cid=rrpromo
Historically, the incumbent party loses ground from here.
Last edited:
I tried to phrase my response/question a little more diplomatically.But I like your style...
Dems opening a lead back up in the generic ballot for the fall. Seems like it's been pretty steady since January or so on the 538 average if you drew a line through the middle of everything.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/?ex_cid=rrpromo
Historically, the incumbent party loses ground from here. Can't find the link but Harry Enten showed the data a few months back and so far it's followed that pattern with the GOP getting a March/April bounce that's going away.
On the same lines,Bump did an analysis in the WAPO last week exploring this as well.e specifically dealt with the outlier aspect of that May Reuters poll which showed a GOP lead for all of 4 days.
"Those who pay close attention to the polls — and who want to convey what they say accurately — tend to be skeptical of sudden changes in one survey. And that’s what happened with the Reuters-Ipsos poll. On May 13, the Democrats had a 4.2-point lead. On May 18 — five days later — the Republicans had a 5.6-point lead. That’s a shift of 9.8 points over the span of five days in a poll that reports five-day averages of its polls.
Charles Franklin, director of the Marquette Law School Poll, noted on Twitter that there was a possible reasonfor that sudden change: The Reuters-Ipsos poll suddenly shifted its estimate of who would turn out in November. Pollsters have to use models of who is expected to turn out to properly weight the poll results; if you poll half Democrats and half Republicans for an election in which 80 percent of voters are Democrats, your poll will be way off the mark. The Reuters-Ipsos survey suddenly shifted to include a lot more Republicans in the mix, Franklin found, and the generic ballot shifted to the Republicans."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ing-the-lead-in-polls/?utm_term=.7efeb37c82e7
Once the turnout errors were reversed,the poll made a drastic shift in the opposite direction...
It's really hard (impossible really) to argue in favor of any polling metric that calls for increases in GOP voters.We had a further reminder of that just this week in Ruby Red Missouri where Dem enthusiasm superiority was again clearly on display.Another problem the Pubs face is that there key Legislative "success" (the tax plan) is extremely polarizing and likely energizes opponents to the same (or even more) extent that it does supporters.
I don't do anything with politics in Missouri. If you were half the critic your mouth has you acting like, you'd know that. But, its you, so of course you don't.
Compared to you, thousand of people are "high and might duck(s) about everything political"
Stop stalking me, take your insane anger and stuff it up your anal aperture.
Going to be an absolute knock-down-drag-out for control of the House this fall. My guess is the R's likely maintain by a seat or two, which will lead to at least two more years of hysterics.
We shall see....
We shall see....
