2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6182
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:49 pm UTC

https://www.npr.org/2018/06/25/62317087 ... errymander
Now seems as good as time as any to talk 2018 expectations.
Judge Kennedy pulled a total cocktease on liberals after hinting that he was looking for a way to measure & limit gerrymandering. Instead, he sided with conservatives in a series of cases that either overturned, or upheld conservative maps for 1 more election... The same election that controls redistricting for the next 10 years. The details of the case provides liberals a path forward, but it won't affect the 2018 election.

This means Democrats will have to power through a 5-7 point handicap with only Trump's craziness and a fired up base to help Democrats. It's not looking great, and the Democrats are currently around 50/50 to take Congress.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:58 pm UTC

They killed one district, at least? Not sure of the impact, not being familiar with Texas districts, but my first instinct is to guess that TX gerrymandering probably favors republicans.

It's definitely not a sweeping denouement of gerrymongering, but it's a consolation prize.

MD primaries are live right now, but honestly, the big races are either unopposed, or not meaningfully opposed. So, probably little to report there. What's your take on the odds for the senate and house respectively?

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:38 pm UTC

To be fair, at least as far as gerrymandering is concerned - the justices didn't overturn the Pennsylvania decision. So it's been a kind of mixed bag on gerrymandering. I think the Pennsylvania decision was a much clearer case of gerrymandering though. I mean come on, that was just stupid - and why they thought they could get away with it is beyond me.

I thought we had another thread for 2018?

Anyways. At this point I'm pegging the Republicans to gain a couple senate seats and to lose a few house seats. Neither being enough to change balance of power significantly.

The Claire McCaskill race in Missouri will be the major indicator of where things fall imo. If she loses, I believe my prediction to be accurate. If she wins then I suspect the Dems ultimately take the senate and likely the house. Right now I just don't see her winning based on what I see on the ground - how well Trump did in the state in 2016 and how well Roy Blunt did in 2016 (and he wasn't exactly the most popular of choices). That being said - RCP has McCaskill up +1.7 right now. Trump won missouri by 18 points. - I never realized it was that high. Closest poll to predicting that in 2016 was the Emerson poll that had him at +15.


Edit: I'd like to add, one thing the democrats have going for them in the 2018 midterm, on the house side, is a strong group of moderate candidates in districts that probably shouldn't be as competitive as they are. (Lean red but polling shows the Dem performing well, in some cases leading.) These candidates look a lot like connor lamb - a sign the dems have learned from their successes so far. But also a sign that the electorate is shifting.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jun 25, 2018 10:11 pm UTC

They're definitely stronger in the senate than in congress, I think. Senate map just gives the Democrats far fewer opportunities.

Thing is, democrats need to at least pick up the majority in congress. If they don't, and it's as you suspect, a coupla senate seats for the Republicans, and a couple of house seats for the Democrats, effectively a draw, that'll largely get interpreted as tacit approval of the current course of action. In which case, Democrats lose a lot of the leverage they have left.

We're also seeing a coupla republican candidates get selected that are Trumpers. This matters, as the Republican mainstream has sort of resisted Trump to some degree. If he gets a larger pocket of dedicated politicians, and the majority doesn't change, he'll have less trouble getting legislation passed. So, that adds to my sentiment that anything less than grabbing control of the house is effectively a loss for the Democrats.

Once the primaries shake out, we should be able to calculate decentish numbers for chance of victory for each.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Tue Jun 26, 2018 1:24 am UTC

Well said
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jun 27, 2018 8:51 pm UTC

So, primary voting. I didn't make it to my polling station until after work, and the place was frigging dead. Vote counter on the machine said 75, ticking up to 76 with me. Gonna guess that MD gives basically zero fucks about showing up for primaries.

In fairness, many of the candidates didn't seem to care that much. Doing my pre-voting research the morning of, because procrastination, I'd estimate that a solid third I looked up had no web page, nor any other publicly available interviews, etc find-able by a google search where I could read their views. Now, I only check the first page of results, but even so. If you're running for office, you might want to lock that down. Particularly if going for say, US Senator or the like. Half the races were uncontested, and a further two candidates had a history of what appeared to be blatant fraud. So, not all that many actual choices to make. In most cases, it was just "do they appear vaguely coherent, and actually manage to outline a platform".

A bit disappointing, but eh, thinning out the chaff is half of what primaries are about.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jun 28, 2018 12:41 am UTC

So it is all over the news that a powerful NY representative lost a primary to a woman half his age with no actual experience. Less prominent in the news reports is that said representative was one of the most corrupt and despised among the Dems, but let's ignore that. The point is, all the efforts to get out the vote, to galvanize the democratic base to destroy Trump? The Democratic establishment itself is going to be gutted first, and as much as they should be, this may backfire and result in a weakened Democrat party.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6182
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Thu Jun 28, 2018 1:11 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:So it is all over the news that a powerful NY representative lost a primary to a woman half his age with no actual experience. Less prominent in the news reports is that said representative was one of the most corrupt and despised among the Dems, but let's ignore that. The point is, all the efforts to get out the vote, to galvanize the democratic base to destroy Trump? The Democratic establishment itself is going to be gutted first, and as much as they should be, this may backfire and result in a weakened Democrat party.

538 counterpoint is that the progressive wing of democrats have won in are limited to really safe seats that don't matter.
Aka the Democrat's version of the tea party/insurgency is much weaker and strategic than the GOP's 2010 version. A real progressive at all cost liberal would force out a decent moderate in a swing district/state in exchange for purity.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/statu ... 0500964352

Tyndmyr wrote:They're definitely stronger in the senate than in congress, I think. Senate map just gives the Democrats far fewer opportunities.
Thing is, democrats need to at least pick up the majority in congress. If they don't, and it's as you suspect, a coupla senate seats for the Republicans, and a couple of house seats for the Democrats, effectively a draw, that'll largely get interpreted as tacit approval of the current course of action. In which case, Democrats lose a lot of the leverage they have left.
We're also seeing a coupla republican candidates get selected that are Trumpers. This matters, as the Republican mainstream has sort of resisted Trump to some degree. If he gets a larger pocket of dedicated politicians, and the majority doesn't change, he'll have less trouble getting legislation passed. So, that adds to my sentiment that anything less than grabbing control of the house is effectively a loss for the Democrats.
Once the primaries shake out, we should be able to calculate decentish numbers for chance of victory for each.

The economic modeling (which doesn't include polling) would assume that a good night for a generic Democrat party with this seat mix, would mean only LOSING 2 seats in the Senate. The map is fucking that awful. Luckily(which isn't worth a lot) Jeff Session's old seat met a Republican pedophile, so Doug Jones measurably increased the odds of a Democratic Senate majority. Unfortunately, McCain didn't die/retire before the July/June deadline, so that hurts the chances of a Democratic majority. Sorry for the ghoulishness. From there, you really need to model this out, or else it's really hard to suss out all the little things that matter. Like Senator Mccaskill polling well. In other words, I dearly miss 538's forecasting model, and want it to up and running already.

I'm quoting from 538 about the economic model.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jun 28, 2018 1:48 am UTC

That's missing the point. The seats arent at stake but these are the seats occupied by the leadership. The leadership itself is getting the boot.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 1:09 pm UTC

I think the biggest thing to take away is that Connelly was on the short list of people who might be a challenger to Pelosi's potential speakership. (should they get a majority in the house - which is definitely a possibility).

In a way, Pelosi should really be jumping for joy.

On the other hand, this is somewhat of a repudiation of the leadership. There is definitely going to be some soul searching and a lot of work in front of the dem's to keep their caucus in line. I wouldn't be surprised if you end up with a version of the freedom caucus that the republicans have on the democrats side. You have a lot of the traditional blue dog (reagan democrats etc) that are running as moderates who support some of trump's policies (economically for instance) like conner lamb. Then you have ultra left progressives like Cortez.

The media needs to be careful. They are fawning over her right now. And they should to a certain extent - she just unseated a what 13 term representative? But you risk creating a schism in the democrat party that may make the potential majority ineffective at getting anything passed (much the same way the freedom caucus has stopped some of the immigration bills recently that even I found to be agreeable to). Not that I'm complaining. I love this kind of stuff.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby natraj » Thu Jun 28, 2018 2:01 pm UTC

the democrats are already completely ineffective at getting anything passed
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:03 pm UTC

Cortez wants to be president

That didn't take long for the media to start pushing it forward. She's got a few years to go still. At 28 (29 at the start of the start of the next congress term) years old I think she might be the youngest member of congress yes? (Note I think its safe to assume she wins the general at this point - do republicans even try to run in this district?)
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby natraj » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:21 pm UTC

trpmb6 wrote:(Note I think its safe to assume she wins the general at this point - do republicans even try to run in this district?)


literally the exact article trmpie just linked wrote:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a favorite to beat Republican candidate Anthony Pappas in November.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:21 pm UTC

Another young face with no actual accomplishments under their belt? Oh god no.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:25 pm UTC

natraj wrote:
trpmb6 wrote:(Note I think its safe to assume she wins the general at this point - do republicans even try to run in this district?)


literally the exact article trmpie just linked wrote:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a favorite to beat Republican candidate Anthony Pappas in November.


I had to go to the article again to find that. Still didn't see it. Then I saw it buried beneath a giant ad as the last sentence. So that explains why I didn't see it the first time.

also it is trpmb6, or if you prefer fascist fuck is also apparently acceptable
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26356
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:34 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Another young face with no actual accomplishments under their belt? Oh god no.

What kinds of accomplishments should someone have before being a Representative?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

gd1
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gd1 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:36 pm UTC

trpmb6 wrote:
natraj wrote:
trpmb6 wrote:(Note I think its safe to assume she wins the general at this point - do republicans even try to run in this district?)


literally the exact article trmpie just linked wrote:Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a favorite to beat Republican candidate Anthony Pappas in November.


I had to go to the article again to find that. Still didn't see it. Then I saw it buried beneath a giant ad as the last sentence. So that explains why I didn't see it the first time.

also it is trpmb6, or if you prefer fascist fuck is also apparently acceptable


Well, if it counts, you have my sympathy. I don't agree with supporting Trump or just about anything he's done and I'm Muslim so I'm not sure how you feel about that, but my heart does feel a bit for you.
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:38 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Another young face with no actual accomplishments under their belt? Oh god no.

What kinds of accomplishments should someone have before being a Representative?


No, for being President.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8077
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Zohar » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:41 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Another young face with no actual accomplishments under their belt? Oh god no.

What sort of people do you think run to for congress? Not trashing congresspeople (although...) but this is supposed to be a position that's easier to get and approachable by "the common person".
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26356
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jun 28, 2018 4:54 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Another young face with no actual accomplishments under their belt? Oh god no.

What kinds of accomplishments should someone have before being a Representative?

No, for being President.

She's 28 now, so presumably would have at least a decade in Congress under her belt before that's even an option.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:03 pm UTC

gd1 wrote:
I'm Muslim so I'm not sure how you feel about that, but my heart does feel a bit for you.


Your religious beliefs or anyone else's religious beliefs (or lack of religious beliefs) make no difference to me, despite what many would like to portray trump supporters as. I don't go around asking people what their beliefs are before engaging in discussion with them. Have two Muslims on my soccer team and didn't know they were until we were at an after game dinner where they asked for special dietary considerations. Now their soccer abilities.. well one is quite good, the other, needs to work on not poking at the ball on defense and just standing up his opponent. But we did well last night - won 7-2.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26356
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:11 pm UTC

"Some of my best friends are Muslims, but I don't let that stop me from supporting a president who wants to prevent more from coming to the country."
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby trpmb6 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 5:44 pm UTC

ah so predictable. I knew that was coming.

Don't let your blind hatred for trump get in the way of seeing the facts of the travel ban case. The case was not too dissimilar to the situation that will arise soon for certain states that don't issue state ID's that comply with the Real ID Act.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

gd1
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:42 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gd1 » Thu Jun 28, 2018 10:29 pm UTC

trpmb6 wrote:
gd1 wrote:
I'm Muslim so I'm not sure how you feel about that, but my heart does feel a bit for you.


Your religious beliefs or anyone else's religious beliefs (or lack of religious beliefs) make no difference to me, despite what many would like to portray trump supporters as. I don't go around asking people what their beliefs are before engaging in discussion with them. Have two Muslims on my soccer team and didn't know they were until we were at an after game dinner where they asked for special dietary considerations. Now their soccer abilities.. well one is quite good, the other, needs to work on not poking at the ball on defense and just standing up his opponent. But we did well last night - won 7-2.


I didn't word that as nicely as I should have. So I'm sorry for that. It's good to see that you feel that way. Regrettably, I feel that Trump may go after us to make himself look better. I know that painting with a broad brush is dangerous. In the same way that Trump supporters aren't all cut from the same cloth, most Muslims don't want violence against anyone. We're a religion of peace, but unfortunately some people have taken a piecemeal message to raise their own power.

I used to volunteer with some Republicans who were afraid Obama would go for a third term (though I've glossed over stuff that I shouldn't have in the past so I can't judge them). They seemed like good people generally and had no problem with me being Muslim. My worry is that with a red tide + supreme court + Trump we will be deported for our religion. Maybe it's unfounded, but I don't know the rules anymore. I'm sorry things are going this way. Thank you for having a reasonable view of Muslims.
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:15 pm UTC

Apparently, Crowley's district got much, much more Hispanic over the past 20 years, while he himself stayed Irish. Importing millions of voters will help in the general election, but the immigrants themselves won't just fall in line to support whomever the Dem leadership says they should support. So I wonder how this is going to impact the Dem leadership's dealing with immigration, legal and otherwise. My guess is that the Dem leadership may push for more of the immigrants to settle in Republican districts in order to have some sort of political colonization, while keeping immigrants out of Dem strongholds.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6182
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:46 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Apparently, Crowley's district got much, much more Hispanic over the past 20 years, while he himself stayed Irish. Importing millions of voters will help in the general election, but the immigrants themselves won't just fall in line to support whomever the Dem leadership says they should support. So I wonder how this is going to impact the Dem leadership's dealing with immigration, legal and otherwise. My guess is that the Dem leadership may push for more of the immigrants to settle in Republican districts in order to have some sort of political colonization, while keeping immigrants out of Dem strongholds.

That is wild speculation and not how immigration works.
For everyone talking about just how great the liberal tea party faction is doing, can you explain Chelsea Manning and Nixon's loss in the primary? I'm skeptical of the strength of insurgents compared to the establishment especially if you consider who's in leadership positions.
CorruptUser wrote:That's missing the point. The seats arent at stake but these are the seats occupied by the leadership. The leadership itself is getting the boot.

Are there any other examples of Democratic leadership getting the boot? Like how many positions need to fall before we notice a change in DCCC administrative policy?

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jun 29, 2018 3:00 pm UTC

sardia wrote:That is wild speculation and not how immigration works.


You sure about that? Hillary won 66% of the Latino vote, dominating among every group except Cubans, and Obama did even better. The Democrats have generally won with hispanics, which is the real reason why the Dems want more Latino immigrants and Reps want less. Or really, for/against the amnesty of the immigrants already here.

Hardly the first time; Tammany Hall basically operated on promoting immigration but ensuring the immigrants all fell in line with the party, and it certainly didn't stop in the 19th century.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6182
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Fri Jun 29, 2018 5:22 pm UTC

Let me clarify, how exactly does a organization get immigrants to settle in Republican districts as oppose to say, districts that hire immigrants?
What is the Democrat's generic position on immigrants now and what do progressives hope to shift it to?

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jun 29, 2018 6:10 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Let me clarify, how exactly does a organization get immigrants to settle in Republican districts as oppose to say, districts that hire immigrants?


I went to school in Albany. There were originally 4 major dorms; two were in Albany itself, while two were built in the neighboring town. This was done on purpose, to ensure that the neighboring town had an extra few thousand Dem votes every election. In Albany itself, it's de facto illegal to convert a rental into a home (basically, you get struck with exorbitant property taxes that existing homes don't have), because homeowners and renters have different voting patterns.

It's not impossible to rig the electorate itself. Change building codes, allow or disallow major construction projects based on what you are hoping to achieve, support or oppose various industries depending on what impact they will have on your counties. Prevent new, cheap buildings from being built so that poor immigrants can't move in to your city. Failing that, just gerrymander as needed.

sardia wrote:What is the Democrat's generic position on immigrants now and what do progressives hope to shift it to?


Given the pushes for amnesty over the past few decades, I'd say the generic position has been "convert almost all illegal immigrants into voting citizens".

As for what the progessives hope to shift it to, I'm not sure. As for what the old guard will do, like I said, policies that, while inviting them into the US, push them more toward Republican dominated districts.

dg61
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:30 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby dg61 » Fri Jun 29, 2018 7:28 pm UTC

The issue is also that the Republicans went from trying to court Hispanics* on the logic that they're socially somewhat conservative and often small business owners to essentially running on white nationalism, which meant that they have every incentive to view them as automatic democratic voters and no incentive not to alienate them. Ditto Muslims with Dubya interestingly and older Asian-Americans. In theory, if the Republicans had or did drop the white nationalist wing of the party and didn't just run on that, they would have every incentive to try and cater to Hispanic immigrants and non-immigrant Hispanics by offering policies that benefit them and align with their class interests, recruiting and promoting conservative Hispanics, offering a more nuanced or slightly opener immigration policy(for example, officially embracing not actively seeking out non-feloniously criminal undocumented/illegal immigrants, reducing the complexity of the legal immigration system.

dg61
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:30 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby dg61 » Fri Jun 29, 2018 7:36 pm UTC

As for Manning and Nixon-I can't speculate on Nixon(although she did quite well apparently) but Manning ran against a strong and well-liked incumbent in a district with a lot of government workers and people who are generally more hawkish while not really having much of a platform and putting in appearances at some dodgy events. So it's not surprising that she did worse, and a lot of people were saying that she'd have done better to run for a House seat in a year or two or run for state/county level legislature.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jun 29, 2018 8:34 pm UTC

Oh, almost forgot about gentrification and "urban renewal" projects!

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6182
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Fri Jun 29, 2018 10:28 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I went to school in Albany. There were originally 4 major dorms; two were in Albany itself, while two were built in the neighboring town. This was done on purpose, to ensure that the neighboring town had an extra few thousand Dem votes every election. In Albany itself, it's de facto illegal to convert a rental into a home (basically, you get struck with exorbitant property taxes that existing homes don't have), because homeowners and renters have different voting patterns.
It's not impossible to rig the electorate itself. Change building codes, allow or disallow major construction projects based on what you are hoping to achieve, support or oppose various industries depending on what impact they will have on your counties. Prevent new, cheap buildings from being built so that poor immigrants can't move in to your city. Failing that, just gerrymander as needed.
sardia wrote:What is the Democrat's generic position on immigrants now and what do progressives hope to shift it to?

Given the pushes for amnesty over the past few decades, I'd say the generic position has been "convert almost all illegal immigrants into voting citizens".
As for what the progessives hope to shift it to, I'm not sure. As for what the old guard will do, like I said, policies that, while inviting them into the US, push them more toward Republican dominated districts.

I sorta get what you're talking about now. Except you're attributing different motivations to actions. Like when you see NIMBYism, and lack of cheap housing in cities, you see a deliberate plan from Democrats to affect election results? I've definitely heard, and seen the effects of Democrats self sorting into cities and coastal states. That's well documented. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th ... -problems/
1. Geographic sorting — Voters tend to cluster near other people who share their cultural and political values, and the parties’ coalitions have become far more geographically isolated in recent decades.
Secondly, if you look at the trends, whatever you're claiming the Democrats are doing either isn't working, or is being overwhelmed by self-sorting & gerrymandering. On top of that, why Latinos? I suppose it's plausible that Politicians are stupid, and keep hoping for that Latino wave, but statisticians, and political junkies all know that Latinos are like 2/5s of a voter. If Democrats wanted to do this, they'd do it to seniors and white people. That way you get some bang for your buck. Is this an Albany thing? It might slip under the radar given that local elections are a different dynamic.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9875
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Jun 30, 2018 12:22 pm UTC

When I see a system that is blatantly rigged to ensure an artificially high number of renters, I see politics. Whenever a government subsidizes or restricts certain industries, I especially see politics. As far as affordable housing and all instead of rent vs own, it's more about ensuring rich people never have to interact with the middle class more than necessary, sort of like Manhattan has all the middle class come in during the day to make the rich richer, but leave by nightfall. There's actually a decent* reason why the rich do this; if you spent a decade getting your kid into the best schools and the best social clubs you don't want it all to be thrown away by letting them date some upper middle class bum.

*logical that is, certainly not ethical

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 02, 2018 4:43 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:So it is all over the news that a powerful NY representative lost a primary to a woman half his age with no actual experience. Less prominent in the news reports is that said representative was one of the most corrupt and despised among the Dems, but let's ignore that. The point is, all the efforts to get out the vote, to galvanize the democratic base to destroy Trump? The Democratic establishment itself is going to be gutted first, and as much as they should be, this may backfire and result in a weakened Democrat party.


Perhaps in some areas, or in the short term, but in the long term, getting rid of the corrupt and the despised ought to strengthen the party overall.

No actual experience might be a weak point, but it can be pitched as an outsider advantage when the insiders have a reputation of corruption and general awfulness. I don't think this is, in the end, all that bad for Democrats. The specific candidate might have issues in terms of this or that, but party wide, both parties would benefit by shedding a bit of dead weight.

sardia wrote:The economic modeling (which doesn't include polling) would assume that a good night for a generic Democrat party with this seat mix, would mean only LOSING 2 seats in the Senate. The map is fucking that awful.


Oh, I wholly agree. The polling maybe pushes it slightly more for the Dems, but at the end of the day, the map is a really, really steep uphill climb in the senate. I feel confident that my Predictit bets that the Republicans will maintain control there will pay off. There's luck, and then there's the hail mary of factors that need to line up for the Democrats to win 51 seats.

CorruptUser wrote:That's missing the point. The seats arent at stake but these are the seats occupied by the leadership. The leadership itself is getting the boot.


Yeah, and given the state of Dem leadership, that's likely a good thing. Shake things up a little bit, let them know that they're not wholly safe from all repercussion.

gd1 wrote:I used to volunteer with some Republicans who were afraid Obama would go for a third term (though I've glossed over stuff that I shouldn't have in the past so I can't judge them). They seemed like good people generally and had no problem with me being Muslim. My worry is that with a red tide + supreme court + Trump we will be deported for our religion. Maybe it's unfounded, but I don't know the rules anymore. I'm sorry things are going this way. Thank you for having a reasonable view of Muslims.


Republicans said the same thing about Clinton. Some democrats expressed similar fear regarding Bush, and if Trump gets a second term, I imagine they will be concerned about Trump's respect for term limits as well. In the end, it's been a long time since someone's had a third term, and nowadays, it's not done. Perhaps the trend will eventually end, but the amount of fearmongering around it seems out of proportion to the likelihood.

Deporting people directly for their religion is probably not going to fly. However, somewhat more indirect things can. For instance, targeting countries of origin that have a lot of a given religion. It's not identical to targeting religious beliefs, but it does have a highly disproportionate impact. I would generally suggest having one's ducks in a row as much as possible legally if one is not a citizen.

sardia wrote:For everyone talking about just how great the liberal tea party faction is doing, can you explain Chelsea Manning and Nixon's loss in the primary?


Chelsea Manning is an entitled ass, and also sort of a traitor. She does not enjoy much of a reputation hereabouts in MD. Had she somehow pulled off the primary, she'd have likely lost the general. In MD, which is nearly impossible for a democrat.

I think young candidates *can* do well in the democratic party, but certainly not every candidate will. They've got to avoid falling into obvious errors along the way still.

sardia wrote:Let me clarify, how exactly does a organization get immigrants to settle in Republican districts as oppose to say, districts that hire immigrants?
What is the Democrat's generic position on immigrants now and what do progressives hope to shift it to?


I don't think that the party has any particular control over where immigrants go, outside of the case of Sanctuary Cities, which anyways would not be very effective at directing them to Republican districts.

That said, I do think that, logically, Democrats have been well served by courting the immigrant vote, and will continue to do so until it stops providing benefit. Why not, after all? Yeah, some of the benefit may accrue in districts which are currently already safe, but that's still at least some benefit.

dg61
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:30 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby dg61 » Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:00 pm UTC

A third term, barring a very early resignation of a sitting president and their veep coming to power, is constitutionally impossible.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8077
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Zohar » Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:13 pm UTC

dg61 wrote:A third term, barring a very early resignation of a sitting president and their veep coming to power, is constitutionally impossible.

Well we've seen how much respect Trump has for the constitution...
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

dg61
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:30 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby dg61 » Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:17 pm UTC

There's "Respect for the constitution" and there's "ability to completely blow it off without being frogmarched out of the oval office". More so than he already has I mean.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26356
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:22 pm UTC

Yeah, marching him out of the office requires people willing and able to actually do the marching.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

dg61
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:30 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby dg61 » Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:29 pm UTC

Yea I'm thinking more "that might be a bridge too far as opposed to "let him get shoved out, tweet about Rule of Law etc, then obstruct whatever dem has won"(on the assumption that he won't leave office specifically in that circumstance, there is obviously no incentive not to shove him out if e.g. he loses a primary to a republican who goes on to win the general" and just obstruct and block the dem into being a one-term president. Anyhow I see the Republican Party's antidemocratic elements going more PRI ish in this circumstance.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gmalivuk and 10 guests