2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

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

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

cphite
Posts: 1273
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby cphite » Mon Jul 02, 2018 7:03 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:
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...


His travel ban was effectively halted for a while despite being entirely constitutional; all because judges interjected. And while it did eventually get through the SCOTUS; the point is that it was still subject to that process. He couldn't pull it off by ignoring the law.

His immigrant detention program - while being morally abhorrent and unnecessary - was technically legal; but he stopped it due to political pressure.

In short, there are a plethora of examples of Trump being effectively shut down, both legally and politically.

The point is, he hasn't been able to just ignore the constitution even on much smaller issues; there are obstacles even when he's on solid legal footing. For something like ignoring the three term limit - where he'd be facing extreme resistance from the judiciary, the states, both chambers of congress, etc, etc... it's just extremely unlikely.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8170
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Zohar » Mon Jul 02, 2018 7:15 pm UTC

I didn't say he won't be stopped, I said he doesn't give much of a shit about it. Like wanting to deprive people of due process.
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: 26440
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 7:16 pm UTC

You mean the judiciary to whose highest court he's planning to appoint his second nomination in as many years? (Despite being currently under federal investigation)
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
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Mon Jul 02, 2018 8:16 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
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.

I was questioning CU's claim that the Democrats were packing Republican seats via regulations. Separately,I was questioning the strength of the liberal tea party parallel.
It sounded completely crazy and not likely to work when he said you could win seats by nimbyism as an example. Though the local politics in New York State are pretty crazy.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jul 03, 2018 2:39 pm UTC

Ah, yes. I'm in agreement with your questioning, then. Both claims sound like they need some support.

I think there's some tension in the Democratic party between the ol' guard and the Bernie sorts, but I don't know that it's an exact mirror of the tea party. If I had to guess, I'd say that the tension first became super apparent during the occupy wall street demonstrations. We go from there to Bernie's run, and now to successful primary challenges by socialists, so it *might* have legs...but that might also be attributing way too much importance nationally to individual events. I don't know new york's local politics well enough to say, but it certainly feels as if the tea party was far more successful nationally than the far left has been.

Anything that gets the youth engaging in politics is probably a good thing for the Democrats, though, so strategically, they probably ought to hope for a leftist tea party equivalent, even if they don't necessarily agree on every score.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:01 pm UTC

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/sta ... 2611234816
Time for some good news bad news. The bad news is as of right now, Ted Cruz is maintaining his lead over Beto in Texas.

For your consolation prize, here's an unsourced chart from Harry Enten.
GOP is opting not to share their internal polling while Democrats happily share their internal polling. This implies the GOP candidates don't like releasing bad numbers.
httpss://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/st ... 6633277441
So far about 86% (from what I see) of partisan House polls have been from Dem/liberal groups. Since 06 (as far back as I have data and a small sample size), the percentage of internals from liberal vs. conservative groups has said a lot about the November result

[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dh2n0a0X0AMCgVY.jpg
[/img]

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:36 pm UTC

Predictit, at present, is giving approximately 40% odds of the Republicans retaining control of the house, and 74% odds of the senate.

This would indicate a fairly low chance of the Democrats taking both. Obviously, the two variables are far from independent, so it's probably only marginally lower than the odds of a senate victory. Democrats grabbing the senate without also getting the house seems pretty unlikely.

As an aside, if you opt to invest money on the Republicans in congress, I'd strongly suggest betting on a seat spread. The odds are at least somewhat skewed by partisans who believe a huge red tide is possible/probable, whereas a republican-retained congress is highly likely to be fairly modestly red. You can cover the reasonable point spread at about half the cost of betting on simply "republican win" with a marginal amount of additional risk. I'm wrong about this only if Republicans are, somehow, going to utterly blow out the election, but I see no indications of that.

I would add to the the polling comment that, generally, democrat/liberal groups have seemed to have better data gathering/handling overall for the past several election cycles. This is a bit subjective, but I think it may provide them with a small edge. Maybe not huge, but it at least provides a potential way to better approach a given race. This may explain part of the availability discrepancy, but I think it still is a positive indication for Democrats, regardless of which interpretation you go with.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:34 pm UTC

FYI the internal polling release rate is also correlated to Republicans wave elections as well. This doesn't mean that interna polll release rate is a leading predictor or anything special. It could just be noise, or predicting a small wave or it's a signal about the confidence of each party.
But this month sucks for Democrats, and they need some good news.
I was hoping that McCain and that other old fogey senator would retire/die in time for a November election, but it looks like both of them are playing "Weekend at Bernie's" until the next election. If McCain goes out, the GOP can now appoint a Republican instead of an election.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:48 pm UTC

sardia wrote:FYI the internal polling release rate is also correlated to Republicans wave elections as well.


Huh, interesting, I didn't know that. Why do you think that is?

I was hoping that McCain and that other old fogey senator would retire/die in time for a November election, but it looks like both of them are playing "Weekend at Bernie's" until the next election. If McCain goes out, the GOP can now appoint a Republican instead of an election.


Super common strategy. I suspect at this point, they're all going to stall for the appointment if at all possible. If necessary, they might turn to necromancy.

If it's any consolation, prediction market odds have, over the long term, been sliding more Democrat for the house. If that trend continues until election time, it might look fairly positive for them. There's less good news regarding the Senate, but that was always going to be a rough map.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Mon Jul 16, 2018 6:13 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Huh, interesting, I didn't know that. Why do you think that is?
I was hoping that McCain and that other old fogey senator would retire/die in time for a November election, but it looks like both of them are playing "Weekend at Bernie's" until the next election. If McCain goes out, the GOP can now appoint a Republican instead of an election.


Super common strategy. I suspect at this point, they're all going to stall for the appointment if at all possible. If necessary, they might turn to necromancy.
If it's any consolation, prediction market odds have, over the long term, been sliding more Democrat for the house. If that trend continues until election time, it might look fairly positive for them. There's less good news regarding the Senate, but that was always going to be a rough map.

I'm guessing it's confidence inference. Or the Democratic internal pollsters get better numbers, so they release them more. The only thing worse than not saying you're winning is admitting you're losing. Harry has a formal article now about it.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/14/politics ... index.html
As for McCain and other old fogey, the deadline passed in June it doesn't matter if they die now, they'll just be appointed by Republican governor's.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 16, 2018 6:44 pm UTC

Interesting...probably a mix of looking favorable for Democrat house races and better democrat polling.

Makes sense. I'd guess that the regression to the mean as the election day approaches is because the party who's behind can't get away with releasing nothing for forever. They might sandbag and filter results to some degree, or delay publishing, but just ignoring everything makes you look out of touch. So, sooner or later, you get some studies out.

Shame there's not more non-partisan polling, but this is definitely an interesting way of extracting additional meaning from partisan polling.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7459
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:05 pm UTC

I might have asked this before, but I still dont quite understand it: Why are people so invested in predictions about the election, with all the cycles and epicycles of polling and aggregation and what not? It's only a few months in the future to get the actual outcome.

I understand why it matters for professional politicians, who have to make decisions today, based on what they think will happen in the future. But for the ordinary news-watching public?

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3900
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Dauric » Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:28 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:I might have asked this before, but I still dont quite understand it: Why are people so invested in predictions about the election, with all the cycles and epicycles of polling and aggregation and what not? It's only a few months in the future to get the actual outcome.

I understand why it matters for professional politicians, who have to make decisions today, based on what they think will happen in the future. But for the ordinary news-watching public?


The tribal conflict. Party affiliation is often a tribal membership thing, more so than actual policy support. Just like backing a local sports team marks one as a member of the community, being a member of a political party can be as much a badge of membership, or even familial connection. Elections are as much about communities being able to say "We're better than you" as any sportsball events.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:51 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:I might have asked this before, but I still dont quite understand it: Why are people so invested in predictions about the election, with all the cycles and epicycles of polling and aggregation and what not? It's only a few months in the future to get the actual outcome.

I understand why it matters for professional politicians, who have to make decisions today, based on what they think will happen in the future. But for the ordinary news-watching public?

You have a point that a lot of what we post doesn't matter. But you could say that about much of life. Secondly, I think it has way more value than listening to news commentary on tv.
Lastly, there's a bias towards thinking recent events as the status quo. When Obama was elected, we thought we were in a new age after Bush. When Trump was elected, people thought we were in a dark era that will last decades.

I got tired of people posting wrong assumptions about the world. Like how nothing bad has happened to Trump's approval rating, or how great x thing is for you, only to be debunked later.

Aren't you curious if the age of free trade is coming to an end? Or if the far right in Europe will maintain it's strength? Isn't knowing about that ahead of time important? US Politics (along with the rise of the far right worldwide) touches so much, and with an increasing divergence in the political parties, it affects more than you expect. Wanting to know more can't be that crazy.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7459
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:25 pm UTC

Oh, I get the point of trying to understand the news better. Even imperfectly, and even if you can't do much to change it.

It's just that election prediction has such rapidly diminishing returns. Zero effort tells you that the democrats can theoretically get a majority in one or both chambers. A little bit of polling says that it's more than theoretical, but very far from a sure thing. After that, all the extra effort just gives variations on that theme.

If the goal is to understand broad trends in American politics, than this is enough. A few percent left or right might radically flip the outcome, but it's still only a few percent. The losing party is still big, the winning party not much bigger.

If the goal is to understand what 2019 might be like in advance, then you have to look at multiple scenarios anyway. Once a scenario crosses a certain threshold of possibly, it goes on the list. The subtleties of polling and other forms of haruspicy won't change that.

User avatar
dubsola
Posts: 2282
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:55 am UTC
Location: Sunny Snakeville

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby dubsola » Wed Jul 18, 2018 4:42 am UTC

sardia wrote:When Trump was elected, people thought we were in a dark era that will last decades.

It feels like decades already

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 18, 2018 3:10 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:I might have asked this before, but I still dont quite understand it: Why are people so invested in predictions about the election, with all the cycles and epicycles of polling and aggregation and what not? It's only a few months in the future to get the actual outcome.

I understand why it matters for professional politicians, who have to make decisions today, based on what they think will happen in the future. But for the ordinary news-watching public?


It's like watching sports, only with more potential impact on your life. Part of it's the team-based thing, and part of it's concern for if OtherParty is going to ruin the laws regarding the thing you enjoy. The latter can be quite personal indeed. More abstractly, predicting the future accurately is a fairly challenging problem, and getting better at it is advantageous for a great many things. Pulling apart data models and the like appeals to folks who enjoy understanding trickier problems.

So, all in all, it's probably a good bit more valuable than getting invested in a sports team.

Zamfir wrote:It's just that election prediction has such rapidly diminishing returns. Zero effort tells you that the democrats can theoretically get a majority in one or both chambers. A little bit of polling says that it's more than theoretical, but very far from a sure thing. After that, all the extra effort just gives variations on that theme.


Well, small errors can have significant consequences. Trump's election is a great example. Tons of media sources were posting assessments that he had very little chance to win indeed. More careful analysis was much closer to equal, such as 538's forecast showing him as an underdog, but one with a substantial shot at it. The difference between those two is very large in practice, and understanding that many people were greatly underpricing Trumps odds personally made me a couple hundred dollars.

It also can matter if you intend to dabble into political support yourself. You may not wish to throw money behind a doomed race, but still contribute to one with a fighting chance, though disadvantaged. Knowing where to best allocate money is a potential advantage to the Democrats from their better polling. I'm not sure that all donors do this, but as we all have limited resources, it seems like it could be a pretty concrete advantage.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:15 pm UTC

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/21/politics ... index.html
Progressive/liberal wing of Democratic party isn't attracting blacks. No blacks, no primary wins.
Cuomo's margin over Nixon among black voters at 74% to 17%.
His advantage among black voters is no fluke.
When Ocasio-Cortez was cruising district-wide, she was weak in black neighborhoods. She was able to win in large part because of strength in areas with larger white populations.
Progressive Daniel Biss lost the Illinois gubernatorial primary earlier this year at least partially because he ran weak in the black neighborhoods of Chicago.

Interesting tidbit, blacks identify as Democrats. Liberal wing politicians & co. Identify as liberal independent that vote Democrats.
Tidbit 2, those evil Democrats in name only moderates? They're black people. Until the Bernie wing figures out a way to appeal to blacks, they'll struggle to win.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:31 pm UTC

That makes sense. Wasn't there something about the Bernie crowd being unusually white for the party back during the primaries?

I'm realizing now that I don't think I've ever met anyone black who identified as a socialist. For some reason, it hadn't occurred to me until now, but it seems there's a really sharp divide. The Democrats do a great job of appealing to black voters, but they seem to fall into the more mainstream wing of the party. Eyeballing the metrics, it seems as if black voters are a prime opportunity for Republicans to expand their appeal.

Now, I don't think the Republicans are properly capitalizing on this, but it's an unforced error on their part.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:17 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:That makes sense. Wasn't there something about the Bernie crowd being unusually white for the party back during the primaries?

I'm realizing now that I don't think I've ever met anyone black who identified as a socialist. For some reason, it hadn't occurred to me until now, but it seems there's a really sharp divide. The Democrats do a great job of appealing to black voters, but they seem to fall into the more mainstream wing of the party. Eyeballing the metrics, it seems as if black voters are a prime opportunity for Republicans to expand their appeal.

Now, I don't think the Republicans are properly capitalizing on this, but it's an unforced error on their part.

Bernie's strength is white or young. So there are black Bernie voters, they're just young, and young people have low voting rates.

They could be, as coalitions can change quickly. However, the old white dudes coalitions can keep it up for the next 5 to 20 years. For example, you cut off immigration, criminalize minorities, voter id/suppression, and gerrymandered the rest. Now you can win with only 30% of the population. Having a small voting block also makes it easier to bribe them. (Eg you subsidized coal production or tariffs goods. You get the support of white industries while harming the economy of your opponents).
Here's the thing though about minorities, even after all the trash talking that Trump did, he still had black, Hispanic and women voters. Why risk the loyalty of your base when you can trash minorities, and still get some of their votes.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... education/

This is all morally repugnant, but you can form a winning coalition of racial anxiety for a while longer.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:27 pm UTC

Can Trump even make it to eight years, though? I'm uncertain. It seems that there's some regression to the mean for most second term presidents, and Trump only just squeaked through the first time. Yeah, his electoral map was strong, but popular vote wasn't, and losing only a bit more off that popular vote on average could threaten a lot of his electoral advantages.

I certainly don't want to call it impossible...underestimating Trump appears to be a common error. That said, based solely on the numbers, if I were in Trump's spot, I'd have some concerns about making a second term.

Some sort of strategy change seems necessary by then. Sure, they can probably make it through the midterms with no grand strategic change, but next general election, it might be advisable for Republicans to have some kind of improved approach.

Tobias
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:01 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tobias » Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:45 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I'm realizing now that I don't think I've ever met anyone black who identified as a socialist.


I know a few. I think it's important to remember that black people were once at the forefront of the US socialist movement. MLK was socialist, the Rainbow Coalition and Black Panthers were socialist.

The government and society in general made it very clear that although they hated leftists in general they had particular scorn for black leftists, to the point having government agents openly assassinate their leaders. Their groups are almost always the first to be infiltrated by authorities and broken up, even today.

That certainly doesn't explain it all, just figured it was worth pointing out that a sharp divide between black Democrats and socialist Democrats hasn't always been the norm.
Last edited by Tobias on Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:35 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:53 pm UTC

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I hope not. He's an incumbent, he's got a good economy behind him. Also, he's starting trade wars, he makes stupid decisions that are impeachment worthy, and probably some other dirty shit that may matter (corruption, incompetence, racism, nazilover, weak on Russia etc etc.).

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 23, 2018 7:11 pm UTC

Trade war, depends on how it turns out. If the economy keeps chugging along well enough, and trade wars are peacefully handled, it can become part of an economic success narrative. If the trade war explodes into something that starts a recession, well...that's a horse of a different color. People will excuse a lot on the part of the successful, then cheerfully turn on them when they fall from grace.

If he tanks the economy, he'll suddenly have to deal with everything carrying a lot more weight, and having a lot more anger behind it. In that outcome, his fall goes pretty swiftly. Hell, depending on when, he might not even finish a term.

The question mostly comes down to how other countries respond. If they universally respond harshly, it's obvious that the US loses more than any of them. Alone, whoever, most countries can't exert enough force. China can do some, but the trade balance there means we can threaten more exports than they ever can. Russia can't actually threaten many exports, and have few direct options in terms of trade.

The EU kind of can, but they, as a whole, also represent a negative trade balance for the US. The UK, in position #7, is the largest trade partner to buy more from us than we do from them. Therefore, they may be best positioned to apply leverage. Does the UK want a trade war, though? I'm not sure they do.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby natraj » Mon Jul 23, 2018 10:40 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I'm realizing now that I don't think I've ever met anyone black who identified as a socialist. For some reason, it hadn't occurred to me until now, but it seems there's a really sharp divide.


do you hang out with enough socialists to get a representative sample? for that matter, do you hang out with enough diversity of black people to get a representative sample?

anyway, black people are *still* an enormous driving part of radical leftist movements. in both baltimore (iirc, where you live?) and dc the largest active socialist orgs are all driven in huge part by the energy of black organizers. i suspect that there's a whole lotta selection bias going on in your idea that black people are somehow less radical. many of the largest visible black liberation efforts that people can think of today (eg the movement for black lives & black lives matter) also owe a lot of their birth and sustained energy to the contributions of black radicals & black radical organizations.
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

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 23, 2018 10:46 pm UTC

natraj wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:I'm realizing now that I don't think I've ever met anyone black who identified as a socialist. For some reason, it hadn't occurred to me until now, but it seems there's a really sharp divide.


do you hang out with enough socialists to get a representative sample? for that matter, do you hang out with enough diversity of black people to get a representative sample?


The latter, sure. The former, potentially not.

I live 'bout midway between DC and Baltimore. Depending on where I'm renting have been in both metro areas, but I'm not super into most liberal things. Still, hard to avoid all the protests in DC.

Don't get me wrong. There's a *ton* of leftist groups here. Just...if you see a group emphasizing the "socialist" branding, rather than something else, it seems a lot more likely to be white guys.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby natraj » Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:34 pm UTC

i mean i am literally telling you about the makeup of socialist groups who i l i t e r a l l y work with constantly for the past several years but okay i guess your sample size of being a markedly racist nonblack person who doesn't hang out with socialists much is going to be hella more accurate than me, a black anarcho-communist who spends my entire life in leftist circles working with these folks. sure. cool. good 2 know.
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: 9994
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jul 23, 2018 11:59 pm UTC

You have it twisted. Slightly. African Americans didn't join left wing radical groups so much as left wing radical groups created/infiltrated/suborned/allied/supported African American rights groups, especially the pinko commie scum left wing radicals. The Birchers, that saw even moderates such as MLK as commie puppets? Not entirely unfounded. The Russians had been one of the if not the biggest driving forces of the Civil Rights Movement, not because they gave two shits about human rights but to sow discord in the US. And the CPUSA was the Russian's useful idiots, at least until 1956 and the Hungarian issue which gave incontrovertible evidence that Russia was not the worker's paradise it pretended to be. Not that the US wasn't doing similar, funding democratic groups not so much because the US cared about spreading democracy as much as causeing headaches for Russia.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Tue Jul 24, 2018 12:47 am UTC

natraj wrote:
do you hang out with enough socialists to get a representative sample? for that matter, do you hang out with enough diversity of black people to get a representative sample?

anyway, black people are *still* an enormous driving part of radical leftist movements. in both baltimore (iirc, where you live?) and dc the largest active socialist orgs are all driven in huge part by the energy of black organizers. i suspect that there's a whole lotta selection bias going on in your idea that black people are somehow less radical. many of the largest visible black liberation efforts that people can think of today (eg the movement for black lives & black lives matter) also owe a lot of their birth and sustained energy to the contributions of black radicals & black radical organizations.

How do you explain the lack of black voters for Nixon and Ocasio-Cortez? Or Hillary vs Bernie? I'm sure there's a substantial chunk of young black liberals, but the polling numbers & election results indicate, to 538, that there aren't enough of them. I mean the Democratic party has moved left, but we should be able to explain why progressives aren't getting as many black Democratic votes. Not trying to be critical here, just curious what your take is on that.
Last edited by sardia on Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:27 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6165
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Thesh » Tue Jul 24, 2018 12:55 am UTC

I think white and black people who identify as socialist are probably too small to make a difference. Sanders is not really a socialist, and he embraced the whole "let's stop worrying about racism, and focus on the white working class". I'm sure that's not what most black socialists have in mind.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3685
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Dark567 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 12:56 am UTC

The overrepresentation of the left end of the Democratic party is white, and its moderates tend to be more likely to be minorities. I'm not sure this is actually surprising, given that something like 60-70% of Latinos, and ~90% of African-American's identify as Dems and surely some of them are more moderate or even conservative, but would never vote for the GOP due to its history of racism.

Polling done by the Pew Research Center has suggested that among self-identified Democrats, blacks and Latinos are less likely to describe themselves as liberal than whites. Data from this AP/NORC poll comports with Pew’s findings: The majority of blacks say they are moderate (44 percent) or conservative (27 percent), while just 26 percent said that they are liberal.


https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... s-liberal/
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26440
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:49 am UTC

I'm not sure why you're bringing up polling of self identified Democrats in a part of the conversation that's about self identified socialists though.
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)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11207
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:45 pm UTC

natraj wrote:i mean i am literally telling you about the makeup of socialist groups who i l i t e r a l l y work with constantly for the past several years but okay i guess your sample size of being a markedly racist nonblack person who doesn't hang out with socialists much is going to be hella more accurate than me, a black anarcho-communist who spends my entire life in leftist circles working with these folks. sure. cool. good 2 know.


The point isn't that they don't exist, merely that Sardia's evidence happens to be supported by my personal experience. In terms of reliability, you of course ought to trust Pew's research over my anecdotal evidence.

Ocasio-Cortez has openly claimed the socialist moniker as well, thus the relevance. It isn't just Bernie. I also don't think her platform was only focused on white people. Thus, those seem like insufficient explanations for the trend.

I admit, saying that the Republicans aren't working hard enough to appeal to minorities is kinda the intellectually easy answer. That's not really a new thing. However, I feel relatively safe in saying it's part of the trend. There may be plenty of moderate black/other minority voters who could be appealed to by the Republicans if they put the effort in. They may not be very ideologically distant, but put off by other aspects of the party.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3685
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Dark567 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:16 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:I'm not sure why you're bringing up polling of self identified Democrats in a part of the conversation that's about self identified socialists though.

Err my mistake, its Democratic voters, and leaners, the self-identified part is ideology(although the line also says self-identified, the actual polls show registered voters). Most socialists seem to vote Democratic in general elections, and try to push the Democratic party in a more socialist direction, rather than vote for third party socialists. In theory, this still captures that.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby addams » Fri Jul 27, 2018 2:03 pm UTC

Microsoft has identified the Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill as a Target of Russian Hackers, 2018 Midterm Election Cycle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Glb7qi14sqY

Another link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF5bwqulET0
(if you can stomach the pre-report juvenile banter)

We need some of those patriotic hackers Putin talked about, on our side.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e675HQgBFE
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:27 am UTC

https://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/a ... n-results/
This is gonna be close one for O'Conner in Ohio, (The democrat). The last Special election before the midterms. If Democrats win this, they'll increase their chance of taking the House by 4%.

2018 is going to be a bit awkward for those who believe in consistency. Remember all those racist rural voters who went from Obama to Trump? They're coming back to the Democrats, while the rich 'smart' suburban voters are underperforming for Democrats. Luckily, partisanship is a great drug, so nobody is gonna mention it too much. This is all based on special election data from 538. Democrats are predicted to do well everywhere, just that their strengths in 18 isn't what people expected post 2016.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 9994
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:04 am UTC

And it looks like Balderson won by 1750 votes, or just under 1%, but O'Conner is contesting.

iamspen
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby iamspen » Wed Aug 08, 2018 5:11 am UTC

I have relatives in that district. It's legally upper-middle-class and whiter than the average Nickelback concert. A democratic loss by such a tiny margin in a special election that will be fought again in three months during a normal election cycle is a harbinger of doom for Republicans, especially since (I've read but not confirmed) there was an absolutely ridiculous disparity in campaign costs that favored Republicans.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6343
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby sardia » Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:34 am UTC

iamspen wrote:I have relatives in that district. It's legally upper-middle-class and whiter than the average Nickelback concert. A democratic loss by such a tiny margin in a special election that will be fought again in three months during a normal election cycle is a harbinger of doom for Republicans, especially since (I've read but not confirmed) there was an absolutely ridiculous disparity in campaign costs that favored Republicans.

This district was weird. 2017-2018 special elections have had democrats underperforming upper middle class areas. I need to go over the voter totals to see if that held up. Special elections are only individual data points. There's no guarantee that upper middle class have abandoned or moved enmasse towards democrats.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6165
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2018 Midterm Elections Coverage

Postby Thesh » Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:48 pm UTC

Well, pretty sure Collins is out. Not sure how competitive his district was before.

Chris Collins arrested for insider trading.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Armanant and 18 guests