Midterm Elections 2018

[dudog84]

I agree that Nick's graphic was needlessly confusing. While Sarah Jeong was a big topic of discussion on political sites this week, one shouldn't assume that everyone reading this thread is keeping up with those sites. (Indeed, folks might very well come to this thread in lieu of reading political sites). To answer some of your questions, here is my short summary: Sarah Jeong has a long history of making anti-white tweets. She says the tweets were satire and a mimicking of people who harassed her online. The New York Times has hired her to be part of their editorial board and stands by that decision.

Ok, that helps a bit. A wee bit. I have never heard of her. But his link has her tweets as being anti-black. And I still have no idea what that has to do with his statement about "fact reporting" (his quotation marks, not mine) in the very same sentence as the link. It appears his "fact" was not a "fact" at all. A bit strange, don't you think?

[Troublemaker]

It appears his "fact" was not a "fact" at all. A bit strange, don't you think?

No, because Nick told us it was that way in his original post.

And I still have no idea what that has to do with his statement about "fact reporting" (his quotation marks, not mine) in the very same sentence as the link.

Yeah, Nick will have to explain that himself. If I had to venture a guess, I suppose Nick was saying the NYT's credibility is called into question if it continues to employ Ms. Jeong on its editorial board. (IF that was his point, I don't necessarily agree.) Also, Nick may have found the NYT's explanation that Ms. Jeong was merely "imitating the rhetoric of her harassers" to be very dubious since the twitter history in question encompasses hundreds of posts over a period of 5+ years, most of which were not replies to other tweets. Tying this back into the midterms, I'll make a prediction (and I'll eat crow if I'm wrong). I believe the Rs will attempt to make Sarah Jeong a national name this week (probably via Trump's twitter). Like I said, she was all over the political blogosphere last week as the Left and the Right debated whether the NYT should continue to employ her, but unless you follow politics closely, you wouldn't have heard of her. The Rs' goal will be to start a national discussion about whether it is okay to tweet anti-white things like Ms. Jeong did. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but it would seem to be to be politically beneficial to the Rs if that discussion is had and to perhaps draw a comparison between Ms. Jeong keeping her job at the NYT and, say, Roseanne Barr losing her job.

[Wander]

Tying this back into the midterms, I'll make a prediction (and I'll eat crow if I'm wrong). I believe the Rs will attempt to make Sarah Jeong a national name this week (probably via Trump's twitter). Like I said, she was all over the political blogosphere last week as the Left and the Right debated whether the NYT should continue to employ her, but unless you follow politics closely, you wouldn't have heard of her. The Rs' goal will be to start a national discussion about whether it is okay to tweet anti-white things like Ms. Jeong did. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but it would seem to be to be politically beneficial to the Rs if that discussion is had and to perhaps draw a comparison between Ms. Jeong keeping her job at the NYT and, say, Roseanne Barr losing her job.

That's an interesting thought. I wouldn't be surprised if you're correct – anecdotally, I've seen the issue start to slowly creep up into my social media. And it would put Democrats into an awkward position, potentially dividing them between taking the moderate vs the extreme positions, like Republicans have had to do about things like gay marriage* in the recent past. BUT... it would have been more effective in the primaries or in a presidential election, and a lot of primaries are over. In a general senate/congressional race, it's just too obvious that the correct position politically would be "She said some crappy things, let me now pivot into saying that doesn't justify the terrifying attacks on journalists by this administration" or to just ignore it completely. Or it least that should be the obvious position, but politicians drop the ball on obvious choices all the time, so...

(*Sidenote: how crazy successful have gay marriage advocates been? Even Trump, who is clearly not afraid of embracing all sorts of R red meat issues, basically doesn't touch it. It has to be the most successful issue advocacy of the last view decades)

[PackMan97]

That's an interesting thought. I wouldn't be surprised if you're correct – anecdotally, I've seen the issue start to slowly creep up into my social media.

It's clear that both sized have begun to weaponize social media posts from some time ago. It's what got James Gunn fired from Guardians of the Galaxy 3. his tweets were over 10 years old and from before Disney signed him to direct the first Guardians movie.

MLB pitcher, Josh Hader, had to apologize for some offensive tweets he had back in HIGH SCHOOL!

Lord knows what you might find posted by me from the old days of usenet newsgroups (yes, I'm getting old and so is the interwebs). I wouldn't like myself from 25 years ago, but I grew up.

With the amount of social media, the archival history of the internet we are going to end up with people who have had their image scrubbed so clean running things that we have no idea who they are.

[Neals384]

I agree that Nick's graphic was needlessly confusing. While Sarah Jeong was a big topic of discussion on political sites this week, one shouldn't assume that everyone reading this thread is keeping up with those sites. (Indeed, folks might very well come to this thread in lieu of reading political sites). To answer some of your questions, here is my short summary: Sarah Jeong has a long history of making anti-white tweets. She says the tweets were satire and a mimicking of people who harassed her online. The New York Times has hired her to be part of their editorial board and stands by that decision.

Suppose her tweets were about any ethnicity other than white. Her journalism career would be over, period. So why is anti-white racism acceptable?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Suppose her tweets were about any ethnicity other than white. Her journalism career would be over, period. So why is anti-white racism acceptable?

And... There it is. The post that will shut down this line of inquiry.

[PackMan97]

Suppose her tweets were about any ethnicity other than white. Her journalism career would be over, period. So why is anti-white racism acceptable?

I think that each organization needs to decide for itself what is and isn't acceptable. In turn, each consumer needs to decide if that organization's standards are acceptable or not. At the end of the day, we the consumers have the power to make change happen. Don't let another organization decide your standards. Does it really matter if your standards are different than mine and are different than the NY Times?

My wife and I are bit of odd-balls when it comes to raising our boys. We are exceedingly old fashioned and have to explain to our kids why we do things others don't, or why others do things we don't. Just because we don't do let them do something their friends parents' might doesn't make it wrong, it just makes it something we don't allow them to do. Every family sets their standards differently. Different isn't wrong, it's just different. If everyone were the same, the world would be a boring place.

Don't like the NYT's actions, don't click on their links and read their content. Don't care or like them? Feel free to read and click their ad links.

[El_Diablo]

Suppose her tweets were about any ethnicity other than white. Her journalism career would be over, period. So why is anti-white racism acceptable?

Maybe just cancel your NYT subscription and move on. We don’t need an airing of grievances here.

[OldPhiKap]

I see that my Braves are starting their summer swoon. Sad, but expected.

What the Red Sox are doing this season is quite impressive so far, love 'em or hate 'em.


Oh, and there is a special election in Ohio tomorrow that is interesting. Should be a safe R seat, polls show it to be within the margin of error. Lots of outside $$$ and surrogates pouring in.

[BandAlum83]

I see that my Braves are starting their summer swoon. Sad, but expected.

What the Red Sox are doing this season is quite impressive so far, love 'em or hate 'em.


Oh, and there is a special election in Ohio tomorrow that is interesting. Should be a safe R seat, polls show it to be within the margin of error. Lots of outside $$$ and surrogates pouring in.

OK, I've been lurking and not posting throughout all of this. It's not like I have nothing to say (as many of you know). In fact, you've probably wondered where I've been (alright, maybe you haven't even given it a first thought, let alone a second).

Let me just say that I like that all my infractions have long since expired from my time on the Presidential election thread. The worst infraction was for a totally misunderstood joke that created an unintended visual. I still think it was funny as intended, but not as interpreted.

Anyway, OPK, you have laid down the gauntlet and said some fightin' words I simply can't ignore!!

DON'T BE DISSIN' MY BRAVES!!

Expected summer swoon? Why would it be expected? They have a rich history of playing well in summer (at least since 91). Sure the last few years of rebuilding have been lean, but they have an exciting young team in the midst of an exciting 3-way pennant race! STARTING a swoon? They hit some speed bumps, but have won 5 of 6. I'd say they are starting their August Acceleration!! (If you had said something about playoff flame outs...different story)

They roll into DC this week for a series that can make the pennant race a full on 3-way race, or put some nails in the Nationals coffin.

Don't count out the Braves! They are arriving a year earlier than expected, for sure, but they are ready!!

As for the midterms...

I personally think all the conversation is moot until Mueller releases his report. If it happens before Labor day, it will undoubtedly have a huge impact on the mid-terms (regardless of what it says).

If it isn't released by Labor Day, it is likely that it won't be released until after the mid terms. That in and of itself will be spun by both side 9 ways to Sunday, and will also have a huge impact on the midterms.

We have only just begun to see the ugliness this season will demonstrate. And make no mistake; while all politics is local, this one is going to be driven from the national level.

As for the GA governor's race, Abrams (D) Leads Kemp (R) by two points in the latest (7/27 - 7/29) poll of likely voters by Gravis Marketing (who gets a c+ from 538 with a 0.6 dem bias)

For non Georgians who may not be familiar with the names: Abrams is the African American woman, Kemp, is the guy with the seven guns in the ad pic Jason posted..

Notwithstanding the comments I made above about the Mueller probe, the OH special election tomorrow is a fascinating bellwether of where we stand right now. Stay tuned for that one. Also interesting is that the same two will in all likelihood be facing each other again in 91 days.

No polling for my congressional district as of yet GA-06. This was the district that got a lot of attention last year due to the special election to fill Tom Price (short lived Sec HHS) seat. It was close and contested. The R Woman won. She will be facing a different challenger, another African American woman.

This had been considered a Republican lock seat since the last redistricting after the 2000 census. More often than not there hasn't even been a D challenger running.

[BandAlum83]

OMG Cyber warfare at it's finest and most dramatic!

Oh the humanity!

Anonymous vows to take down, expose QAnon

[OldPhiKap]

No polling for my congressional district as of yet GA-06. This was the district that got a lot of attention last year due to the special election to fill Tom Price (short lived Sec HHS) seat. It was close and contested. The R Woman won. She will be facing a different challenger, another African American woman.

This had been considered a Republican lock seat since the last redistricting after the 2000 census. More often than not there hasn't even been a D challenger running.

Agree with your points (and am hoping the Braves finish strong. I've just seen this picture before).

As for Ga-6, it helped that the R candidate (Karen Handel) had won statewide office previously (she was Secretary of State, and as best I can remember it was without real scandal). She had also run for Senate in 2014, and had good name recognition if nothing else. The D challenger (Ossoff) was a political newcomer by contrast and IIRC he had some question about whether (or how long) he lived in the district. Even so, it was a little less than a four-point race which surprised me.

Interesting to hear that Abrams is in a statistical dead heat with Kemp, if not a sliver ahead. I've been bearish on the Dems taking back the statehouse but perhaps I need to reconsider.

[BandAlum83]

I am curious...

Has everyone been afraid to even mention the bi-partisan agreement with and among the intelligence community that Russia is still involved in very active measures to influence this mid-tern election?

In just the past few weeks we have learned that two sitting Senators have been targets of Russian hacking efforts, Facebook has taken down multiple pages of foreign influence peddlers, more states than originally thought had election systems probed prior to 2016, and the electrical grid has been hacked.

As our democracy is being attacked, will this in any way impact the election? Or rather, how will this impact the election?

[BandAlum83]

Agree with your points (and am hoping the Braves finish strong. I've just seen this picture before).

As for Ga-6, it helped that the R candidate (Karen Handel) had won statewide office previously (she was Secretary of State, and as best I can remember it was without real scandal). She had also run for Senate in 2014, and had good name recognition if nothing else. The D challenger (Ossoff) was a political newcomer by contrast and IIRC he had some question about whether (or how long) he lived in the district. Even so, it was a little less than a four-point race which surprised me.

Interesting to hear that Abrams is in a statistical dead heat with Kemp, if not a sliver ahead. I've been bearish on the Dems taking back the statehouse but perhaps I need to reconsider.

Being a statewide race, the Governor's mansion might be within the reach of the Democrats, but the 2000 redistricting probably puts the statehouse out of reach in a midterm year. I tend to believe that 2020 may be the better shot which will also be critical in the redistricting based on the 2020 census. Greater turnout is usually seen in presidential years.

That being said, the Abrams candidacy combined with generally motivated democratic voters could very well generate huge statewide turnout that could overcome the districting challenges.

We certainly will see just how purple the state is. Atlanta metro is growing so fast (20,000 people per month), that it is projected to be the 4th largest metropolitan area in the country in 2025. So the electorate has undergone huge changes just since 2016.

[Troublemaker]

And it would put Democrats into an awkward position, potentially dividing them between taking the moderate vs the extreme positions, like Republicans have had to do about things like gay marriage* in the recent past. BUT... it would have been more effective in the primaries or in a presidential election, and a lot of primaries are over.

I don't think the point would be to get D politicians to take sides on Ms. Jeong (although D politicians from safe districts/states undoubtedly will). The point would be to get normal Americans who are not political junkies discussing Ms. Jeong's tweets (and continued employment on the editorial board of the NYT) around water coolers, at the dinner table, and on social media. For people who follow politics closely, they've no doubt encountered something similar to the following formulation before, very often written or spoken by a millennial D: "It's okay to be anti-white but it's not okay to be anti-POC because offensiveness is a matter of prejudice + power. Without the power dynamic, it's not offensive." (One might then wonder whether a Harvard grad like Ms. Jeong and someone on the editorial board of the NYT has any power in this world.) Many people on the Left believe this, and it would be wise of Rs to introduce that double standard to Americans en masse and see where the country stands on it.

I personally think all the conversation is moot until Mueller releases his report. If it happens before Labor day, it will undoubtedly have a huge impact on the mid-terms (regardless of what it says).

If it isn't released by Labor Day, it is likely that it won't be released until after the mid terms. That in and of itself will be spun by both side 9 ways to Sunday, and will also have a huge impact on the midterms.

I wouldn't say that. Surely you've heard of the phrase "October surprise."

[BandAlum83]

I wouldn't say that. Surely you've heard of the phrase "October surprise."

Interestingly, until 2016 it has been a standard practice of the justice department to specifically NOT provide any October (or September) fodder for surprises that could impact an election. Other than the activities of Comey late in the 2016 cycle, we really haven't seen anything like it. That was certainly a strange series of events, I think everyone can agree.

At the same time, the Trump campaign and members of it were under investigation and not a peep was heard.

I would tend to believe that if he can't get a report out by Labor day (or so), Mueller will follow tradition and wait until after the election.

[Wander]

I don't think the point would be to get D politicians to take sides on Ms. Jeong (although D politicians from safe districts/states undoubtedly will). The point would be to get normal Americans who are not political junkies discussing Ms. Jeong's tweets (and continued employment on the editorial board of the NYT) around water coolers, at the dinner table, and on social media. For people who follow politics closely, they've no doubt encountered something similar to the following formulation before, very often written or spoken by a millennial D: "It's okay to be anti-white but it's not okay to be anti-POC because offensiveness is a matter of prejudice + power. Without the power dynamic, it's not offensive." (One might then wonder whether a Harvard grad like Ms. Jeong and someone on the editorial board of the NYT has any power in this world.) Many people on the Left believe this, and it would be wise of Rs to introduce that double standard to Americans en masse and see where the country stands on it.

I agree with every word of this, and I suspect we agree on the actual issue as well. But, at some point, there has to be a way for it to translate into votes, correct? Do you think that there will just be a vague sense that Democrats support that line of thinking, and it will hurt some of their candidates even if those candidates don't make statements on the issue? That could be true.

On the other hand, she is hardly the first person in the media who has said controversial things. I've seen a prominent media member call people of other races a different species, and it was such a non-issue that barely anyone noticed. What would make this particular example so special that it could influence an election? Is it just a different environment?

[BandAlum83]

I agree with every word of this, and I suspect we agree on the actual issue as well. But, at some point, there has to be a way for it to translate into votes, correct? Do you think that there will just be a vague sense that Democrats support that line of thinking, and it will hurt some of their candidates even if those candidates don't make statements on the issue? That could be true.

On the other hand, she is hardly the first person in the media who has said controversial things. I've seen a prominent media member call people of other races a different species, and it was such a non-issue that barely anyone noticed. What would make this particular example so special that it could influence an election? Is it just a different environment?

My take is that everything having to do with this is a side show that will have zero impact on anyone's vote.

[Mike Corey]

The Ohio 12 seat has been held by a Republican since 1939, save for a two-year Democratic tenure from 1981 to 1983.

The prior incumbent, Pat Tiberi, won in 2016 by 37 points.

That this is so close is astounding.

[Bostondevil]

What the Red Sox are doing this season is quite impressive so far, love 'em or hate 'em.

Love 'em.

Interested to see what kind of a Republican Party exists in Massachusetts. We have a history of electing Republican governors (to serve as a check on the state legislature). Governor Baker has a challenger from the right, Scott Lively. Scott Lively cannot win in the general. If he defeats Baker in the primary, some unknown Dem will be the next governor. Why do I say unknown? We're 3 weeks from the primary and I cannot name a single one of the 3 Democrats vying for the nomination. I do know that there are 3 but that's all I know. Baker will almost assuredly be re-elected if he wins the primary.