Midterm Elections 2018

[cato]

What is the over under on how many infractions are issued before that happens?

On which thread?

(LTE is, and will remain, the champ btw. Thankfully.)

Enough infractions to keep the LTE in the post-count lead — unless you count the deleted posts.

[-jk]

Enough infractions to keep the LTE in the post-count lead — unless you count the deleted posts.

Well, yeah - don't do stuff to get your posts deleted...

-jk

[CameronBornAndBred]

Sinema's lead over McSally has increased to over 20,000 votes.

[BandAlum83]

I spent a few month interning for a Congressman in the mid-aughts. One of the things - and there were a lot of them - that surprised me was just how many members of Congress were either renting bedrooms in shared group houses or flat out sleeping in their offices and using the congressional gyms to exclusively tend to their bathing needs. On it's face, it seems absurd because we think of these folks as well-to-do but many of them aren't wealthy and the costs of running, maintaining a DC and a home district residence ---- particularly if you're the sole breadwinner and have children ---- can be difficult to manage. Here's former Utah Republican, and known office cot-sleeper, Jason Chaffetz on the issue: https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/0...ends-chaffetz/

I haven't seen it but Amazon made a show based on one of the famous Capitol Hill member group houses. Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, etc have lived in for years and the landlord is a Dem representative from California. There are a few mixed (R/D) houses. Seems like a fun premise to me!

https://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/polit...use/index.html

I would add that In the 80's, members made relatively less which made it even more difficult to maintain two households. They were able to get speakers fees back then, but reform since then gave a sizable raise and precluded other income from appearances, etc. (until after they leave office)

Members do just fine, long term. The cost of entry can be daunting, however, which may be why so many members are millionaires before elected.

[YmoBeThere]

Silly me, I thought Scottsdale Prop 420 was going to be about, well, you know. Turns out it is about land development in an undeveloped part of the city.

[Neals384]

Have also been thinking of adding this, so here goes.

My city has about 41,000 residents. We have a mayor and 4 zones, so that should be roughly 10,250 people per zone.

The county elections department says the zone my friend was running in has 8,899 registered voters.

That's simply impossible. It's doubtful there are that many adults.

I started to get suspicious when there were over 5,500 votes cast in her zone. An adjacent city is split much the same (population/zone), and none of their races drew over 3,800 votes.

Not sure what to do about it however. But if we get recounts, I'm contacting the Senate and Governor's camps.

Is there a graveyard in her zone? That’s probably where the extra votes are coming from

[JasonEvans]

The very close Az senate race could be key to deciding who controls the senate... in 2020.

Allow me to explain...

In 2020, there is 1 democratic seat that will be in danger, Doug Jones in Alabama. I'd rate that as the most likely seat to flip in the election. But, after Jones there are 6 GOP seats that could be in danger. In order, I would rate them as: Cory Gardner-Colorado, Susan Collins-Maine, John Kyl-Arizona, Joni Ernst-Iowa, David Purdue-Georgia, and Thom Tillis-North Carolina. It is also possible GOP senators Steve Daines in Montana, Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, and John Cornyn in Texas could have somewhat interesting fights on their hands. So too could Democrats Gary Peters in Michigan, Tina Smith in Minnesota, Jeane Shaheen in New Hamp, and maybe even Mark Warner in Virginia.

So, assuming Scott holds on in Florida and nothing insane happens in the Mississippi runoff in a few weeks (meaning the GOP wins), the Arizona race will be the difference in the senate being 54-46 or 53-47. Put another way, depending on how Arizona goes, the Dems will either need to take 3 or 4 seats to get back control (depending on who wins the White House and breaks a 50-50 tie). If we can assume that Jones will not win re-election (which I think is pretty likely in a Presidential year in deep red Alabama), then if the Dems lose the Arizona fight they could only regain the senate by flipping 5 out of those first 6 races. Whew, that could be a tall order. Colorado, Maine, and Arizona seem like good shots for the Dems and Iowa is probably doable in a Presidential year. But Ga or NC... that's gonna be tough for them, I think.

Anyway, I just point it out because it may feel like the senate balance of power is a done deal and the GOP has some nice breathing room at the moment (Collins and Murkowski just became a lot less important) but the Arizona race is still really important... not for right now but for a couple years from now.

-Jason "did I leave any vulnerable senators out?" Evans

[JasonEvans]

I'm hearing that even GOP loyalists in Washington think McSally is going down in Arizona. Each new update of the vote count seems to boost Sinema's lead. The latest count is:

Sinema 49.5% 1,048,655
McSally 48.1% 1,018,823

49.5% to 48.1% isn't even that close.

Meanwhile, many Florida counties have begun their machine recounts in the Sen/Gov races. The expectation is that the machine recounts won't make much of a difference. The difference comes when you go to a hand recount and you start looking at ballots that the machines kicked out for being over or undervotes. That is where you discover partially filled-in ovals that did not register as anything or folks who clearly marked one spot but then appear to have accidentally also marked another spot in a tiny way that the machine judged to be an overvote. Stuff like that.

While there are likely a lot of ballots that were improperly kicked out by the machines, I'm quite skeptical they will find enough of these to give the seat to Nelson over Scott. The Governor's race is a done deal, IMO.

-Jason "Looking very much like we will have a 53-47 GOP senate... unless something insane happens in Mississippi" Evans

[PackMan97]

I believe that hand recounts should be outlawed in Florida. I don't want to see another 2000 on our hands.

Instead, FL should have to be forced to endure a month long run-off and each candidate will be given $200 million in cash to run non-stop campaign ads. If Florida (collectively) can't make up their mind, they should be the ones made to suffer not the rest of us as we watch what will for certain be a hot mess of a hand recount.

[OldPhiKap]

I believe that hand recounts should be outlawed in Florida. I don't want to see another 2000 on our hands.

Instead, FL should have to be forced to endure a month long run-off and each candidate will be given $200 million in cash to run non-stop campaign ads. If Florida (collectively) can't make up their mind, they should be the ones made to suffer not the rest of us as we watch what will for certain be a hot mess of a hand recount.

National election standards would not be that difficult to do. There really is no reason for fifty different ways to record and count votes.

[budwom]

The very close Az senate race could be key to deciding who controls the senate... in 2020.

Allow me to explain...

In 2020, there is 1 democratic seat that will be in danger, Doug Jones in Alabama. I'd rate that as the most likely seat to flip in the election. But, after Jones there are 6 GOP seats that could be in danger. In order, I would rate them as: Cory Gardner-Colorado, Susan Collins-Maine, John Kyl-Arizona, Joni Ernst-Iowa, David Purdue-Georgia, and Thom Tillis-North Carolina. It is also possible GOP senators Steve Daines in Montana, Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, and John Cornyn in Texas could have somewhat interesting fights on their hands. So too could Democrats Gary Peters in Michigan, Tina Smith in Minnesota, Jeane Shaheen in New Hamp, and maybe even Mark Warner in Virginia.

So, assuming Scott holds on in Florida and nothing insane happens in the Mississippi runoff in a few weeks (meaning the GOP wins), the Arizona race will be the difference in the senate being 54-46 or 53-47. Put another way, depending on how Arizona goes, the Dems will either need to take 3 or 4 seats to get back control (depending on who wins the White House and breaks a 50-50 tie). If we can assume that Jones will not win re-election (which I think is pretty likely in a Presidential year in deep red Alabama), then if the Dems lose the Arizona fight they could only regain the senate by flipping 5 out of those first 6 races. Whew, that could be a tall order. Colorado, Maine, and Arizona seem like good shots for the Dems and Iowa is probably doable in a Presidential year. But Ga or NC... that's gonna be tough for them, I think.

Anyway, I just point it out because it may feel like the senate balance of power is a done deal and the GOP has some nice breathing room at the moment (Collins and Murkowski just became a lot less important) but the Arizona race is still really important... not for right now but for a couple years from now.

-Jason "did I leave any vulnerable senators out?" Evans

Good analysis, but for whatever reasons, Mainiacs seem addicted to Susan Collins...she periodically wrings her hands about what the GOP is doing on certain issues, then almost always falls in line...don't see her being defeated, even
though she riled up a lot of folks on the Kavanaugh issue.

[Troublemaker]

National election standards would not be that difficult to do. There really is no reason for fifty different ways to record and count votes.

If we blew up the country and started from scratch, I'd agree. But I see at least 2 problems, given that our country has forever been a patchwork of national, state, city, and county regulations with no overarching philosophy or design.

1. I actually don't think the two major parties, who are deeply suspicious of each other, could agree on national standards. There's too much enmity.

2. Furthermore, where they have local control, both parties have implemented electoral laws that suit their needs and don't want to give up that power. And, generally speaking, even purple districts/states/etc that go back and forth would be loathe to give up their power to the feds. Again, it's much easier to start from scratch rather than fight tradition and history.

[PackMan97]

If we blew up the country and started from scratch, I'd agree.

You must spread some Comments around before commenting on Troublemaker again. It would be nice, but just not practical.

[dudog84]

-Jason "Looking very much like we will have a 53-47 GOP senate... unless something insane happens in Mississippi" Evans

Such as the R candidate saying she'd be in the front row for a public hanging in her contest against a black man?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...eW9?li=BBnb7Kz

Despite this story, I don't think it changes anything in Mississippi.

[OldPhiKap]

If we blew up the country and started from scratch, I'd agree. But I see at least 2 problems, given that our country has forever been a patchwork of national, state, city, and county regulations with no overarching philosophy or design.

1. I actually don't think the two major parties, who are deeply suspicious of each other, could agree on national standards. There's too much enmity.

2. Furthermore, where they have local control, both parties have implemented electoral laws that suit their needs and don't want to give up that power. And, generally speaking, even purple districts/states/etc that go back and forth would be loathe to give up their power to the feds. Again, it's much easier to start from scratch rather than fight tradition and history.

All you say is true.

Still, a federal law under the auspices of the Fourteenth Amendment would likely preempt inconsistent state laws (I guess -- interesting question). And one could argue it is a national security issue given the threat of hacking, whether from a foreign power or a guy in his parent's basement.

Assuming so, I would form a bipartisan commission to at least try. The focus would not be on voter rolls, etc., just the simple mechanics of recording and tabulating votes in a manner that is somewhat protected from hacking and is transparent.

[gus]

Bay County Florida's supervisor illegally accepted emailed ballots.

The county voted heavily Republican - netting approximately 30k votes for DeSantis and Scott. It was also devastated by Hurricane Michael. Andersen, the supervisor, claims it was only 147 illegal votes he accepted.

Florida just doesn't know how to run elections, does it?

[dudog84]

How bad is it when weather.com starts wading in?

[OldPhiKap]

How bad is it when weather.com starts wading in?

"This is Jim Cantore coming to you live from Orlando . . .. "

[El_Diablo]

Florida should just be forced to seat a stuffed alligator in the Senate for the next six years as its punishment; the rest of the country should be spared from the remainder of this unfolding debacle.

[OldPhiKap]

Florida should just be forced to seat a stuffed alligator in the Senate for the next six years as its punishment; the rest of the country should be spared from the remainder of this unfolding debacle.

A Republican stuffed alligator, or a Democratic stuffed alligator? Asking for a friend.

(This is absurd. As is Georgia for a wholly different reason),