Biden, Yang: 6
Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Gabbard, Steyer: 4
Harris: 3
Booker, Sanders: 2
Warren: 1
Directlonally close but not really what I would have expected. I am usually first in line to defend the old guard media, but I think this was a pretty lousy survey. Questions were vague, poorly worded or did not really lend themselves to this type of survey. For instance, I read the FMLA question as asking how long all workers should be guaranteed full pay, so I supported a smaller number than I might have if I knew they might partially pay (and gave some details around the definition of partial). And I don't think any candidate is actively supporting increasing the national debt - it is just a bigger concern for some than others. There are shades of gray on a lot of issues and this does not represent them.
P.S. It would be interesting to get Trump's take on these topics. His actions speak to his thoughts on many of them, but he has been largely silent on a number of them. Not passing judgement on that fact - for example, I don't think there is a huge outcry for changes to the supreme court so it isn't something he really needs to opine on. But at the same time, for all of the divisiveness among Democrats about healthcare and Trump's campaigning in 2016 against Obamacare, it has been a big non-issue during his presidency.
Oh that's an easy one. My favorite UNC Tarheel is without a doubt Mahktar Ndaiye! He is the personification of Carolina Class.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makhta...e_(basketball)
...but 9f is my second choice.
Fun fact: The paragraph beginning "During his NCAA playing career, N'Diaye acquired a reputation for rough play and contentious relations with game officials" was written by yours truly. I engaged in a brief spat with the (weirdly anal and recalcitrant) Wikipedia editors, and they finally backed down when I clearly demonstrated that the information contained therein can be documented copiously.
So that information about Makhtar's [redacted]ness has been part of his Wikipedia page for nearly 7 years now.
*diabolical laugh*
Last edited by wilson; 11-19-2019 at 02:45 PM.
Given that many feel the Republicans stole Obama's last Supreme Court appointment, there is more desire to appoint another two judges to balance things out again (assuming a Democrat in the White House). I think this is a bigger issue than you think among Democrats most likely to participate in the primary process or be active in campaigns.
Trump has made a few significant changes to the Affordable Care Act that have made an impact. I don't want to get into policy specifics or a discussion around them, but here is a link to NPR to highlight some of the most impactful. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-...ows-that-going
Having seven years of experience living in a marijuana-legal Colorado, I would offer that there may have been three groups of voters in 2012 on Amendment 64 --
1. Supported legal marijuana and believed the health effects on adults are minimal.
2. Did not believe marijuana should be sold legally, but were tired of the filling the jails with pot smokers. I.e., not legal but de-criminalized.
3. Opposed legalization and were happy to fill the jails with users on the way to harder drugs.
The second group may have been sizable. Yet Colorado faced a yes-no on a legalization amendment that also allowed cultivation and processing, but with local options. We were not offered a vote on decriminalization. We got the full legalization, with marijuana cultivation and processing becoming an important industry in a number of localities.
In comparison to the four Southern states where I have lived, Colorado is more of a live-and-let-live state. Personally conservative, but less inclined to tell other people how to live.
Anyway, Biden's current position would be OK with groups two and three.
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
I agree that the pot issue won't move the needle much on Joe, but if he's wondering why younger voters are unexcited about him, it's just another example. At some point, turnout will matter, younger voters have been known to stay home, unlike geezers who have nothing better to do.
I was speculating about the views of the electorate in 2012. I concede the views today would have to be different, although I don't know in which direction. Marijuana, however, is here to stay in Colorado.
On the numbers: The annual marijuana sales was $1.56 billion in 2018. The population total is 5.7 million -- probably around 4 million 21 and over (under 18 is 22 percent). So your figures would result in fewer regular users as a percent. Moreover, there is the tourist factor. Colorado receives a lot of visitors, but I don't know that the state collects data on out-of-state sales.
As some local retailers have reportedly said, the standard tourist comment on entering a store is, "I feel like I died and went to heaven."
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
Some interesting numbers on efforts by Trump and the Republicans to win over black voters in 2020:
Less known, as Philip Bump wrote last year, is that Trump actually “did slightly better with black voters than did John McCain in 2008 or Mitt Romney in 2012,” albeit worse than George W. Bush or earlier Republicans.
More interesting is that the slippage in vote choice continued through to the 2018 midterms. Turnout wasn’t the issue here, with African Americans constituting 12 percent of the midterm electorate, flat from 2016 and the highest-ever recorded for a midterm. Rather, according to Democratic data firm Catalyst’s analysis of the results, Democrats won the black vote by “only” a 90 percentage point margin in 2018 House races down from 93 percent in the 2016 presidential.
I'd heard the above before, but this was new to me:
In Georgia, for example, Stacy Abrams’s much-touted efforts to increase minority turnout were largely successful and the electorate was less white than the state saw in 2016 or 2014. But in terms of voters’ choices, Abrams did better than Clinton with Georgia’s white population but worse with black voters.
In Minnesota, which featured two separate Senate races, the two Democratic candidates ran 22 points ahead of Clinton with non-college white voters, 28 points ahead of her with white college graduates, and two points weaker with non-college non-whites.
In other words, while Republicans remain deeply unpopular with non-white voters, the clear backlash against Trump-era Republican governance was an exclusively white phenomenon. And there are some real indications that Trump has managed to personally hold on to these gains.
Interesting stats but they lost me in the last paragraph you quoted, saying "the clear backlash against Trump-era Republican governance was an exclusively white phenomenon." Um, no. Exclusively is a pretty absolutist word to use. Primarily? Maybe. Largely? Perhaps. But exclusively is incorrect and not brought out by the facts presented in the article. (I just spent 30 minutes earlier tonight working with my 4th grader on inferences, drawing conclusions, cause and effect, etc.)
I think this is new information. Tried to look back in the thread. This appears to be the first poll showing Buttigieg leading in NH. Although an N of just 255 likely voters seems a little low, and it has a 6.1% margin of error.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...shire-poll?amp
“Coach said no 3s.” - Zion on The Block
Dem debate tonight — will it be overshadowed by Sondland rehashes or whatever great fare will be on ACCN?
Curious what the ratings will be.
CNN is reading Sondland's opening statement on the air right now... it is apparently devastating to Trump and lays bare any question of quid pro quo. He says, "everyone was in the loop" including Trump and Pence.
We shall see if his testimony produces sound byte moments that move the needle on Trump's approval ratings. Thus far nothing has. Nate Silver said on a 538 podcast that he thinks there are about 7-10% of people who are backing Trump now who could go away if things turn really ugly on impeachment. He said that if Trump's approval numbers drop from 41% (where they are now) down into the mid-high 30s... like the 36-38% range... we could see elected GOP officials start to turn on him.
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
I'm not sure anything can move the needle for most supporters of the Prez, but I sure was wondering how far Sondland would go in his testimony...I suspect his lawyers made it clear that going open kimono might be the path of least peril.
I do take Nate seriously, but not sure I believe this take...I guess we'll see.
I guess my take is that as long as GOP legislators are vulnerable to primary challenges backed by the President, they are unlikely to change, but we'll see (and yes, not all Senators are exposed to primaries this year, of course).