Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 LastLast
Results 401 to 420 of 445
  1. #401
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by Phredd3 View Post
    A broader spectrum, but without the demonization of a monolithic opposition. It's harder to be "us vs. them" when you are a member of a party that controls a tenth of the vote. If you want any voice at all, you need to be willing to reach an agreement.
    yes, and I think that's a good thing. Not just two big entities going at each other all the time..

  2. #402
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Bluegrass Data Analytics has a new Kentucky Senate poll that finds:

    McConnell (R-inc) 49%
    McGrath (D) 46%
    Barron (L) 4%

    I do want to caution that this poll was commissioned by a Democratic organization and the reason they released it was because it shows the race is tight. If it had shown McConnell up 8 points instead of 3, it never would have seen the light of day.

    The lesson -- while a poll done for a non-media entity may be real, there is often a partisan reason the result is being released.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  3. #403
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North of Durham

    New Quinnipiac Senate Polls

    Quinnipiac released new polls today on Senate races. Collins is down 47-43 in Maine, McConnell is up 49-44 in Kentucky and Graham is tied at 44 in SC. I didn't realize that Graham's seat was potentially in play.

    https://poll.qu.edu/2020-presidentia...ReleaseID=3670

  4. #404
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    Quinnipiac released new polls today on Senate races. Collins is down 47-43 in Maine, McConnell is up 49-44 in Kentucky and Graham is tied at 44 in SC. I didn't realize that Graham's seat was potentially in play.

    https://poll.qu.edu/2020-presidentia...ReleaseID=3670
    Well... I feel like Graham's seat is in play much in the same way Texas is in play in the presidential election. It could happen, but it is like 6th or 7th in the line of somewhat unlikely results. Graham's seat flips in a scenario where the Democrats flip more than a half dozen seats. It could happen, but only in a real GOP bloodbath.

    Meanwhile, Data for Progress also released a bunch of senate polls today in seats that appear to be more in play than SC.

    They've got Kelly up 10 on McSally in Arizona. Not a surprising result. I've been saying for a while that is second only to Colorado on the likely GOP flips.
    Cunningham is up 8 on Tillis in NC. That's another one that seems to be a pretty likely pickup for the Dems.
    Giddeon is up 3 on Collins in Maine. Collins is really putting up a strong fight in a state that is likely to go for Biden by double-digits.
    And Greenfield is up 2 on Ernst in Iowa. I see the Maine and Iowa races as the ones that are likely to be the "tipping point" for the Senate... maybe Montana.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  5. #405
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    A couple House polls caught my attention.

    In the Texas 24th district, the GOP incumbent is retiring. RMG Research has the race there as a dead heat while Victoria Research (a pollster that is employed by Democrats) has the D up 7. This is a district that went Republican by 32 points in 2014, 17 points in 2016, and 3 points in 2018. So, the current polls have the Democrat running far ahead of 2016 and even better than the "Blue Wave" in 2018.

    Monmouth did polls of several districts in Iowa. In the Iowa 1st, they have incumbent D Abby Finkenaur up by 11 points. A generally reliable GOP seat, she won it in 2018 by 3 points. So, another sign that Dems may be doing even better than in 2018.

    In the Iowa 2nd, we get the exact opposite result. The Democratic incumbent is retiring after winning the seat by 12 points in 2018. But, Monmouth finds the Republican candidate leading by 3 points over the Dem in this race. So, the GOP doing much better than in 2018 here.

    In the Iowa 3rd, which Democrats only barely (1.5 points) flipped in 2018, the now incumbent Dem seems to be in good shape, up 8 points on the former Republican rep who was ousted 2 years ago.

    And in the Iowa 4th, now that controversial GOP Rep. Steve King has been defeated in the primary, that seat is now a very very very safe GOP seat. The Republican who beat King is running 20 points ahead of the Democratic challenger. Much like the GOP breathing a sigh of relief when Kobach was defeated in the Kansas senate primary earlier this week, the GOP wisely got rid of a difficult candidate and now has one less seat to worry about.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  6. #406
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    With stimulus talks stumbling badly right now, Senate Republicans in tight races can't be pleased...

  7. #407
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    With stimulus talks stumbling badly right now, Senate Republicans in tight races can't be pleased...
    Fair or not, the party seen as being in power almost always gets blamed in a shutdown or government inaction situation and the Republicans are seen as being in power this time. The fact that the Dems passed a stimulus bill first, more than a month ago, in the House makes it even easier for the public to see the GOP as the ones holding up a new stimulus package. It was smart of Pelosi to get that out there early.

    I know the GOP is loathe to add too much to the deficit but the best thing for the party in power in an election year is to put money in the pockets of the public. The GOP resistance to all this stuff shows you how important it is to McConnell to not bail out state/local governments and not help states fund elections (those are the two big sticking points, despite all the talk about unemployment benefits).

    McConnell is just lucky he can block anything from being voted upon, because I suspect there are Democratic proposals out there that would get 8 or so GOP votes in the senate and would pass if he let it come to a vote, but there is no way he can allow that to happen and put the pressure on Trump to veto.

    I'm eager to see what Trump thinks he can do via executive order on this. I haven't read much about how that would work.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  8. #408
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North of Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Fair or not, the party seen as being in power almost always gets blamed in a shutdown or government inaction situation and the Republicans are seen as being in power this time. The fact that the Dems passed a stimulus bill first, more than a month ago, in the House makes it even easier for the public to see the GOP as the ones holding up a new stimulus package. It was smart of Pelosi to get that out there early.

    I know the GOP is loathe to add too much to the deficit but the best thing for the party in power in an election year is to put money in the pockets of the public. The GOP resistance to all this stuff shows you how important it is to McConnell to not bail out state/local governments and not help states fund elections (those are the two big sticking points, despite all the talk about unemployment benefits).

    McConnell is just lucky he can block anything from being voted upon, because I suspect there are Democratic proposals out there that would get 8 or so GOP votes in the senate and would pass if he let it come to a vote, but there is no way he can allow that to happen and put the pressure on Trump to veto.

    I'm eager to see what Trump thinks he can do via executive order on this. I haven't read much about how that would work.
    Should Biden win, it will be like Reagan/Bush and Clinton. Republicans run up the deficit (though most will agree that in the current situation, it is a necessary evil to prop up the economy), Democrat comes into office, raises taxes to reduce the deficit, and Democrats are bashed as being "tax and spend" when really part of the reason for the tax increases is to pay back Republican-created deficits.

    We recently had a brief discussion about laws and processes that we would change. I would put the one allowing the Senate Majority Leader to prevent House bills from being voted upon at the top of my list. I know there are those in favor of minimal government intervention so think that the less they do, the better, but if the government (both sides) focused more on doing things for the people and less on partisanship, gamesmanship and finding esoteric ways to manipulate the rules in their favor, I think we would all be better off.

  9. #409
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Fair or not, the party seen as being in power almost always gets blamed in a shutdown or government inaction situation and the Republicans are seen as being in power this time. The fact that the Dems passed a stimulus bill first, more than a month ago, in the House makes it even easier for the public to see the GOP as the ones holding up a new stimulus package. It was smart of Pelosi to get that out there early.

    I know the GOP is loathe to add too much to the deficit but the best thing for the party in power in an election year is to put money in the pockets of the public. The GOP resistance to all this stuff shows you how important it is to McConnell to not bail out state/local governments and not help states fund elections (those are the two big sticking points, despite all the talk about unemployment benefits).

    McConnell is just lucky he can block anything from being voted upon, because I suspect there are Democratic proposals out there that would get 8 or so GOP votes in the senate and would pass if he let it come to a vote, but there is no way he can allow that to happen and put the pressure on Trump to veto.

    I'm eager to see what Trump thinks he can do via executive order on this. I haven't read much about how that would work.
    From what little I've read, Trump can take some previously authorized (but not used) money and do something, but he has nowhere near enough to put a dent in the problem, e.g. stimulus checks for all, extension (at some level) of jobless benefits...Pelosi has him and Mitch over a barrel, but these are strange times, Mitch is kind of leaving it up to the Dems to work with the WH, and as such I wouldn't be stunned if there's no deal...but this won't help GOP senators in tight races, that's for sure...

  10. #410
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    Should Biden win, it will be like Reagan/Bush and Clinton. Republicans run up the deficit (though most will agree that in the current situation, it is a necessary evil to prop up the economy), Democrat comes into office, raises taxes to reduce the deficit, and Democrats are bashed as being "tax and spend" when really part of the reason for the tax increases is to pay back Republican-created deficits.
    Be careful...this sounds like it's getting close to a partisan claim. I'm having flashbacks to when Anabasis (spelling?) on the old PPB board in the late 90s would argue that the Clinton boom was really due to Reagan having increased military spending (and, as a result, the deficit) in order to bankrupt the USSR, which gifted Clinton a "peace dividend", etc.

    (This post isn't really to criticize you, CrazyNotCrazie, as I'm sympathetic to your argument...I was just reminded of Anabasis' ability to blow-up the old PPB threads back in the day...anyone remember that poster?)

  11. #411
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Fair or not, the party seen as being in power almost always gets blamed in a shutdown or government inaction situation and the Republicans are seen as being in power this time. The fact that the Dems passed a stimulus bill first, more than a month ago, in the House makes it even easier for the public to see the GOP as the ones holding up a new stimulus package. It was smart of Pelosi to get that out there early.
    Jason, to the frustration of the Republicans, they always get blamed for a government shutdown. Everyone tends to believe that Dems love government and Pubs hate the government. "Inaction" may be different...

    Beginning with Gingrich and the House Republicans forcing a government closure, which rebounded to hurt the Republicans (from history.com):

    In November 1995, Newt Gingrich gave President Bill Clinton an ultimatum: approve cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and other programs, or he would shut down the government. The ensuing shutdowns were a public embarrassment for Gingrich and a victory for Clinton...
    A Pyrrhic victory for Clinton because l'affaire Lewinsky started during the shutdown.
    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

  12. #412
    Quote Originally Posted by construe View Post
    Be careful...this sounds like it's getting close to a partisan claim. I'm having flashbacks to when Anabasis (spelling?) on the old PPB board in the late 90s would argue that the Clinton boom was really due to Reagan having increased military spending (and, as a result, the deficit) in order to bankrupt the USSR, which gifted Clinton a "peace dividend", etc.

    (This post isn't really to criticize you, CrazyNotCrazie, as I'm sympathetic to your argument...I was just reminded of Anabasis' ability to blow-up the old PPB threads back in the day...anyone remember that poster?)
    Whoa. Anabasis. Folks these days need to be a lot more subtle to blow things up, but still. That dude had a unique set of skills.
    Carolina delenda est

  13. #413
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Two polls in the past 2 days on the GA Senate race --

    PPP finds John Ossoff (D) in a dead heat with David Purdue (R-Inc) at 44% each.
    And Garin-Hart-Yang actually have Ossoff up 2, 48-46.

    This is the part of the post where I note that both of these organizations are Democratic pollsters, meaning they work for liberal/Dem campaigns and organizations. It does not mean their polls are skewed, but they tend to release the polls that show good things for Dems and they keep more quiet about the ones that don't paint a good picture. Both pollsters have a decent B rating from 538 so it is not like we should dismiss these results out of hand.

    -Jason "sorta surprised Ossoff has not gotten a speaking spot or something at the DNC... I mean, they gave Sally Yates a few minutes last night and she isn't even running for office" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  14. #414
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Two polls in the past 2 days on the GA Senate race --

    PPP finds John Ossoff (D) in a dead heat with David Purdue (R-Inc) at 44% each.
    And Garin-Hart-Yang actually have Ossoff up 2, 48-46.

    This is the part of the post where I note that both of these organizations are Democratic pollsters, meaning they work for liberal/Dem campaigns and organizations. It does not mean their polls are skewed, but they tend to release the polls that show good things for Dems and they keep more quiet about the ones that don't paint a good picture. Both pollsters have a decent B rating from 538 so it is not like we should dismiss these results out of hand.

    -Jason "sorta surprised Ossoff has not gotten a speaking spot or something at the DNC... I mean, they gave Sally Yates a few minutes last night and she isn't even running for office" Evans
    You're the expert on polling, but the one time I dived into one of 538's asterisked polls (can't remember if it was D or R) I was more struck by the wording of the questions. It wasn't even that subtle. But probably effective if they can "poll" enough people.

  15. #415
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    You're the expert on polling, but the one time I dived into one of 538's asterisked polls (can't remember if it was D or R) I was more struck by the wording of the questions. It wasn't even that subtle. But probably effective if they can "poll" enough people.
    Yup, there is plenty of that in some partisan pollsters. I mean, there is even the "Push Poll" which is an attack ad disguised as a poll. Like, "If I told you that Hillary Clinton was using her foundation to funnel money to her family, would that change your vote?" The idea behind these is not to gather serious polling evidence, but to influence the people you call. It is also done to see how various attacks will work if employed through wider media.

    The release I saw of the Garin-Hart-Yang poll did not reveal the wording of it, but the PPP question is worded perfectly: "If the election for US Senate were held today, and the candidates were Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican David Perdue, who would you vote for? Jon Ossoff 44% ...David Perdue 44% ...Not sure 11%"

    The Senate question was the second one asked by PPP, right after the Trump approval question, which seems fine. Their sample seems pretty good as they also asked how you voted in the 2016 presidential race and it came back 48-43, Trump. In reality, he won Georgia 50-45 so the comp to how folks voted in 2016 seems accurate.
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  16. #416
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    I'd tell ya, but then I'd have to kill ya
    I think McSally in Arizona is officially desperate. She asks her supporters to fast and send the money saved to her campaign.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...s0I?li=BBnb7Kz

  17. #417
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    I think McSally in Arizona is officially desperate. She asks her supporters to fast and send the money saved to her campaign.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...s0I?li=BBnb7Kz
    Starve yourself for the good of the country!
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  18. #418
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    I have questions about the mechanics/marketing for campaign contributions.

    I have received several solicitations for contributions recently touting a 500% or 600% matching of my contribution. So, questions. Is this a real match? If it is a real match do they really need my money at all since I will be providing less than 20% of the actual funds? Is there a reason for the 500% matching offer other than to get my small contribution? I would tend to think it's not really about the money, but maybe to get me into the pipeline for larger contributions or other activity.

    A link to one of the offers in case you are interested in seeing the solicitation: Linky

  19. #419
    I don't see how that is feasible given camapign contribution limits. I am also skeptical that there is no disclosure how the matching works. I would put it in the same category as most camapign material. Complete and utter BS.

  20. #420
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    FWIW, NC sample ballots are now available (I suspect they are available in other states as well). Start doing that research now! Reading about candidates for the judgeships and various smaller state/local offices is...tedious at best.

Similar Threads

  1. Midterm Elections 2018
    By Udaman in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1869
    Last Post: 05-15-2019, 12:58 PM
  2. Shooting at Congressional baseball practice
    By davekay1971 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-16-2017, 07:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •