2018 US Elections

I don't know why you're asking me that.

Because its the exact same logic that you use to not vote on propositions.

You don't believe in the system, therefore you don't vote. How is that any different than many of the other reasons people give for not voting at all?
 
Because its the exact same logic that you use to not vote on propositions.

You don't believe in the system, therefore you don't vote. How is that any different than many of the other reasons people give for not voting at all?


Not really. I vote for other major offices and if a law needs making then it can be done by the legislature. If you know about the initiative process here in CA then you'll know just how crap a system it is. I don't vote on stupid positions like sheriffs and judges either because I don't have time to get informed about those running and think it's also a bullshit way of doing things.
 
We don't have propositions here.

But I try and get information on as many of the down ticket candidates as possible.
Certainly Sheriff and such.
We usually get very little information on judges. And here in Minnesota they tend to be pretty non-partisan.
 
Not really. I vote for other major offices and if a law needs making then it can be done by the legislature. If you know about the initiative process here in CA then you'll know just how crap a system it is. I don't vote on stupid positions like sheriffs and judges either because I don't have time to get informed about those running and think it's also a bullshit way of doing things.

Its certainly a double edged sword. There have been some important propositions that advanced California in a positive direction like women's suffrage in Ca came from proposition, medical marijuana was the first legislation in the country to challenge the insanity of the War On Drugs and the non-partisan primaries + independent commission for congressional districts to stop radical gerrymandering were all very positive and important. These measures could have taken decades to pass otherwise if ever (the non-partisan primary never would pass the state legislature).

So where there have been some poor propositions, and there is definitely the problem with special interest astroturfing at least the worst social conservative props just get struck down by the Ca Supreme Court.
 
ok guys & @Raoul

what is the plan for Tuesday night?. when will the results start to be known so I can set the body clock??
 
Live in Minnesota.

Walz (Gov)
(Senators) Klobachar and Smith (Special Election) Franken's seat.

All will come in for Democrats.

Ellison has taken some hits because of made up claims by his ex girlfriend about a physical abuse claim.
But ads are running against a Republican corporate stooge for the AG position.
Ellison should get through.

Walz is pushing a Public Option in Health Care and in fact 2019 premiums will be lower in any case if going through MNSure which anyone can buy through.

MN is moving left and will come in for Bernie in the 2020 caucuses. ;)


Great!
 
The great state of California:
11 propositions to vote on alongside the US and State level, county level and city level positions.
Three full pages of ballot that took about 3 hours to research.

On the state: Newsom (D) will win CA governor.
Di-Fi (D) will probably get the US Senate; US Rep will probably go to Rouda (D).
I figure the rest of the CA state govmnt positions will go to the Dems.

Di Fi needs to retire or kick the bucket. At this point she does more harm than good. Why can't these people have the grace to step aside, after what 30-years in the Senate?
 
Feinstein, Pelosi all should retire.
McCaskill whether she wins or not...should be her last time.

Authentic candidates resonate.
That means candidates who are listening to ordinary people's needs.

Beto is proving it.
So is Gillum.

Wake up people.
 
https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...eto-orourke-texas-senate-2018-election-222188

Interesting argument. Of course a Beto win would "flip the script" but if he ends up losing I would tend to agree with the central thesis of the article. I think Beto is extremely naive and not pragmatic enough to be an effective politician. Barack Obama preached and stood for high ideals but he also had excellent political strategists who had a strong dose of pragmatism and cynicism needed to run and win elections. I don't think Beto has convinced me that he could convince enough people to vote for him against Trump which is a shame as he has many good qualities that are needed at the national level.
 
https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...eto-orourke-texas-senate-2018-election-222188

Interesting argument. Of course a Beto win would "flip the script" but if he ends up losing I would tend to agree with the central thesis of the article. I think Beto is extremely naive and not pragmatic enough to be an effective politician. Barack Obama preached and stood for high ideals but he also had excellent political strategists who had a strong dose of pragmatism and cynicism needed to run and win elections. I don't think Beto has convinced me that he could convince enough people to vote for him against Trump which is a shame as he has many good qualities that are needed at the national level.
it's a bullshit article, Beto is going to outperform the democrats running for congress on a platform to his right. Republicans who claim they want to vote for "sensible democrats" are fecking liars who would happily vote for John McCain's cancer if it had a (R) next to it.
 
it's a bullshit article, Beto is going to outperform the democrats running for congress on a platform to his right. Republicans who claim they want to vote for "sensible democrats" are fecking liars who would happily vote for John McCain's cancer if it had a (R) next to it.

These words should be printed in bold letters and nailed to every fecking election on the contestant's forehead
 
https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...eto-orourke-texas-senate-2018-election-222188

Interesting argument. Of course a Beto win would "flip the script" but if he ends up losing I would tend to agree with the central thesis of the article. I think Beto is extremely naive and not pragmatic enough to be an effective politician. Barack Obama preached and stood for high ideals but he also had excellent political strategists who had a strong dose of pragmatism and cynicism needed to run and win elections. I don't think Beto has convinced me that he could convince enough people to vote for him against Trump which is a shame as he has many good qualities that are needed at the national level.

its a farce. they are asking his opponents opinion before the race is even over and presenting it as worth listening to
 
@sport2793
Someone had predicted this article and written a good response: https://old.reddit.com/r/ChapoTrapH..._we_need_to_talk_about_beto_how_the_media_is/
The guy who wrote it worked for the Obama campaign and for downballot races in the midwest for many years.

Main part of the post:
This is relevant because when the time comes and Beto loses the IMMEDIATE response will be a combination of the fact he's 'too far to the left' and 'he didn't have enough money because of PACs'. Neither of these points are true. He is running to the left of her without PAC money yet raising more (60m vs .5m) and he'll lose by 4-8% while she'll lose by 15-20%. It's important you don't let the narrative that Beto is too radical seep in. Beto is probably going to have more votes than Valdez and it's likely because of his focus on integrity through money as well as being genuinely to the left of most politicians.
 
Not that it means that much but in Florida Democrat affiliated early voting returns surpassed those of Republicans for the first time this morning. They had been trailing by between 60-90k, now they're at +25k. This is worse than in 2016 (+96k) but better than 2014 (-90k).

Overall returns are 1.5 million fewer than 2016, but 1.9 million more than 2014.
 
Last edited:
ok guys & @Raoul

what is the plan for Tuesday night?. when will the results start to be known so I can set the body clock??

When will we know the results?
The votes will start to be counted as soon as the each polling station closes, which means results will trickle in over the early hours of the morning. We can expect a clear picture on what the elections mean for the country by 8am GMT.
 


This guy will be under serious investigation if the Dems take the house regardless of if he holds his position. It’s the most blatant case of corruption you are ever going to see.
 
So, if Dems get both Missouri and Nevada (in addition to those which are favorites to win), it is going to be 50-50, which essentially means that Murkowsi, Paul and Pence will be the ones which decide what happens.

Or we can dream and Dems get one of Texas, North Dacota or Tennessee.
 
So, if Dems get both Missouri and Nevada (in addition to those which are favorites to win), it is going to be 50-50, which essentially means that Murkowsi, Paul and Pence will be the ones which decide what happens.

Or we can dream and Dems get one of Texas, North Dacota or Tennessee.

You're forgetting Joe Manchin (and probably Doug Jones and Heitkamp)
 
You're forgetting Joe Manchin (and probably Doug Jones and Heitkamp)

Joe Manchin winning or losing doesn't matter either way. Only a democrat by name. Can't see him voting with Dems on any issue. Maybe Chuck Schumer will change his 'let the moderates break on their own' shtick after midterm but hey ho
 
You're forgetting Joe Manchin (and probably Doug Jones and Heitkamp)
You're right, Manchin and Heitkamp vote more with Trump than against him. Manchin votes 61% of time with Trump. For comparison, Rand Paul votes 74%. Heitkamp votes 55% while Jones 50%.
 
Joe Manchin winning or losing doesn't matter either way. Only a democrat by name. Can't see him voting with Dems on any issue. Maybe Chuck Schumer will change his 'let the moderates break on their own' shtick after midterm but hey ho
I think that was his point, that he is essentially a 'swing' vote which can go either way (same as Heitkamp, Jones, Paul, Murkowski, Collins and how McCain was until his death).
 
So, if Dems get both Missouri and Nevada (in addition to those which are favorites to win), it is going to be 50-50, which essentially means that Murkowsi, Paul and Pence will be the ones which decide what happens.

Or we can dream and Dems get one of Texas, North Dacota or Tennessee.

Even with 50-2-48 it’ll be hard for the GOP to push things through. They’ve had enough difficulty doing it with a 51-2-47 advantage.
 
So, if Dems get both Missouri and Nevada (in addition to those which are favorites to win), it is going to be 50-50, which essentially means that Murkowsi, Paul and Pence will be the ones which decide what happens.

Or we can dream and Dems get one of Texas, North Dacota or Tennessee.

Even with 50-2-48 it’ll be hard for the GOP to push things through. They’ve had enough difficulty doing it with a 51-2-47 advantage.