2018 US Elections

sport2793 said:
Have you ever been to Arizona? It's not purple to the point where you can espouse deep progressive principles like single payer and win a general election. It may be that way in a few years due to the demographic shift but not quite there yet. Wouldn't surprise me if she shifted her voting record to the right over the last couple of years to prepare for a senate run. That's why I said take what she says on the campaign trail with a grain of salt. I do believe that when the time comes she will be a reliable Dem vote (i.e. voting no against people like Kavanaugh, stopping Obamacare repeal etc.).
Click to expand...

This is getting tiring. Please read my original post.

berbatrick said:
TBH I'm not sure it's possible to win Arizona on any decent platofrm, so that's fine.
It's just something to keep in mind, when the vote for the next Supreme Court justice or expanded healthcare or the Wall comes around - she probably will not vote with the rest of the party on that. So the "win" is purely that a catastrophe was avoided, not that any real progress was made.
Click to expand...
 
sport2793 said:
Have you ever been to Arizona? It's not purple to the point where you can espouse deep progressive principles like single payer and win a general election. It may be that way in a few years due to the demographic shift but not quite there yet. Wouldn't surprise me if she shifted her voting record to the right over the last couple of years to prepare for a senate run. That's why I said take what she says on the campaign trail with a grain of salt. I do believe that when the time comes she will be a reliable Dem vote (i.e. voting no against people like Kavanaugh, stopping Obamacare repeal etc.).
Click to expand...

100% spot on.
 
That's my native county. Surprised it's taken this long considering it has a sizeable black population, a large Hispanic population, and plenty of other minorities call home. It's probably due to how it's been gerrymandered by the GOP.
 
Raoul said:
100% spot on.
Click to expand...

Please do read the conversation from the start - I explicitly said that a good platform can't win in Arizona. The point I was making was about what comes after she gets power.
 
berbatrick said:
Please do read the conversation from the start - I explicitly said that a good platform can't win in Arizona. The point I was making was about what comes after she gets power.
Click to expand...

I wasn't going against your previous point. We really don't know what she will do politically going forward since she has shown that her views can change based on the situation. She said she would've voted against Kavanaugh for instance, and because she won't have to deal with any elections for the next 6 years, she isn't going to be up against the sort of pressure that the likes of Manchin were this past cycle.
 
Raoul said:
Don’t be surprised to see Sinema’s name get thrown into the 2020 VP mix, especially if someone like Biden looks like he may get the nomination.
Click to expand...
That would be bad, cause it is important to get the Senate in addition to presidency. Dems will likely need to flip 3 seats (only 2 if they somehow win Florida) in 2020, cannot afford to add another one to that if Sinema gets VP.

VP must be someone who either is not a senator or comes from a blue state where is easy to win the special election. Last thing Dems need (in case they win both the presidency and senate) is another Sessions/Jones scenario (and that was in a very red state, so nothing is guaranteed).
 
From my experiences there, Arizona has unique and idiosyncratic aspects that differentiate it from other "purple" states. More than any other state in the US I would argue the natives and long time residents embody rugged individualism. Big on gun rights and generally anti-welfare but on the other hand they strongly oppose the Patriot Act and War on Drugs. From cowboys to new agers they are generally anti-government by default. Their demographic is probably the closest to theoretical libertarian ideals with less religious influence than any of the Southern or Midwestern states even including Texas.

Also a sidenote reminder that Barry Goldwater who is credited with inspiring the push to the far right movement that is peaking now was Arizonan.
 
Revan said:
That would be bad, cause it is important to get the Senate in addition to presidency. Dems will likely need to flip 3 seats (only 2 if they somehow win Florida) in 2020, cannot afford to add another one to that if Sinema gets VP.

VP must be someone who either is not a senator or comes from a blue state where is easy to win the special election. Last thing Dems need (in case they win both the presidency and senate) is another Sessions/Jones scenario (and that was in a very red state, so nothing is guaranteed).
Click to expand...

Winning the Presidency would obviously take precedence over winning back the Senate, so if a Biden or similar candidate nominated her as VP, which would likely put AZ in play for the Dems, then that wouldn't be a bad thing.
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
From my experiences there, Arizona has unique and idiosyncratic aspects that differentiate it from other "purple" states. More than any other state in the US I would argue the natives and long time residents embody rugged individualism. Big on gun rights and generally anti-welfare but on the other hand they strongly oppose the Patriot Act and War on Drugs. From cowboys to new agers they are generally anti-government by default. Their demographic is probably the closest to theoretical libertarian ideals with less religious influence than any of the Southern or Midwestern states even including Texas.

Also a sidenote reminder that Barry Goldwater who is credited with inspiring the push to the far right movement that is peaking now was Arizonan.
Click to expand...

They are basically conservatives with an independent streak (hence McCain) mixed in with a large hispanic population, loads of retirees, and a growing younger more Dem leaning contingent of professionals in the Scottsdale/Mesa/Chandler/and Tuscon areas. This is why running as a centrist Dems tends to yield more success for Dems than running as a progressive - a lesson Sinema has had reinforced to her several times now.
 
Raoul said:
Winning the Presidency would obviously take precedence over winning back the Senate, so if a Biden or similar candidate nominated her as VP, which would likely put AZ in play for the Dems, then that wouldn't be a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I don't see this scenario myself. Arizona isn't important enough to the electoral strategies that look most likely and she barely won in Arizona anyway - she isn't an icon of Arizona politics that would massively swing the state in their favor. Additionally with that centrist voting record she doesn't have the progressive credentials to be a good pairing with Biden. She'd need some break out speech where she came off more compelling and charismatic than she ever has before to really offer something as a VP imo
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
I don't see this scenario myself. Arizona isn't important enough to the electoral strategies that look most likely and she barely won in Arizona anyway - she isn't an icon of Arizona politics that would massively swing the state in their favor. Additionally with that centrist voting record she doesn't have the progressive credentials to be a good pairing with Biden. She'd need some break out speech where she came off more compelling and charismatic than she ever has before to really offer something as a VP imo
Click to expand...

I don't see Biden choosing a progressive; at least not one the hard left would get excited about. He would choose a more centrist, establishment type who would be a younger, more proactive VP - more like Gore was to Clinton and less like what Pence is to Trump.
 
Raoul said:
I don't see Biden choosing a progressive; at least not one the hard left would get excited about. He would choose a more centrist, establishment type who would be a younger, more proactive VP - more like Gore was to Clinton and less like what Pence is to Trump.
Click to expand...

For me, I think that's a losing strategy for sure. Biden-Sinema feels a lot like a Kerry-Edwards or Romney-Ryan losing ticket.

If that was the match-up I would vote for Biden-Sinema but I would bet heavy in the Presidential futures market on Trump winning a secord term.
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
For me, I think that's a losing strategy for sure. Biden-Sinema feels a lot like a Kerry-Edwards or Romney-Ryan losing ticket.

If that was the match-up I would vote for Biden-Sinema but I would bet heavy in the Presidential futures market on Trump winning a secord term.
Click to expand...
Well, Romney was as moderate as a Republican can be nowadays, but he had to pretend that he is very conservative (he had 'Obamacare' in his state before it was cool).

But yes, agree with your main point and Biden-some centrist looks very much like Kerry/Edwards or Clinton/Kane.
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
For me, I think that's a losing strategy for sure. Biden-Sinema feels a lot like a Kerry-Edwards or Romney-Ryan losing ticket.

If that was the match-up I would vote for Biden-Sinema but I would bet heavy in the Presidential futures market on Trump winning a secord term.
Click to expand...

It depends on the dynamics going into the summer of 2020, which of course will be different from what they are now. Sinema has outperformed everyone including Beto, in battleground states this cycle, which won't go unnoticed when it comes time to discuss potential VP nominees.

 
Raoul said:
It depends on the dynamics going into the summer of 2020, which of course will be different from what they are now. Sinema has outperformed everyone including Beto, in battleground states this cycle, which won't go unnoticed when it comes time to discuss potential VP nominees.
Click to expand...

Sure Sinema could become a powerhouse in the Senate in the next year and become the leading contender for the Presidential nomination. Or she could flop and flake losing prestige to the point we are just happy she won't face a re-election challenge for 6 years. Its a given that things will change. But how things are now, I'd be betting against Biden-Sinema.
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
Sure Sinema could become a powerhouse in the Senate in the next year and become the leading contender for the Presidential nomination. Or she could flop and flake losing prestige to the point we are just happy she won't face a re-election challenge for 6 years. Its a given that things will change. But how things are now, I'd be betting against Biden-Sinema.
Click to expand...

Biden is just a suggestion. It could be any centrist or establishment Dem (nearly all of them are establishment bar perhaps Sanders and Warren, so the options are pretty wide).
 
Raoul said:
It depends on the dynamics going into the summer of 2020, which of course will be different from what they are now. Sinema has outperformed everyone including Beto, in battleground states this cycle, which won't go unnoticed when it comes time to discuss potential VP nominees.

Click to expand...

Klobuchar is a far safer bet than Sinema. I don't think Texas and Arizona will vote against Trump. Flipping Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania is relatively easier and worth far more in big picture. If Brown stands, add Ohio to the flip.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Klobuchar is a far safer bet than Sinema. I don't think Texas and Arizona will vote against Trump. Flipping Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania is relatively easier and worth far more in big picture. If Brown stands, add Ohio to the flip.
Click to expand...

The trouble with Klobuchar is she comes across as a bit dry and wonky and generally lacking in national level charisma. I've also seen some stats that showed the voters who helped Trump in those states have long abandoned him, so I don't think we are likely to see another repeat of what happened up there in 16.
 
Raoul said:
The trouble with Klobuchar is she comes across as a bit dry and wonky and generally lacking in national level charisma. I've also seen some stats that showed the voters who helped Trump in those states have long abandoned him, so I don't think we are likely to see another repeat of what happened up there in 16.
Click to expand...
That's why she'll be the VP. Brown should be the face and President.

Come on, Trump won Texas by huge margin. Arizona is not far behind. I don't think there's that big a swing. Perhaps Trump will win by a slim margin...but he won't lose either.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
That's why she'll be the VP. Brown should be the face and President.

Come on, Trump won Texas by huge margin. Arizona is not far behind. I don't think there's that big a swing. Perhaps Trump will win by a slim margin...but he won't lose either.
Click to expand...

His popularity in AZ is bascially flat right now (which is at same level as places like FL, OH, etc. AZ is therefore not a reliably solid GOP state anymore.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
That's why she'll be the VP. Brown should be the face and President.

Come on, Trump won Texas by huge margin. Arizona is not far behind. I don't think there's that big a swing. Perhaps Trump will win by a slim margin...but he won't lose either.
Click to expand...
Arizona is winnable for Democrats, Texas, as we saw a week ago, not yet.
 
Raoul said:
They will count the votes. Just as they will in AZ after McSally's concession.
Click to expand...
McSally's nearly 2 points behind and losing ground, Nelson's 0.15 points down with a notable undervote in a strong Dem area. It's probably bad ballot design, but you're dumb if you don't let the hand recount take place to double check.
 
Ubik said:
McSally's nearly 2 points behind and losing ground, Nelson's 0.15 points down with a notable undervote in a strong Dem area. It's probably bad ballot design, but you're dumb if you don't let the hand recount take place to double check.
Click to expand...

If its automatic and manually triggered then yes. But they shouldn't waste endless amounts of time litigating in the hopes they can somehow squeeze out a win ala Gore v Bush. We're already seeing both sides lawyering up which will only drag this on for much longer than it should.
 
Raoul said:
If its automatic and manually triggered then yes. But they shouldn't waste endless amounts of time litigating in the hopes they can somehow squeeze out a win ala Gore v Bush. We're already seeing both sides lawyering up which will only drag this on for much longer than it should.
Click to expand...


Why are you in such a hurry?
 
Raoul said:
I'm not. I'm just not interested in endless litigation that doesn't yield anything other than delays, conspiracies, and heightened contempt.
Click to expand...

It hasn't even been a week. Too early for "endless litigation" buzz words. It sounds like you are buying into Fox News narratives ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.