About that "blue wave"...
Forum rules
We tolerate extreme views, assuming no actual discrimination against board-members occurs. We will let snowflakes melt from the heat.
We tolerate extreme views, assuming no actual discrimination against board-members occurs. We will let snowflakes melt from the heat.
About that "blue wave"...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mysana ... 239398.php
A district flipped from Dem to Republican for the first time in 100 years,,,
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.local1 ... eport-says
A district Clinton's won by 20 points now a toss up as Dems nominate an old ass stroke victim against a conservative who speaks Spanish in a predominantly Spanish speaking area.
A district flipped from Dem to Republican for the first time in 100 years,,,
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.local1 ... eport-says
A district Clinton's won by 20 points now a toss up as Dems nominate an old ass stroke victim against a conservative who speaks Spanish in a predominantly Spanish speaking area.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: About that "blue wave"...
So basically, it’s chaos and turmoil and there’s no predicting outcomes.
Who knew.
Who knew.
- Jigsaw
- Charter Member
- Posts: 3883
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:21 pm
- Location: Columbia City, Indiana
- Contact:
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Amd yet. in Indiana's third and ninth congressional districts, there's a legitimate Democrat nominated in both (Tritch for the third, Watson for the ninth), for the first time in some time.
Now, I doubt either would win (Watson has a better chance than Tritch), but the point is, I think either side could pick out races and districts selectively, since, you know, with the House alone, there are theoretically 435 elections alone.
And to be more clear, I live in Indiana's third, and Tritch isn't getting my vote, nor would Watson if I lived in the ninth, but still, to mainstream Democrats, I'm sure both candidates strike them as realistic.
Now, I doubt either would win (Watson has a better chance than Tritch), but the point is, I think either side could pick out races and districts selectively, since, you know, with the House alone, there are theoretically 435 elections alone.
And to be more clear, I live in Indiana's third, and Tritch isn't getting my vote, nor would Watson if I lived in the ninth, but still, to mainstream Democrats, I'm sure both candidates strike them as realistic.
For my thoughts on the horror films I've seen, please look here: https://jigsawshorrorcorner.wordpress.com/
- Headhunter
- Charter Member
- Posts: 10950
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 11:06 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
I think most rational observers realize the House is very much in play while the Senate would be an upset win for Democrats. I'd give Republicans better odds to hold both than I'd give Democrats to steal both, but no outcome is a long shot. It will be awesome to follow.
Not removing until John Elway is fired.
- Jigsaw
- Charter Member
- Posts: 3883
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:21 pm
- Location: Columbia City, Indiana
- Contact:
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Being from Indiana, what I'm interested most in is whether or not incumbent Joe Donnelly (Democrat, though he votes like a Republican) will be able to hold his seat against Republican Braun. Libertarian Lucy Brenton got 5.5% in 2016, and the Republican (Todd Young) still won with 10% over Evan Bayh, so I doubt she'll do much to effect the out for the 2018 race.
Some have been criticizing Braun's campaign, but realistically, I don't know how much an impact it'll make - https://www.realclearpolitics.com/artic ... 38117.html
Some have been criticizing Braun's campaign, but realistically, I don't know how much an impact it'll make - https://www.realclearpolitics.com/artic ... 38117.html
For my thoughts on the horror films I've seen, please look here: https://jigsawshorrorcorner.wordpress.com/
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: About that "blue wave"...
It will be a weird one. But there is also a lot of talk of higher than usual turnout. Guess Trump finally did something positive if that’s the case, in a way.
Re: About that "blue wave"...
We heard about this "Blue Wave" for months, though. Then some of the establishment Dems got primaried by unelectable idiot socialists and others literally bring nothing to the table.Headhunter wrote:I think most rational observers realize the House is very much in play while the Senate would be an upset win for Democrats. I'd give Republicans better odds to hold both than I'd give Democrats to steal both, but no outcome is a long shot. It will be awesome to follow.
- Jigsaw
- Charter Member
- Posts: 3883
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 7:21 pm
- Location: Columbia City, Indiana
- Contact:
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Those "unelectable socialist idiots" are entirely electable in the districts they won. You don't think Ocasio-Cortez is going to win? She's not even a democratic socialist, by the way, to say nothing of socialist, but she's still going to easily reach congress.Foo wrote:We heard about this "Blue Wave" for months, though. Then some of the establishment Dems got primaried by unelectable idiot socialists and others literally bring nothing to the table.Headhunter wrote:I think most rational observers realize the House is very much in play while the Senate would be an upset win for Democrats. I'd give Republicans better odds to hold both than I'd give Democrats to steal both, but no outcome is a long shot. It will be awesome to follow.
For my thoughts on the horror films I've seen, please look here: https://jigsawshorrorcorner.wordpress.com/
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Sure, she will win the seat, but at the expense of the party at large. When she gets off her coached points for a moment, it is pretty sad to listen to her. The people in those districts have a responsibility to not look like loons because it has a broader impact.Jigsaw wrote:Those "unelectable socialist idiots" are entirely electable in the districts they won. You don't think Ocasio-Cortez is going to win? She's not even a democratic socialist, by the way, to say nothing of socialist, but she's still going to easily reach congress.Foo wrote:We heard about this "Blue Wave" for months, though. Then some of the establishment Dems got primaried by unelectable idiot socialists and others literally bring nothing to the table.Headhunter wrote:I think most rational observers realize the House is very much in play while the Senate would be an upset win for Democrats. I'd give Republicans better odds to hold both than I'd give Democrats to steal both, but no outcome is a long shot. It will be awesome to follow.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Blue wave, achieved.
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Is that why Sotomayor and Ginsberg will be bubble wrapped and kept in a cage for the foreseeable future?showa58taro wrote:Blue wave, achieved.
- Headhunter
- Charter Member
- Posts: 10950
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 11:06 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
It was pretty definitively a "wave" considering what they had to work with.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
Not removing until John Elway is fired.
-
- Charter Member
- Posts: 5402
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 10:20 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
The ones that were expected to have upset wins (Beto, etc) didn't. That's very telling that this was in fact, a "blue wave". Imagine if the others had won.Headhunter wrote:It was pretty definitively a "wave" considering what they had to work with.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
- Headhunter
- Charter Member
- Posts: 10950
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 11:06 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Huge net win in the House, huge net win in governorships and there's a chance the Senate gains for the GOP is only 1 seat. It was an ass kicking.Jmac Attack wrote:The ones that were expected to have upset wins (Beto, etc) didn't. That's very telling that this was in fact, a "blue wave". Imagine if the others had won.Headhunter wrote:It was pretty definitively a "wave" considering what they had to work with.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
Not removing until John Elway is fired.
- showa58taro
- Administrator
- Posts: 8729
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:29 pm
- Location: London, England
Re: About that "blue wave"...
It’s a blue wave by every metric.
- Headhunter
- Charter Member
- Posts: 10950
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 11:06 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
And if there was ever going to be a year where the counterbalance to the presidential election didn't happen, this would have been it with the impact of 2010 redistricting. Trump being Trump made this all possible.
Not removing until John Elway is fired.
-
- Charter Member
- Posts: 5402
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 10:20 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Is it true that there were like 7 million more votes for Dems in the Senate? I heard someone at work saying that but never looked into it. It's hard to trust anyone these days hahaHeadhunter wrote:Huge net win in the House, huge net win in governorships and there's a chance the Senate gains for the GOP is only 1 seat. It was an ass kicking.Jmac Attack wrote:The ones that were expected to have upset wins (Beto, etc) didn't. That's very telling that this was in fact, a "blue wave". Imagine if the others had won.Headhunter wrote:It was pretty definitively a "wave" considering what they had to work with.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
- Headhunter
- Charter Member
- Posts: 10950
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 11:06 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
NY Times says 13 million more, but it's not really anything to put stock into. California's race was between two Democrats, for example.Jmac Attack wrote:Is it true that there were like 7 million more votes for Dems in the Senate? I heard someone at work saying that but never looked into it. It's hard to trust anyone these days hahaHeadhunter wrote:Huge net win in the House, huge net win in governorships and there's a chance the Senate gains for the GOP is only 1 seat. It was an ass kicking.Jmac Attack wrote:The ones that were expected to have upset wins (Beto, etc) didn't. That's very telling that this was in fact, a "blue wave". Imagine if the others had won.Headhunter wrote:It was pretty definitively a "wave" considering what they had to work with.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
The total turnout is what catches my eye.
Not removing until John Elway is fired.
-
- Charter Member
- Posts: 5402
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 10:20 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
You mean there are people like me who don't like Trump because he shits on POWs (likes guys who don't get caught), tweets like a 13 year old girl, is snowflake as all fuck when you criticize him, and has been known to be a crook all his life?Headhunter wrote:And if there was ever going to be a year where the counterbalance to the presidential election didn't happen, this would have been it with the impact of 2010 redistricting. Trump being Trump made this all possible.
-
- Charter Member
- Posts: 5402
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 10:20 am
Re: About that "blue wave"...
Gotcha. I knew there was more to it.Headhunter wrote:NY Times says 13 million more, but it's not really anything to put stock into. California's race was between two Democrats, for example.Jmac Attack wrote:Is it true that there were like 7 million more votes for Dems in the Senate? I heard someone at work saying that but never looked into it. It's hard to trust anyone these days hahaHeadhunter wrote:Huge net win in the House, huge net win in governorships and there's a chance the Senate gains for the GOP is only 1 seat. It was an ass kicking.Jmac Attack wrote:The ones that were expected to have upset wins (Beto, etc) didn't. That's very telling that this was in fact, a "blue wave". Imagine if the others had won.Headhunter wrote:It was pretty definitively a "wave" considering what they had to work with.
With the map Republicans had, there should be more "Trump blew the House" takes out there.
The total turnout is what catches my eye.