Thread Rating:

EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
September 16th, 2015 at 7:52:16 AM permalink
Carson's whiney, namby pamby wimpy voice
drives me nuts. He sounds like a HS music
teacher, not the president of anything. He
may be the smartest man on earth, he has
the personality of a wet towel.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
kewlj
kewlj
Joined: Apr 17, 2012
  • Threads: 214
  • Posts: 4422
September 16th, 2015 at 9:10:11 AM permalink
Quote: ams288

The electoral map favors the Dems big time in 2016. They will take the Senate back easily.



The first part of the statement is true. Dems have an advantage in the electoral map. That can change when you get away from the generics and insert actual candidates though. A weak or damaged democratic candidate could still lose. That 'advantage; we speak of is really only a very slight advantage in a very few states. Just a couple percentage points in a couple key states like Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and that electoral advantage is gone.

The 2016 senate map also does favor the democrats big time. If a democrat wins the white house, the dems will likely take back the senate. If a democrat loses the presidency in a close race, the democrats could still win the senate, with vulnerable republican seats in democratic strongholds like Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

But Harry Reid's open seat in Nevada complicates things. Nevada has been 'trending democrat' in presidential elections, but it is basically a toss up state and it looks like the republicans are likely to have a stronger and better known senate candidate. All in all, I would say the democrats are favored to take back the senate in anything but a big republican presidential win. BUT, I most definitely would not say EASILY win the senate.


Quote: ams288

I've said many times that Trump could never win a general election if he somehow becomes the nominee.



People need to stop looking at the Trump candidacy through 'traditional' glasses. Trump is basically like a third party candidate appealing to those that are fed up with Washington, the lobbyists and the status quo of the two party gridlock and corruption. If he gets to the general election there are some democrats and independents that share this same 'fed up' mentality that he will also appeal to. And when you get into policies, some of his actual positions ARE in line with some democratic positions, as the republicans are trying to point out. If He wins the republican nomination, I think he might just win the presidency.

And now there is talk of the republican establishment breaking off and running a third party candidate if they can't stop Trump. It is funny, just a month ago these very establishment people were afraid he would break off, now they are talking about it. I think that is not likely but if it did occur, I would have to put Trump as the favorite in a three way race with a weakened Hillary and an establishment republican candidate like Bush or Walker running third party without the republican backing.

Either way, people better start taking Trump seriously. He is appealing to those that are sick and tired of Washington, politicians, lobbyists and the status quo, and that appears to by a strong majority that goes well beyond party lines.
Gabes22
Gabes22
Joined: Jul 19, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 1427
September 16th, 2015 at 9:43:27 AM permalink
Quote: ams288

Dems always do bad on the midterms when the voter turnout is low. That's why righties work so hard to disenfranchise voters.

The electoral map favors the Dems big time in 2016. They will take the Senate back easily.



I have never understood why Dems do poorly when turnout is low and good when turnout is high. Whether 10% vote or 60% vote, if the electorate votes with same proportions it should not matter. Dems win if turnout is high almost suggests that Dems only win if fraud is involved, at least that is how I interpret that statement
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
ams288
ams288
Joined: Sep 26, 2012
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 5464
September 16th, 2015 at 9:50:21 AM permalink
Quote: Gabes22

Dems win if turnout is high almost suggests that Dems only win if fraud is involved, at least that is how I interpret that statement



LOL
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 227
  • Posts: 12481
September 16th, 2015 at 9:57:51 AM permalink
Quote: Gabes22

Dems win if turnout is high almost suggests that Dems only win if fraud is involved, at least that is how I interpret that statement



Dems go screaming when any anti-fraud measure is proposed. All I'm saying.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
ams288
ams288
Joined: Sep 26, 2012
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 5464
September 16th, 2015 at 10:02:33 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Dems go screaming when any anti-fraud pro-voter suppression measure is proposed. All I'm saying.



Fixed.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
Gabes22
Gabes22
Joined: Jul 19, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 1427
September 16th, 2015 at 10:18:36 AM permalink
Quote: ams288

Quote: AZDuffman

Dems go screaming when any anti-fraud pro-voter suppression measure is proposed. All I'm saying.



Fixed.


How is asking a voter to prove they are in fact who they say they are in any way shape or form, voter suppression? I, for one, would prefer to know that if I don't cast my vote, that nobody else casts it on my behalf, something I cannot be assured of under the current system.
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
ams288
ams288
Joined: Sep 26, 2012
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 5464
September 16th, 2015 at 10:24:21 AM permalink
Quote: Gabes22

Quote: ams288

Quote: AZDuffman

Dems go screaming when any anti-fraud pro-voter suppression measure is proposed. All I'm saying.



Fixed.


How is asking a voter to prove they are in fact who they say they are in any way shape or form, voter suppression? I, for one, would prefer to know that if I don't cast my vote, that nobody else casts it on my behalf, something I cannot be assured of under the current system.



This issue has been debated to death on these boards. Maybe use the search function....

The simple fact remains that no one can ever point to any serious legitimate cases of voter fraud occurring in this country. Yet for some reason the righties keep insisting on pushing through measures that make it difficult for some older, poorer, and minority voters to actually vote.
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead
Gabes22
Gabes22
Joined: Jul 19, 2011
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 1427
September 16th, 2015 at 10:29:21 AM permalink
Quote: ams288

Quote: Gabes22

Quote: ams288

Quote: AZDuffman

Dems go screaming when any anti-fraud pro-voter suppression measure is proposed. All I'm saying.



Fixed.


How is asking a voter to prove they are in fact who they say they are in any way shape or form, voter suppression? I, for one, would prefer to know that if I don't cast my vote, that nobody else casts it on my behalf, something I cannot be assured of under the current system.



This issue has been debated to death on these boards. Maybe use the search function....

The simple fact remains that no one can ever point to any serious legitimate cases of voter fraud occurring in this country. Yet for some reason the righties keep insisting on pushing through measures that make it difficult for some older, poorer, and minority voters to actually vote.



I, for one, was not allowed to vote in the 2008 election because when I got to the polls, my vote was already cast. And how does showing an ID, which you need to purchase OTC products such as allergy medicine, cold medicine Drano, alcohol or tobacco punishing older, poorer people. You can get a State ID for $5 in my state, which is one of the most over-fee'd and overtaxed states in the union.
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
kewlj
kewlj
Joined: Apr 17, 2012
  • Threads: 214
  • Posts: 4422
September 16th, 2015 at 10:35:29 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Dems go screaming when any anti-fraud measure is proposed. All I'm saying.



If that's what they REALLY were, no one would have a problem with any such measure.....but that's not the case.

We know this because in most cases, these 'fixes' are for fraud cases that have never been found, or are found is such a minute number, even when republican bodies of legislature go looking for them.

These unnecessary 'fixes' are carefully calculated to effect certain segments, the elderly and poor, in an attempt to disenfranchise what is likely to be disproportionately democratic voters. We know this because there have been some republican operatives that have come out and blatantly, even proudly, admitted it.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/11/27/opinion-republicans-finally-admitting-to-voter-suppression-efforts/

Or how about the video of Pennsylvania GOP house leader stating "voter ID that will allow Mitt Romney to win Pennsylvania....done". You will note no mention of voter fraud as the reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

Just like things like eliminating certain early voting periods, or reducing voting locations. These aren't things that are just proposed out of the blue. They are carefully calculated to effect one side greater than the other.

I really hate that you are so partisan and refuse to look at anything objectively. It really is a form of dishonesty. You either are not being honest with us, or you are not being honest with yourself.

  • Jump to: