Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Blue Waves and Red Waves
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostGiven that Reagan has been dead for nearly a decade and a half...Last edited by mikewhitney; 08-08-2018, 01:41 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostGiven that Reagan has been dead for nearly a decade and a half...The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostIf Bernie Sanders and Ronald Reagan were running against each other, who would you vote for?The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWait... you said CENTRIST*, not pinko commie extremist liberal wacko nutso crazy**!
*or something of that nature
**not intended to represent any actual persons living, dead or otherwise, or posting on TwebThe ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI am revoking your posting privileges...
What the schwaunce!!!! I can't POST!!!!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThat is definitely one way to look at it but considering the virulent hatred for Trump on the left if they were still seeing indications of a blue wave they could not contain themselves and would be joyfully trumpeting it far and wide. The fact that they aren't, IMHBAO, is telling.
Of course, it is still a long way until November.
I think we've known for a while that the Senate is a long shot. But not the house. And your reading of the "quiet" is one possible interpretation. Another is that we know arrogant over-confidence was a factor in 2016, so the silence may simply be a strategic decision. If the powers that be are too vocal about "the blue wave," the result may well be that voters stay home, figuring it's in the bag. That happened a LOT in 2016.
But we shall see. I track RealClearPolitics and 538, and the trend lines have been interesting. The generic ballot has been tightening all year, up until the end of May. Then it began to widen again with Democrats favored. More importantly, the house map continually shifts to the left. At one point there were 212 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" red and 188 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" blue with 35 seats in play (toss up). As the primaries have unfolded that has steadily shifted. As of now, there are now 196 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" red (so 16 seats have become "in play" or worse), 199 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" blue (11 seat improvement), and 40 seats that are in play (up by 5).
Yes, Republicans have taken 8 of the 9 special elections (and many are crowing about it), but they are ignoring the fact that all of these seats were in solidly red districts, and almost all of the races showed a 10-20 point shift to the left. When the district is pro-Republican by more than 20 points, that is not enough of a shift to take the district, so Republicans have won them. However, there are over 60 districts held by Republican with less than a 10 point margin. If the trend continues, and they also shift 10-20 points to the left, Democrats could take every single one of them. The greatest wave elections (historically) saw 70 seats change hands. I doubt Dems will achieve that because the map is too badly gerrymandered. But they don't need to. They just need to secure the 199 seats that are "leaning, likely, or solidly" blue, and 19 of the 40 seats "in play."
In general, I like their chances. I also hope they do. Having all three branches of government in the hands of one party is not good for our democracy.The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostNot so long anymore.
I think we've known for a while that the Senate is a long shot. But not the house. And your reading of the "quiet" is one possible interpretation. Another is that we know arrogant over-confidence was a factor in 2016, so the silence may simply be a strategic decision. If the powers that be are too vocal about "the blue wave," the result may well be that voters stay home, figuring it's in the bag. That happened a LOT in 2016.
But we shall see. I track RealClearPolitics and 538, and the trend lines have been interesting. The generic ballot has been tightening all year, up until the end of May. Then it began to widen again with Democrats favored. More importantly, the house map continually shifts to the left. At one point there were 212 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" red and 188 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" blue with 35 seats in play (toss up). As the primaries have unfolded that has steadily shifted. As of now, there are now 196 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" red (so 16 seats have become "in play" or worse), 199 seats "leaning, likely, or solidly" blue (11 seat improvement), and 40 seats that are in play (up by 5).
Yes, Republicans have taken 8 of the 9 special elections (and many are crowing about it), but they are ignoring the fact that all of these seats were in solidly red districts, and almost all of the races showed a 10-20 point shift to the left. When the district is pro-Republican by more than 20 points, that is not enough of a shift to take the district, so Republicans have won them. However, there are over 60 districts held by Republican with less than a 10 point margin. If the trend continues, and they also shift 10-20 points to the left, Democrats could take every single one of them. The greatest wave elections (historically) saw 70 seats change hands. I doubt Dems will achieve that because the map is too badly gerrymandered. But they don't need to. They just need to secure the 199 seats that are "leaning, likely, or solidly" blue, and 19 of the 40 seats "in play."
In general, I like their chances. I also hope they do. Having all three branches of government in the hands of one party is not good for our democracy.
Still, too early to tell.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostWow - awesome question. That would be a really tough call, but if you are asking the question in the current political climate - Reagan.
Sanders..........................................C enter...........Reagan..........
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostGood answer, but how would it be a tough call?
Originally posted by Sparko View PostReagan was conservative but not excessively so. A bit right of center. But Sanders is WAAAAAAYY off to the left. Almost in Starlight country. If you are a centrist the call would be easily Reagan, I would think.
Sanders..........................................C enter...........Reagan..........The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King
I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostBecause my answer would differ in a different political climate. I actually align with more of Sander's positions than Reagan's.
I am a centrist "on average." Fiscally, I lean right. Socially, I lean VERY strongly left.
Probably an American thing- left wing & liberal tend to mean different things over there it appears.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Mountain Man, Yesterday, 06:07 PM
|
11 responses
56 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by Sam
Yesterday, 09:41 PM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 09:26 AM
|
6 responses
35 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 11:28 AM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 07:47 AM
|
8 responses
56 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Yesterday, 09:58 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-06-2024, 02:53 PM
|
25 responses
146 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Yesterday, 06:50 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, 05-06-2024, 10:34 AM
|
31 responses
129 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 07:36 AM |
Comment