The Politics Thread

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

In other news Chris Christie says he's "tired of minimum wage talk". Pretty damaging or just overblown?

[DRW50]

That just means he's a tough talker! He speaks truth few are afraid to ever say!

Blah blah Chris Matthews boner blah blah.

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

LMAO

LMAO....but for real though he was getting torn apart left and right from what I could tell.

Loved seeing Senator Shaheen dig into Scott Brown's smug arrogant little playboy butt last night. She absolutely obliterated him in the exchange regarding his "ties to New Hampshire".

[Max]

Gawker may not get involved in political races, but they definitely advocate on behalf of liberal causes. Just right now on their website, they're reporting on a lone case of a Nebraska school district that is permitting high school students to pose with firearms for their high school yearbook photos. (I'm guessing that the implication is this is typical red state dysfunctional behavior.) Another story is criticizing Bill de Blaisio because whites in NYC still have far lower arrest rates than blacks for marijuana possession.

By the way, I am sorry for my delayed response, but something really pressing came up and I was unable to respond until today.

I agree that who Grimes voted for is totally irrelevant, but I think that she damaged herself badly when she gave her "non-response" to that particular question. (And her non-response is relevant, because voters need to know if a candidate is being completely straight with them.) Instead of making her infamous gaffe, she should have just stated the obvious and admitted that she voted for Obama and then added that she thought he was a disappointment. (Obviously the far-left base would not have liked that, but those people are going to still vote for her anyway.)

Anyway, it isn't only McConnell who wants to focus on useless issues (such as who Grimes voted for president). Illinois--which is failing miserably--has arguably the country's worst governor in Pat Quinn. He was trailing in the polls until he took a page from the anti-Romney playbook against his opponent, venture capitalist Bruce Rauner, and Democrats pounced on him for something as pointless as belonging to a $100,000 wine club.

Unless the Republicans nominate Paul (which is all too possible at this point), 2016 won't be a cake walk for Hillary. (Cruz has no realistic chance of getting the nomination.) She'll still be a slight favorite against Bush, Christie, or Kasich. (The same is true against a match with Rubio, but I don't think he will run because he is just too hated among the base.)

As you stated, President Obama's unpopularity poses a huge problem for Hillary. I don't recall somebody ever getting elected when the sitting president of the same party was this unpopular. (The only ray of hope for the Democrats is that the Republicans remain both unpopular and highly disorganized.) Thus, Hillary needs to distance herself from the president to appeal to independents. At the same time, she can't distance herself too much from him, because that will lead to depressed turnout among the Democratic base, particularly black voters.

[Max]

Upon thinking about this, I realize that these two statements of mine are contradictory. (Because I said that if Grimes stated she was disappointed in Obama, the base would vote for her anyway, but if Clinton distances herself too much from Obama, it will depress turnout among the base.) I still agree with what I said regarding Hillary, but had Grimes done what I suggested, some of the base likely would have chosen to stay home. However, the suggested answer of mine is still the best way I can think of for her to get out of a tough situation; by doing what she did, she not only depressed turnout among her base, she also alienated independents.

I want to point out one bright spot for Senate Democrats, and that is Georgia. (There is also New Hampshire, where Jeanne Shaheen is pretty likely to win, even though Scott Brown is gaining ground.) David Perdue seems to be floundering, and Michelle Nunn has been leading in four out of the last five recent polls. This race will almost certainly go to a runoff, but that helps Nunn, because arguably Perdue's strongest selling point--that electing him will give the GOP a Senate majority--will be moot (as I fully expect the Republicans to already have the Senate majority by then). Nunn is also helped greatly by her last name (whereas in Jason Carter's case, it is more of a mixed blessing), by the fact that she has no Senate track record (and thus can't be tied to Obama), and by the fact that she received an enthusiastic endorsement from Zell Miller.

The other Senate races don't look so good for the Democrats: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, Kentucky, and Louisiana (which could go to a runoff, though the result will still be the same) all seem to point to a likely GOP victory. North Carolina appears to be about tied at the moment, by Kay Hagan is trending downward, and I believe that she will be caught in the tide. In Kansas, Pat Roberts was flailing for life, and would have lost had the election been held in September, but I think that he will pull out a narrow victory; Greg Orman hurt himself by being so coy in regards as to which party he would caucus with (which undermined his initial appeal as being somebody who wasn't a typical politician). Democrats are hoping for a similar situation in South Dakota (as in Kansas), but I don't think that will occur.

Though my predictions have been pretty mixed in the past, my best guess is that the GOP will have 53 seats in the next Senate, gaining AK, AR, CO, IA, LA, MT, NC, SD, and WV, while losing GA. I may change these predictions later, but probably only if something unexpected happens before the election.

I would love to read the predictions anybody else may have.

The governors races are much more fluid and unpredictable, so I am not yet ready to predict those yet.

Edited October 24, 2014 by Max

[DRW50]

I don't think Democrats will lose both Iowa and Colorado. Colorado has a history of bad polling (see the 2010 elections) so I don't know where that will go.

I really don't think Kansas has much to do with Orman being coy. He always said he would decide after the elections. Kansas hasn't elected anyone but a Republican to the Senate since 1930-something. They may get rid of Brownback (no real idea if they will) but they aren't likely to go all the way.

The media has this need for endless horserace stories and explanations, and I'm just plain bored with it. I've been reading TPM less and less because they have succumbed to this. Ditto for Politico. For instance, there have already been writeups about Kay Hagan's failures, weeks after the same sites wrote about her successes. She didn't magically start losing or magically become terrible. Sometimes it's just not enough, no matter what campaign you run. And it greatly annoys me when media outlets which have been fighting tooth and nail for a certain outcome (like Scott Brown winning in NH) then write their lazy articles about how now it's happening and now it's a race. Of course it's a race - you've been sacrificing goats for him for 5 straight years.

If Nunn gets into a runoff I think she will lose, as they are even lower-turnout. I don't see her winning outright though.

I will say she did a much better job dealing with the voting-for-Obama issue than Grimes did. Grimes reminds me of one of those people who is just a little too perfect and it's a mask for weaknesses. I don't think she's relateable. But even if she was, McConnell wasn't going to lose.

Edited October 25, 2014 by DRW50

[DRW50]

RIP Joan Quigley, the infamous astrologer of the Reagans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/25/us/joan-quigley-astrologer-to-a-first-lady-is-dead-at-87.html?_r=1

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

I think the Democratic get out the vote machine will come thru in the end for Co and Iowa. More so Colorado than Iowa. At first I thought Bruce Braley might be able to survive his stupid gaffe earlier this year but it's clear that it was a big blow to his credibility and likability as a candidate.

That and Joni Ernst does come across as less than psycho and has run a very tight effective campaign. And I gotta give it to her those ads with the pigs are pure genius.

Pryor had a good poll come out the other day and I think if Bill Clinton continues to stump for him then he has a good shot of winning narrowly. Same for Grimes.

I think Begich is toast but I hear Alaska polling is very hard to do/judge. Praying Kay Hagan survives in North Carolina. She was the first senator I ever voted for so I feel a special connection with her.

I'm very angry/annoyed at the President though and his stupid White House for allowing him to say such stupid things on camera and on the radio with Al Sharpton (who I don't like). He knows what a tough environment Democrats were are facing and yet he's still saying stupid sh&&t like "my policies are on the ballot" and "these are folks who voted with me". Great job sir. Enjoy that Republican majority ole Mitch at the head.

I think national Democrats and operatives have every right to blast him and the WH if the Democrats lose the Senate. I don't care how much money he raised. All he had to do was keep quiet, not campaign in these red states, and manage the country's affairs with some sense of competency. I'm not blaming him for ebola or anything ridiculous but his actions or inaction have made these races a lot closer than they ever should have been.

Edited October 27, 2014 by ThePrinceOfSunspear

[marceline]

There's nothing Obama could do that would make this better. At the end of the day, the Democratic Party is filled with cowards who time and time again let the idiots in the GOP put them on the defensive. Democrats do such a lousy job of promoting their wins and policies and an even worse job of tearing down the lies of the GOP. The fact that they are still running from the ACA is a perfect example of that. This whole Ebola issue is a perfect example of how the Democrats could highlight the failure of GOP policies (for-profit healthcare, big Pharma, no Surgeon General, cuts to the CDC and NIH, forced quarantining, etc...) but the party is too wussified to even try. It's the reason I don't think of myself as a Democrat. I'm a liberal who is basically forced to vote for Democrats.

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

Not saying those two words would have done a LOT. Not waiting to appoint an ebola "czar" (which I think is unnecessary and a stupid title) would have been a decent PR move.

The economy doesn't feel that much better unless you've invested heavily in the stock market. The ACA is still a mixed bag. All I'm saying is that the President has made it a lot more difficult than it ever needed to be for them to create some space between the people running and himself. I just don't get it. And it's quite frustrating considering he's done a lot of good things esp on the money front and convincing people that the Senate was crucial. Only for him to screw it up on his own.

As a supporter I just don't want the last 2 years to be about special committees left and right and special investigations in Benghazi as well as a crippled immigration reform bill passed by both the Republican House and Republican Senate that might be hard for him to resist signing.

[quartermainefan]

When the country votes in the republicans and the abortion bills start flying, the country will get what it deserves. That's what coming: conservative doctrine nonsense and investigations up the wazoo. Considering the republicans had six years to come up with a health care response to Obama and yet can't tell us still what they would do when they replace Obamacare, it is safe to assume the next two years will be more do-nothing congress doing nothing but even less nothing that before.

That said, the democrats came up with some pretty lousy candidates this year--that woman who refused to admit she voted for Obama at the very top. I don't know who she is but she should not be elected. If a democrat is ashamed to admit to voting democratic, then that is not the profile in courage we are looking for in our leaders. She should take her mealy mouthed non responses back to wherever it is she came from.

[Juliajms]

I disagree with you there, since we aren't some monolith responsible for other people's votes. Vast portions of the country want the abortion bills to start flying which is the exact reason they are voting for the Republicans in the first place. This is still a deeply religious country (and some of our immigration policies are ironically insuring we stay that way for years to come). The rest of us will be stuck in the dark ages, but I don't see why we deserve it.

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

I have strong opinions on immigration but that aside I do think a lot of the Republican agenda is backwards looking (esp on social issues). That being said like Julia said there is a significant portion of the country that does want these laws to come into being (even if it technically is against the Constitution and the Law).

As for Georgia I understand what you're saying re lower turnout but I think this is one case where it won't happen. Democrats will be even more motivated if she makes the runoff and beats Purdue in the first stage IMO. And the Democratic party is already planning on sending in the best operatives from across the country since all the other elections will be over by that time to ensure that people get out and vote come January.

Looks like our favorite New Jersey governor is back to his old tricks again.....

Seriously though is anyone from NJ who lives in the Sandy area? What is the deal with the money from the hurricane 2 years ago? Has it not gotten to all the people who need it? Was the guy who protested telling the truth? It seems odd that after 2 years a vast majority of the relief funds are still being held by the NJ government (if what he is saying is true). That being said Chris Christie clearly has little to no patience for being challenged. I literally think he's gonna implode on the debate stage. Whether it's against Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, Jeb Bush or even Secretary Clinton (or any Dem). The guy clearly is out of control.

Edited October 30, 2014 by ThePrinceOfSunspear

[marceline]

Getting freaked out over who Grimes voted for is a perfect example of how the media dumbs down political discourse. The idea that not saying who she voted for means that Mitch McConnell should be given yet another term is ludicrous. It's like deciding your vote based on what kind of sundae topping someone orders.

It's hysterical to me that Democrats think they can woo black voters even as the run from the nation's first black president. Sigh. It's like there's only one spine in the Democratic Party and it gets passed back and forth between Elizabeth Warren and Wendy Davis.

[ThePrinceOfSunspear]

But again that is the Media thinking that Black/African American voters are absolutely dumb and are not cognizant of the political reality facing President Obama and Senate Democrats this year. As an AA I know that he's unpopular in a lot of these southern states. Whatever the reason may be (flat out racism, uneven economic recovery, policies that they feel go against their way of living, etc).

The bottom line is that the President is not a net positive for these folks. And I think most black voters are smart enough to understand that and won't trip if a Democrat has to put some distance between themselves and the President. Esp in Kentucky where he's pretty much poison. It's just a necessity. And if I were living in KY I would be telling every black voter to vote for Grimes because she is no where near as bad as McConnell will be for the President.

It's just a fact. The same for Purdue vs Nunn in Georgia, Hagan vs Tillis in NC. The list goes on and on. The media likes to pretend like black voters will be all upset that Grimes won't say who she voted for but the truth is that it doesn't matter one iota. The media should be talking about the issues and examining what exactly has Mitch done for Kentucky and where does he stand on the issues?

Instead the Media is asking for the BILLIONTH time "Is Obama going to campaign in Georgia/North Carolina/New Hampshire/etc?" Instead you've got annoying pests like Kasey from MSNBC asking for the hundredth time "Did you vote for President Obama? Is President Obama a positive factor for you? Do you support the President's policies?"

My favorite? "Will you vote for Harry Reid as Majority leader?" It's like who gives a crap? Is that really what a race for the Senate should be about?