Tuco

Joe has enough money to shovel it into places he has no chance of winning, like Alaska and Montana. If he gets more votes there, so does the Dem/Indy Senate candidates who have legit shots.

Yeah, I looked at it a little more, and it was saying that 95.9% of the early votes were for Trump, in a county that he won 67.4% of the vote in 2016. I think this is strong evidence that Texags has some extremely gullible people on it.

Cool. Maybe in a month we can convince you that Biden will win. (all smiley faces 'n shit. I don't have a problem with the doom and gloom, as there is part of me that is there too.)

You must feeling positively optimistic today to call it a toss-up.

That looks like bullshit to me. There are no states that are actually counting who you voted for, and -fun fact - you don't register by party in Wisconsin. There would be absolutely no way of knowing how many Republicans vs. Democrats are sending in their ballots. It looks like targetearly may be a data mining operation, so they may be trying to make some assumptions based on locations, or demographics. But, more likely, it's click bait to gather information to help with their targeting. According to one of the posts in that thread, Targetearly was banned from twitter after reposting some bullshit. That being said, there was a Madison State Journal article which had some pro-Trump implications in registrations, but even that is pretty inconclusive. Wisconsin State Journal from July

Sasse probably leaked it himself, trying to invoke some shadow of a backbone. Unfortunately his Democratic opponent is going to struggle to get the majority of Democratic votes. What a clusterfuck.

I'm not sure being buddies with a woman Democratic Senator from California is what Graham is going to pay to advertise.

As has been pointed out previously, Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho actually sought advice from people who were relatively intelligent. He is the better President, and its not really close.

It would also be the last Nebraska ever split their EV. (I suspect it will be regardless.)

Everyone seem pissed off that Trump is getting an hour town hall, opposite Biden. I am not. Any opportunity to have Trump off-script in front of the cameras is great. To have ordinary people asking him question, even better. I don't think it will matter much in the Presidential race, but I want to watch Congressional/Senate Republican candidates continue to try to defend his insanity.

I'll add that if the Democratic leadership had refused to impeach for this, they risked cracks in their ranks. There were enough Dems who were pissed off that nothing was done to follow-up on the Mueller Report.

Because the President committed a crime. Because the President was continuing to extort a foreign country to fabricate dirt on an political rival, contrary to the national security interests of our country. And, frankly, because there was some political gain from it. Susan Collins is basically toast because of it, partly because of the fundraising it generated. Even amongst people who were negative on the impeachment, many of them concluded that Trump had acted improperly. It's not something you want to put as a central campaign theme, but I don't believe it hurt the Democrats in total.

Translation: "Republican voters of South Carolina, there will be a Democratic President soon. You don't want a Democratic Senate as well." It's an effective pitch for him, as long as it doesn't get a tweet from Trump.

Plus, focus on the impeachment pits him against Congress. Negatives are increased for both. Biden likely doesn't need that, particularly if it hurts Democratic Congressmen in redder districts.

I concur. He ate my child also. That's got to be hyperbole. Even when his jaw unhinges, I doubt he could get more down than a Chihuahua.

And over the last 100 years, we have shift the tax burden more towards the "payroll tax", which is definitely regressive, and towards the income tax, which the Republicans are trying to make more regressive. And, in the last 4 years, that wasn't enough, so we passed a massive corporate tax rate cut. And of course, they are trying to remove the estate tax. And the magic ceiling is bullshit. There are plenty of prosperous countries, with very high standard of livings, that have ratios in the 40s. The UK is at 34%; Denmark is over 50%. It's just more fantasy bullshit that conservative pundits like to peddle as fact. There is no logical basis for it and there is no evidence to support it. List of countries.

How much do you think we should cut military spending?

Do you remember Iraq's first election, with all of the purple-dyed fingers? The commentary was on how great it was that Democracy was taking hold in the region and how awesome it was that Iraqis participated at a high rate, in contrast to our paltry rate. My take was a little different. In Iraq, if your guy didn't get elected, it meant folks in your clan/family/religion were in danger of persecution. You were less likely to get equal access to business permits, or a fair justice system, or even a job. Electrical service was going to be prioritized to the other side. You might even have a heightened risk of dying or having family members die in a some sectarian violence, as it was less likely you would be protected by the police. They participated at a high rate, because in an unstable, dangerous place, it mattered personally to them. It's the luxury of wealth and stability that Americans did not participate in the political system at a similar rate. It is a sign of the times that Americans have lost that complacency. I agree with you. I do. Because even as many Americans did not feel the need to participate, things in this country slowly went to shit. I do hope that this is a political revolution, not only characterized by broader voting participation, but also by regular fucking people deciding they need to devote themselves to being involved, either directly running for government, or working in the campaigns of those who do, or just becoming active in grassroots organizing. We have seen that already, and hopefully it is sustained. But for fucks sake, I hope it is of less dire consequence in the future. America will not permanently become a one-party system. And, as a life-long Democrat, I can recognize that competition is critical for keeping shit in check. Republicans (or whatever replaces them) will win elections in the future; there will be R Houses, and Senates, and White Houses. My sincere hope is that when that happens, there is little reason to take to the street. I hope I can look at the prospect of a R-led government, and not feel sick to my stomach. But, will the revolution continue when that is gone? I doubt it.

Drain the Swamp.

Didn't Florida's system accidentally crash on the last day of registrations as well?

I started this. And you left out "...as a deterrent." I put that in there, because I have run into enough disingenuous fucktards who will "but-Obama" this topic, using the same stale bullshit you are using. It's neither insightful nor original. It's just the standard attempt to muddy the water, so you don't have to address the fact that the political party (or political faction) you support is morally bankrupt. I'm sure you consider yourself as some sort of free thinker, but the reality is you are just regurgitating the same bullshit that every other Trump apologist does without actually researching it or examining it under the light of critical thought.

I imagine there would be a difference in results for a script that said "Do you plan on voting for Peters or James" vs. a script that says "Do you plan on voting for Peters, the Democrat, or James, the Republican." Name recognition is something that can actually be addressed with heavy advertising. Although, the fact that both names sound like first names of British origin doesn't help distinguishing them.

I'm going to go ahead and neg you (Wulaw) because I don't think you are actually this stupid. Maybe I'm giving you too much credit. But that just came across as way more dishonest than ignorant.

Something I wish the Democrats would do better is putting Trump's nativist movement in historical context. Italian immigrants had massive nativist backlash against them when they immigrated to America. The KKK had Catholics right there with Jews and Blacks on their to-kill list. (My Irish-Catholic grandma grew up in a house in rural Kansas with a hidden door to a cellar, in case the Klan showed up.) The nativist movements throughout our history have been shitty to Irish, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, and many other groups I'm sure I'm forgetting. Currently it's focused on people from Latin America and Africa. But it's the same regurgitated, ugly, stupid, mindset.

You may want to give it a month before defending America's honor. If it hadn't been for a fucking global pandemic, there is a solid chance that America would have re-elected the fucking criminal who put brown kids in cages, as a deterrent.