Jump to content

Tuco

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3371
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tuco

  1. This was Gorsuch's statement when they denied the extension of Wisconsin vote-by-mail receive date: To me that is an explicit statement that the federal courts should be interpreting how the state law is being applied. It doesn't matter that the state officials (SOS) or state judges (Texas SC) have decided it should be allowed. The Feds have stated they will determine if the application of the law is meeting how the law was written. In the end, it would just an egregious denial of voting rights to toss 100k votes, and I doubt it would happen, but I don't see how you can be confident that the Feds will just say "states' rights" and walk away from it.
  2. Scanning through the last 12 hours of posts on this thread....it looks like the manufactured Hunter-gate has predictably fizzled.
  3. Why give Pete HUD? Of all of his policy points I agreed with him during the debates, I can think of any that dealt with low income housing or urban housing. My preferences would be: 1. Secretary of Defense: The dude has a background in military and management consulting. One of his main pushes during the campaign was working on way to extract ourselves from perpetual war. I would love to see what he could do about streamlining the military and preparing for a post-war defense. And sure, having an openly gay man as the civilian head of the military would send a signal that we aren't going to give credence to gay stereotypes. 2. Secretary of State: He doesn't really have the experience for this one, but I thought his statements on the nature of our competition with China were good. Something about how focusing on who sells more washing machines was completely outdated. And, diplomacy will be part of ending perpetual war. 3. ...Energy maybe. He did talk a lot about engaging rural America and environmental solutions. I'm not nearly as excited about that.
  4. Fucking hell. Washington Examiner (which is still shit) is reporting it as well. Fucking racist pieces of shit.
  5. Text looks weird. Seems really short for a proclamation. Not seeing anything in the news on it. Not seeing anything in Trump's twitter vomit. Looks like bullshit.
  6. Ok. I think maybe election day is heavy with the utes, but there does seem to be a disconnect on the 2020 final youth percentage. (Final is EV+election day). NBC is saying 18% of the final 8.92M, which is 1.6M votes., in 2016 Tuffts is saying 1.22M youth, or 13.7% of the 8.92M, in 2016 I am wondering if NBC was including registered voters in their "all voter" demographic. Still, if ~106k voted early in 2016 (per the Mark Elliot tweet) of the 1.22M who would eventually vote, election day had a shitton of youth voting on election day. (Ok, the Elliot tweet did not include the Friday before election day in 2016.) So, to me the bad news is that the youth have not exceeded their 2016 total votes yet. Their EV rates have not exceeded their final rate of 2016. The good news is they frequently wait until election day, and logic tells me that they are less likely to be concerned about COVID issues with voting then. Considering the party affiliation differential currently favoring the Republicans, that's a good thing.
  7. I don’t know where you are only getting 2.2m votes on Election Day in 2016.
  8. If the youth vote was 2% of EV in 2016 and it was up 600%, then it would be roughly 13% without any increase by anyone else. And their EV % would still be less than their % in the total vote on Election Day. It’s possible NBC’s numbers are bad, but there is nothing wrong with the math. The Tufts numbers could imply an issue with what youth % of total is.
  9. Because compared to previous early voting, their turnout is high: (Credit to someone who pm'd me that.)
  10. I'm sure it's up compared to EV in previous years, both in total numbers and as a percentage of EV. But I don't think the percentage of youth vote as a total of EV in 2020 is higher than the 2016 total percentages. And I think that is consistent for other states. Nebraska 18-29 is at 11% total, Wisconsin is 8%, Ohio is 10% (compared to 18% of 2016 vote), Georgia is 13% (compared to 18%). [Not sure of that 18% is the nationwide % of 18-29 in 2016, or it's just consistent between states.]
  11. The NBC tracker indicates 18-29 year olds are 13% of the 8.5M votes. That's the smallest chunk of any age demographic. In 2016, that demographic was 18% of all votes. But, I think younger voters are less likely to be concerned about voting on election day. (The 65+ chunk is currently 27% of EV, but was only 15% of 2016 total.) So who the fuck knows. That age correlation, in Texas and other states, may do a lot to challenge the notion that EV will be primarily Dem and election day will be primarily Rep.
  12. So why is Texas kicking ass on early voting compared to other states? Is the hint of competitiveness bringing out a bunch of people who never vote? Are they pissed at some of the voter suppression fuckery? Was the effort to register new voters more effective than I would have guessed?
  13. Those are minute orders. I need to up my prescription to read them.
  14. As a Husker fan, I should be irritated, but with your early vote totals, I'm pretty much loving everything Texas right now.
  15. I don't think it is limited to that one county. I work with a guy who lives near Philly and he said it took three weeks for a ballot to reach him, from the date it was listed as being sent on the election commission's website. Because of that, he ended up dropping it off at a drop box rather than relying on the mail.
  16. The Dems should be blasting the airways with commercials that if your mail in ballot was lost you should come in and vote a provisional ballot.
  17. Don't know if this one has been posted yet, but NBC's election page is tracking early voting, broken down by age group, party affiliation, and gender. I try to avoid drawing too many conclusions from early voting, so let's just call this speculation for the hell of it. Take it with a huge grain of salt. For example, Pennsylvania - link Comparing mail in ballot requests vs. combo mail-in returned and in-person early voting, the Dems request 63% of the ballots, but have 68% of MI+EV have been Dem. That seems like a good sign, as it could indicate a better Dem turnout on MI votes. Or it could just indicate that a higher percentage of Dems are doing EV, even relative the percent that requested MI. But overall, a good sign. Looking at the gender breakdown, 56% women is a good sign. But it may just reflect more women voting early, rather than voting in total. The biggest head scratcher to me is the total MI+EV compared to their 2016 totals. They are less than 36% of the total 2016 vote. Now, that is an increase of 1400% from MI+EV in 2016, so maybe it is just a massive pain in the ass to do so in Penn. But, (speculating) it may show a lack of effectiveness in the Dems pushing MI+EVs in the state, which is concerning for their effectiveness in total. And certainly mailing issues have been a problem.
  18. It's not the odds that are concerning, it's the stakes. Hard not to be nervous when there are so many chips are on the table, regardless of what hand you are holding.
  19. This is excellent work.
  20. I'd love to believe, but I would call this race a Lean D at best. (Toss-up at worse.)
  21. The Dems don't command the party loyalty that the Republicans do. Manchin isn't going to vote a certain way just because Joe tells him to. Getting to 50+VP in the Senate would be a huge advantage for controlling the agenda, but actually passing that agenda is going to be a bitch without being able to twist some arms, or a couple of extra seats.
  22. Yep. And for any progressive who is cranky about pulling the lever for Biden, they should realize that if there is no mandate, there will be little backbone to implement even the moderate changes Biden is pushing.
  23. They are only a distant memory if you are old enough. For most anyone under thirty, they don't remember.
×
×
  • Create New...