Jump to content

2020 Senate Elections


Patrick Bateman

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, GopherRock said:

Rumors of Gary Peters' demise appear to be premature. 

Also, this is a Dem pollster, but another poll showing Jamie Harrison deadlocked with Leningrad Lindsey.

 

did I see a poll yesterday that had James within 1 of Peters?  That is a pretty big difference.  I assume based on the turnout prediction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, babysdaddy said:

did I see a poll yesterday that had James within 1 of Peters?  That is a pretty big difference.  I assume based on the turnout prediction?

Yeah, it was a NYT/Siena which had it at 43-42.

NYT/Siena poll have consistently shown much larger % of uncommitted voters, especially in Senate races. For example, they just released a NC poll with Cunningham +4, right in line with polling averages, but it was only 41-37.

This thread really gets into the weeds, but it's a function of the way they build their LV screen and include low propensity voters which other pollsters would exclude.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


The degree to which ActBlue has slanted this race against Senate Reps can’t be overstated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The quote I saw last week (was probably in this thread, can’t remember) is really the story of these elections:

When Republicans are pissed off, they go to Facebook. When Democrats are pissed off, they go to ActBlue.
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

CNN said Lindsey Graham raised 28m, but Harrison raised 57 million. 

I just saw an anti-Graham add on ESPN's ULaLa-Coastal Carolina game.

I pictured the Harrison office desperately trying to spend $57M... "We should advertise during the Coastal Carolina game...  Are they even in South Carolina?   Not sure, but gotta spend it somewhere." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:


The degree to which ActBlue has slanted this race against Senate Reps can’t be overstated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can't remember where I read it, I think it was in the run-up to 18, that the GOP wanted to put together something to rival Act Blue. The problem was that they couldn't agree on how to set it up so that everyone that wanted a cut got theirs.

In other words, they were so damn greedy they fucked up a really simple process. All Act Blue does is act as the conduit. The campaigns use it because it works. If it was a shitty operation it would have died. It makes it easy for the campaign and the donors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I can't remember where I read it, I think it was in the run-up to 18, that the GOP wanted to put together something to rival Act Blue. The problem was that they couldn't agree on how to set it up so that everyone that wanted a cut got theirs.

In other words, they were so damn greedy they fucked up a really simple process. All Act Blue does is act as the conduit. The campaigns use it because it works. If it was a shitty operation it would have died. It makes it easy for the campaign and the donors. 

 

heaven-and-hell.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, babysdaddy said:

did I see a poll yesterday that had James within 1 of Peters?  That is a pretty big difference.  I assume based on the turnout prediction?

Yes. And another one within 2 or 3 today. And a politico article saying the Dems were scared but not shit their pants scared. I think James is gonna run 2 or 3 points ahead of Trump. I doubt that’s good enough. James would have won big in 2016  or 2014 but he picked a really shitty time to run for a national office in a state much more blue than purple. 

Edited by Wulaw Horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cactusflinthead said:

I can't remember where I read it, I think it was in the run-up to 18, that the GOP wanted to put together something to rival Act Blue. The problem was that they couldn't agree on how to set it up so that everyone that wanted a cut got theirs.

In other words, they were so damn greedy they fucked up a really simple process. All Act Blue does is act as the conduit. The campaigns use it because it works. If it was a shitty operation it would have died. It makes it easy for the campaign and the donors. 

That sounds right in the party if trump. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Yes. And another one wishing 2 or 3 today. And a politico article saying the Dems were scared but not shit their pants scared. I think janes is gonna run 2 or 3 points ahead of Trump. I doubt that’s good enough. James would have won bit in 2016  or 2014 but he picked a really shitty time to run for a national office in a state much more blue than purple. 

I know you love the guy, but we just can’t spare the seat.  Democrats really need to get the senate majority for the sake of this country. Mitch McConnell doesn’t care about this country, he only cares about republicans and keeping power. He’s done an awful job as senate majority leader and badly needs to be replaced by a Democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Voldemort86 said:

I know you love the guy, but we just can’t spare the seat.  Democrats really need to get the senate majority for the sake of this country. Mitch McConnell doesn’t care about this country, he only cares about republicans and keeping power. He’s done an awful job as senate majority leader and badly needs to be replaced by a Democrat.

Sure if you are a dem which I’m not. Look- it’s not going to be good enough, and he’s going to be, I’d think, marginalized and his time past. 
I don’t know him well enough to say if this is true for sure, but he’s got the kind of narrative and story that presidential runs are built upon. And it’s not going to happen for him because his timing is shitty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, thepop said:

She doesn’t get attention cause her race isn’t really competitive, but she’s refusing to debate. One of the worst senators.

 

It's Mississippi.  So I'm not overly optimistic.  But there was a recent poll that had this as a one point race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, thepop said:

She doesn’t get attention cause her race isn’t really competitive, but she’s refusing to debate. One of the worst senators.

 

No doubt about it. This woman is very stupid and knows the debate would go poorly. She’s just trying to lean on the partisanship of her state. What a worthless cunt.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do these practiced “oops, did that sound racist” quotes that fire up the base and they can claim plausible deniability.  DeSantis with his monkey this up quote, what’s his name with “white supremacy, western civilization ... when did that become racist”.  Cindy’s was the dumbest with “[whoever] could talk me into going to a public hanging.”  It was so obviously unnatural that her goal of wanting to titillate and tickle her racist fans was too obvious.  It was cringe-racism, which is worse than plain vanilla racism imo.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

back in my day, we jacked off a lot. 

So do the kids/ 20's.  They'd rather play video games and watch porn and jack off then go bang a real woman. Seriously, I'm not saying this as anything other than a researched and verified fact. 

And, also, the amount of kids who don't bother to get their DL right away is also mind blowing.  Anecdotally, same reason.  

You were actually ahead of your time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wulaw Horn said:

And, also, the amount of kids who don't bother to get their DL right away is also mind blowing.  Anecdotally, same reason. 

In their defense, the Mom-wagons that everybody drives now are boring as fuck. Where's the zest in life if you're likely to survive every wreck?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not relevant to the Senate discussion but I don't understand the utes, either.  Our single minded obsession when we were teenagers were getting laid.  Never mind we were too awkward to pull it off in some cases.  Why did we want a DL?  To get laid.  Why dress better?  Get laid.  Why play guitar in a band?  Get laid.

Teenage dudes today don't seem interested in getting laid and as a result, are very unimpressive.  Seems kinda sad.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Not relevant to the Senate discussion but I don't understand the utes, either.  Our single minded obsession when we were teenagers were getting laid.  Never mind we were too awkward to pull it off in some cases.  Why did we want a DL?  To get laid.  Why dress better?  Get laid.  Why play guitar in a band?  Get laid.

Teenage dudes today don't seem interested in getting laid and as a result, are very unimpressive.  Seems kinda sad.

It's the argument I've made to my wife- basically everything man does is to get laid.  Would there be pyramids in Egypt 3000 years ago or skyscrapers in NY without this urge?  No.  Would I bother the get up and dress and shower and go to work before I fuck around on the internet instead of laying in my own filth and sloth at home while I fuck around on the internet if it wasn't for that urge?  No.  We wouldn't do anything beyond basic survival if it wasn't for the desire to get laid. I  mean- sports are cool- but in a world where athletes didn't get massive groupies would we have blood sports? NO.  I've always said the only reason anyone ever played the guitar was to get laid.  


Hell, being rich is fun I'm sure, but if massive money didn't equal top shelf 'tang how many people would really care about it?  I mean, I guess sitting on the beach and sipping Pina Colada's is cool and all, but is it really all that much better than being at home and watching TV or dicking around on the internet without the girls in bikinis and the getting laid (whether it's picking up a local or if you brought your own sand to the beach in the form of a SO other spouse) on the agenda?  Nah, not really.  

It really is amazing.  And this is coming from someone who only ever had sex with his wifes.  I was doing self improvement and trying to get life right not for immediate gratification but to hopefully put myself in the best situation for life. Why?  So I could attract the best possible mate and get laid.  I think almost every guy thinks this way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...