Recent Posts
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 17, 2024, 06:25:38 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

Filter Options Collapse
        


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10

 1 
 on: Today at 06:25:36 PM 
Started by Horus - Last post by wnwnwn
Do you think he and StoneToss know each other?
Imagine an SNL sketch of both light skinned latino Nazis.

 2 
 on: Today at 06:24:40 PM 
Started by Obama24 - Last post by Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
Yeah Trump should totally spend his money on Florida. It’s not like he has it in the bag or anything.

Can't hurt to invest in a state with a load of EC votes regardless. A politician should never take any state for granted. Hillary learned that mistake the hard way in 2016. Just because a state has trended X or Y way for however long doesn't mean it will 100% of the time. You gotta water your garden if you want to keep it healthy.

Hillary was right to target FL Murphy was the fav until Rubio jumped back in, right now Scott appears to be the maverick because he passed red flag laws, FL is outta play and so is TX it's a 319 map

 3 
 on: Today at 06:23:40 PM 
Started by Arizona Iced Tea - Last post by Arizona Iced Tea


Never in my life would I have expected a Republican candidate to hold a rally in that part of town especially near Morrisania.

 4 
 on: Today at 06:23:32 PM 
Started by Virginiá - Last post by Storr
I'm guessing a "friendly" regime in Ukraine from Putin's perspective would be Belarus 2.0:

"In my recent piece in Foreign Affairs, I argued that nobody in Moscow is looking for an exit strategy from the war; rather, people are prepared to fight as long as it takes. Many interpreted this as a thesis that Moscow will not negotiate with Ukraine or agree to a ceasefire. That is not what I was saying. Here are several points to make my understanding more nuanced:

There is no discussion among senior officials in the Kremlin about negotiating with Ukraine or what compromises could be reached with Kyiv or the West. Decision-making on this issue is monopolized by Putin, and many senior officials simply guess what he wants but do not dare to initiate anything. The common belief is that Russia is winning, advancing successfully, and has the upper hand in Ukraine. Hence, they see no point in talking to the West, let alone Ukraine.

Putin does not aim to storm Odessa, Kyiv, or even Kharkiv. First, he lacks the army for that. Second, he does not want to engage in large-scale battles. His strategy is to impose on Ukraine military pressure, diminish military infrastructure, and intimidate locals to coerce Kyiv into surrendering and accepting Russian demands. He will only take what he believes he can, given his limited military capacity and wait when Ukraine falls.

Yes, Putin wants to talk, but strictly on Russian terms. He is concerned that a pause might be used by the West and Ukraine to rearm. Because of this, he will be extremely cautious about the conditions of any talks

He will not talk to Zelensky, as he does not believe Zelensky can deliver what Russia wants from Ukraine. Moscow has been signalling for months that the West must remove Zelensky. However, if Zelensky were to lift the ban on talks with Russia and open a window for negotiations, Putin might seize this opportunity (as a showcase and temporarily)—not to start real talks, but to demonstrate his readiness for negotiations, expecting, as well, it to accelerate Zelensky’s departure. Putin might also agree to a tactical ceasefire if reassured that it would not be used to rearm Ukraine and if he sees Ukraine is desperate and ready to discuss Russian demands.

So, what are Russia’s demands? Putin’s flexibility will depend on the progress on three tracks, which are inter-dependable:

1. Washington’s position: If Putin has any hope that the US might consider an "ironclad" ban on Ukraine’s NATO membership and other guarantees of neutrality, his position on two other tracks might soften.
2. Kyiv’s readiness to consider political demands: Putin wants a "friendly" regime in Ukraine—one that would exclude the emergence of anti-Russian forces. I will not go into details here, but If he believes he can achieve this, he may be flexible on territorial matters. It is important to say that I do not believe this is ever possible, but in Putin’s vision, it is no problem if Odessa remains Ukrainian as long as Ukraine is “friendly.”
3. Territorial Matters: If there is no progress on the first two tracks, Putin will continue a creeping offensive for as long as needed. If he is more successful militarily and gain more territories, he will become more contemptuous about first and second tracks.

The point of my article in Foreign Affairs was that if there is no sign from the West that serious talks are possible (in Putin’s eyes and those of the Russian ruling elite there are no such signs), the only path is further escalation. No one is concerned about this unless it brings us to the brink of nuclear war—an eventuality that might split the elite (I do not urge to provoke the nuclear escalation). Until then, the political class will stick with Putin and support his military ambitions."


 5 
 on: Today at 06:23:28 PM 
Started by Landslide Lyndon - Last post by TechbroMBA
I’d say it’s a bit more hackish to claim you’re a gold star family than misrepresent your primary share by, what? 5%?

 6 
 on: Today at 06:15:13 PM 
Started by Landslide Lyndon - Last post by GAinDC
Well, he can defend the 90% number by claiming that the rest of Haley primary voters were not Republican and even then, the math does not add up.  And frankly in a tight race, even 10% of primary voters is yooge!

I would view that comment more as a signal and as public negotiations with Haley.  He wants to lower her price for coming to him (not sure whether just for endorsement or as a VP).  I doubt that flea market bargaining strategy will work but we shall see.

Oh geez, how many times have we heard this over the last nine years?

“Don’t worry, folks — I know Trump’s statement seems like a complete lie if you just go by the facts, but if you let me dissect it for the next 15 minutes, you’ll see it actually makes a lot of sense and is a brilliant political 3D chess move!”

Not buying it!

Bu bu Trump quoted wrong numbers about a settled primary he won in a landslide. He’s a dumb idiot and mentally unsound.

Unrelatedly it’s totally normal to forget how and in what country your son died, that’s easy to mess up.


What’s your point? I’m talking about Trump’s statement, not Biden’s

And it’s kind of hackish behavior to insult a guy about his memory of his dead son. Grief is complex. I’m talking about Trump’s many lies about election results.

 7 
 on: Today at 06:12:53 PM 
Started by jojoju1998 - Last post by Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden
As mainline Protestant denominations and Roman Catholicism fail to attract as many would-be priests and ministers, MDivs will decline.

A better question would be "Why is there a priest/minister shortage?" for these denominations, and there are plenty of good answers to that question.

Yup. M.Divs are a requirement for (I think) most mainline denominations and the Catholic Church. It's definitely cheaper to become a pastor for a nondenominational one since there are obviously -- for better or worse -- no requirements. And it's the nondenominational churches which are, of course, "growing" (or declining slower, to be more precise) in influence for American Christianity.

One has to wonder if eventually the mainline churches will discard M.Divs as a requirement, or replace it with a church-administered training program, in the future in order to make that vocation more attractive to candidates. Same with the Catholic Church, but I'm not as familiar with how strict the RCC is when it comes to degree requirements. But there is already a shortage of priests, at least for most of the West, and I don't see that problem going away soon.

 8 
 on: Today at 06:12:34 PM 
Started by Obama24 - Last post by MarkD
Here is how I describe the ideology of Joe Biden
https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=368572.0

 9 
 on: Today at 06:12:07 PM 
Started by Arizona Iced Tea - Last post by ProgressiveModerate
Agree with poster above but this is still clearly and embarrassing oversight. Rural TX counties have a history of these problems particularly in lower profile elections like referendums no one cares about and primaries. In the past decade multiple rural TX counties (including Starr) failed to ever report their results for a few uncompetitive statewide ballot things.

If this happened at the Pres level (I.e. Biden winning Roberts County TX) it would definitely be caught and fixed right away, but in these other elections just not enough folks care and the race isn’t competitive to matter.

 10 
 on: Today at 06:09:14 PM 
Started by Arizona Iced Tea - Last post by DrScholl
With that few votes it's not going to generate much discussion. It's not that it doesn't matter it's just that it is too small for anyone to pay attention to. Things like this are a good argument for county consolidation. Texas is one of many states with far too many counties.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 13 queries.