Recent Posts
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2021, 05:37:33 PM
News: EV Calculator updated with new apportionment numbers, custom labels, orange party color and more. Read more

Filter Options Collapse
        


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10

 51 
 on: Today at 04:34:56 PM 
Started by wbrocks67 - Last post by Mr. Kanye West
Its not much difference both bills are attempting to Federalize Elections and ban Gerrymandering districts that the ScOTUS already pulled by Kennedy was Constitutional

The D's have no Voter Suppression in 278 EC states but AZ and GA and all they need is MI, WI and PA  states to win the Election but in 2022 they need TX and FL to stay neutral and OH and MT in 2024 Senate seats to keep the Senate, Congress is stake not the Prez

Many of the Drop boxes that were deleted are in minority districts but you can take it, your ballot to your local Post office and Voter IDs are constitutional

ACB is the swing vote instead of Roberts, since she is the final arbitor on Roe and she will vote to overturn Roe, do you have confidence in her in upholding a ban on gerrymandering, NOT

There is a difference between being Center right and a Maverick, and don't think Rs won't sue they are already taking IL to Crt on Redistricting


This is a Beto bro plan, because without the For the People's Act, he can't run for Gov and defeat Gregg Abbott whom is up 80/20%

 52 
 on: Today at 04:34:38 PM 
Started by Tekken_Guy - Last post by Orser67
I think he'd be about 50/50, but I'd probably very slightly lean towards him losing, in part because PA Dems have a pretty decent bench. One data point worth considering is that Toomey ran ~0.6 points ahead of Trump in 2016, and Biden won PA by a point in 2020 (although direct comparisons aren't perfect because of different levels of third party voting).

Just quickly eye-balling the 2020 results in the PA suburbs, it looks the only district where congressional Republicans really ran ahead of Trump was in PA-1, where Fitzpatrick got 56.5% compared to Trump's 46.6%. As a PA suburbanite, my personal hope is that the type of voter who voted Biden/Fizpatrick would have realized that Toomey, unlike Fitzpatrick, is basically an average congressional Republican in terms of ideology (notwithstanding Toomey's occasionally centrist positions on social issues).

Actually congressional Republicans won the house popular vote in PA last year.

Well I wasn't arguing that they didn't, I was just saying that Fitzpatrick's district was the lone district where I saw a truly major gap between presidential and congressional results.


Moving on, here's a look at the difference in margins between the presidential and house races, with the presidential data coming from Daily Kos:

District (w/Incumbent): House R overperformance
PA-1 (Brian Fitzpatrick-R): 18.9
PA-12 (Fred Keller-R): 5.6
PA-04 (Madeleine Dean-D): 5.0
PA-11 (Lloyd Smucker-R): 4.3
PA-10 (Scott Perry-R): 3.7
PA-15 (Glenn Thompson-R): 3.2
PA-06 (Chrissy Houlahan-D): 2.9
PA-13 (John Joyce-R): 2.6
PA-09 (Dan Meuser-R): 2.3
PA-14 (Guy Reschenthaler-R): 1.9
PA-05 (Mary Gay Scanlon-D): 1.7
PA-03 (Dwight Evans-D): 1.1
PA-07 (Susan Wild-D): 0.5
PA-17 (Conor Lamb-D): 0.4
PA-16 (Mike Kelly-R):   0.0
PA-02 (Brendan Boyle-D): -4.1
PA-08 (Matt Cartwright-D): -8.0
PA-18 (Mike Doyle-D): -8.4

What I take from this is that while House Republicans did relatively well running against Dem incumbents in the Philadelphia suburbs (PA-4 and PA-6 being the big ones), elsewhere incumbent members of Congress from both parties at least ran close to even with the top of the ticket. So Toomey's survival may have hinged on his ability to run closer to R incumbents than to Trump in Republican-held districts, although obviously he could have made up ground in other ways, e.g. by running even further ahead of Trump in the PA suburbs than House Rs did.

 53 
 on: Today at 04:34:33 PM 
Started by Samof94 - Last post by Lady of Ten Thousand Names
Well there was the exiled clerical class of the Hyksos and the exiled Egyptian Atenists to Canaan/Philistine. Safe to say there’s enough historical analogues for Exodus.
Atenism, a failed early draft of monotheism?

To my knowledge, serious scholars treat the Freudian notion that Atenism is the father of Abrahamic monotheism with about the same credence that they give to the old chestnut about Mary being a mere rebranding of Isis. Of course, in my own practice I venerate the two of them side by side, but I recognize this as a distinctly postmodern and syncretic affectation as opposed to the spurious narratives that far too many pagans hold about reclaiming authentic religious history from the Christoids or whatever.

As far as Exodus is concerned, and on the note of pagans being revisionist assholes sometimes (read: much of the time), from my intellectually limited point of view I don't mind what people believe as long as we can all come together to recognize that whatever the f-ck Nina Paley's version of it can be called is blatantly presentist and facetious tripe.

 54 
 on: Today at 04:34:15 PM 
Started by Kingpoleon - Last post by smoltchanov
I have to say, I never thought Kay Ivey would be considered one of the saner Republicans, but here we are.

She's always come across as a bland, Generic R to me. She's in the same wing of the party as Richard Shelby, and is of the same generation as him. And like Shelby, Ivey is a former conservative Democrat.

Like (probably) a million other Alabama's voters. After all - it's not an coincidence, that in the past many Alabama's Democrats spoke of their party as "our (Alabama's) conservative Democratic party..."

 55 
 on: Today at 04:34:11 PM 
Started by Northeast Senator Ishan - Last post by MATTROSE94
Is Mechaman back on the forum? He was a great guy with probably the highest level of political knowledge I ever encountered.

 56 
 on: Today at 04:33:23 PM 
Started by ProgressiveModerate - Last post by ProgressiveModerate
The partisan scoring formula seems to turn on Dem packing, rather than maximizing the number of reasonably safe Pub CD's, plus whatever else can be put in play without putting the reasonably safe stable at risk. Whatever else in my map would be TX-07, and then the issue for a more marginal CD, is thinking about the trends going forward. For TX-07, do you jettison rather marginal former Pub high SES high rates of voting whites trending not so marginal Dem, for lower rate voting more Dem Hispanics but trending Pub, or not? I went with the Hispanics, jettisoning Bellaire and West  University Place and similar adjacent precincts, and embraced Alief and Bellaire West a couple of miles to the west.

In the real world, you also want to avoid CD's to the extent one can, where such a CD might nominate a Pub that is a very poor fit for higher SES urban whites, to the point that the CD might be put at risk. My Dem trending TX-3 for example is drawn the way it is for a reason. Keep the number of gun toting, MAGA hat wearing, rural hicks down to a point where they are put on ignore in Pub primaries! They are not wanted.

Yeah I wasn't really sure what'd be the fairest way to have an objective metric. I'd figure that the formula would encourage as many R CDs in the sweet spot of R+15-25, since after that the amount of additional points you get for a redder districts reaches an asymptote (i.e. from a partisan standpoint, a R+25 and R+50 district are essentially the same).

There are certain decisions like primary electorate nominating someone who'd be a good fit for the district that are hard to measure, or how "trend proof" a given district is, since a lot of this is subjective (even if there is a consensus on Atlas).


Oh I see what you did now. That is outstanding. And I lost out because while in comparison, I an extra lean Pub CD, I also had other CD's that fell into likely but not totally safe Pub category, particularly as time goes by. I see now why you had +15 and an X exponent to 9/10th's to drive the asymptote. I am impressed. It works!

And yes, there is no way to but the rest of what I wrote into a scoring formula, even with consensus.

The main other issue is whether to somehow factor in muni chops, which might actually help to foster demographic coherency beyond its own merits.

Thanks lol. Asymptotes are useful in politics.

Yeah. Do you know if there are any ways to calculate the number of chops?

 57 
 on: Today at 04:33:07 PM 
Started by Bootes Void - Last post by Geoffrey Howe
On the subject of Amazon, I'm always baffled by the criticisms of it, especially in France. Amazon is disrupting and putting out of business many bookshops and there are calls for Amazon to be prevented from doing this etc. I've never understood it.

I go into a French bookshop, it is cramped and messy and the staff are rude and unpleasant. I ask for a book (quite a well known one) and they say they can get it in 8 days. For the same price and with none of the hassle, Amazon can get it to me in 1 day. This, from what I can tell, is why Amazon is doing so well in this sector. It is disrupting bad services and businesses.

Now, people are understandably concerned about the fate of nice, small bookshops; as am I. But if people want go to them rather than Amazon they will survive. If they are friendly and offer a nice experience, I might go to them: Amazon cannot do this. If people don't want to pay for this, why should they be forced to when there is a competitor they prefer?

(People might bring up the issue of how Amazon treats its staff in warehouses. I agree that there are  problems here, but it's obvious this isn't the reason for Amazon's success: plenty of other business treat their workers badly and aren't doing very well. Including probably small bookshops. The solution is to change or enforce workplace regulations, not ban competition.)
 

 58 
 on: Today at 04:30:16 PM 
Started by Suburbia - Last post by Suburbia
It's a white state, it fits the GOP's demographics, their governor, Phil Scott is a moderate Republican....when will we see Vermont vote GOP at the presidential level?


 59 
 on: Today at 04:25:38 PM 
Started by Hammy - Last post by Meclazine
Vaccines should be mandatory, but as we have witnessed over the last 18 months, humans like being....human.

We just need an airline to step up and say you cannot fly with us until fully vaccinated. Then other businesses will follow suit.

For this, you would need a digital vaccination passport from your Government.

Masks should be mandatory in areas where infection is more probable, or during lockdown.

This stuff is not difficult, yet the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted a genuine lack of professionalism and performance in Government sectors compared to the private sector.

If COVID-19 was managed by the private sector in Australia for example, we would not have imported the Delta variant from India (and foreign visitors) and placed these people in hotel quarantine in the CBD of cities with 2-6 million people only to have their Uber Drivers and Security Guards spread the virus to their Reno's and lock down 2-6 million stupidity.

Only Government employees could manage to produce a schmooze like what we have seen.

The pandemic has really highlighted how ineffective Government bodies have become at doing any job. No accountability, wrong people trained to manage it, nobody can make a decision, the list is endless.

The management of COVID-19 is the only one we can see.

 60 
 on: Today at 04:25:36 PM 
Started by Suburbia - Last post by Suburbia
Barring major platform changes, I don't see why Democrats would cede the white vote.  People here seem to forget that liberal white people are more ideologically in line with the Democratic Party (and appalled by the GOP) than even most minorities who vote for Democrats. 

Democrats are always going to have a floor among non-religious whites or whites who support certain issues like the environment, abortion, gun control, etc.  That's a huge chunk of the electorate, which often doesn't get a lot of attention because they are highly concentrated in large professional metro areas that aren't competitive in general elections.  Though many seem to be relocating to places like Texas and North Carolina and that's really going to screw the GOP long term.  See: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/american-migration-patterns-should-terrify-gop/598153/


CRT and this antiwhite nonsense will do it in for them.......Wisconsin, Minnesota and Maine are universally white states and this stuff will shift these places.....

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 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 0.042 seconds with 12 queries.