Harris vs McCready redo - who wins?

[IceSpear]

Anyway, directly on the topic at hand, Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. He has zero margin to lose support. Even if the scandal only chases away 2% of his voters, he's screwed.

Note that both Collins and Hunter were dramatically wounded by their scandals, though their districts ended up too R to actually fall. Collins only won a hyper-Republican seat (Romney won by 12 and Trump won by 24) by 1.1%, while Hunter only won a similarly extreme seat (Romney by 23 and Trump by 15) by 2.5%. The whole "scandal doesn't do anything anymore" is clearly false: scandal can make a candidate run like 8-10% worse than you'd expect even now, it's just that that wasn't enough for these districts.

NC-09 is a seat that Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. Saying "it won't hurt him much" is besides the point. He has literally no support he can afford to lose.

Don't forget VA-2 where "rising star" Taylor lost by 1.8%; his petition scandal is the only explanation for his loss.

Which is why Brat, who was in a more Republican district and didn't have a scandal, lost by more than Taylor, right?

[MT Treasurer]

McCready, and it won’t be particularly close. C’est la vie. He can be defeated in 2020, though.

[Young Conservative]

Depends on whether Harris actually knew or not and even then Democrats would have to have proof. Also depends if the election is Harris or another R

[AudmanOut]

Depends on whether Harris actually knew or not and even then Democrats would have to have proof. Also depends if the election is Harris or another R

I think it would have to be Harris by law

[lfromnj]

Harris will just move to Fort hill

[The Mikado]

I tend to think that if McCready wins and survives 2020, he'll be in pretty good shape. Mecklenburg County is growing at an insanely quick rate while the rural parts of the district are actually shrinking. It'll be hard for redistricting to not create a new NC-09 that's more Mecklenburg focused, even with the GOP trying otherwise.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Anyway, directly on the topic at hand, Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. He has zero margin to lose support. Even if the scandal only chases away 2% of his voters, he's screwed.

Note that both Collins and Hunter were dramatically wounded by their scandals, though their districts ended up too R to actually fall. Collins only won a hyper-Republican seat (Romney won by 12 and Trump won by 24) by 1.1%, while Hunter only won a similarly extreme seat (Romney by 23 and Trump by 15) by 2.5%. The whole "scandal doesn't do anything anymore" is clearly false: scandal can make a candidate run like 8-10% worse than you'd expect even now, it's just that that wasn't enough for these districts.

NC-09 is a seat that Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. Saying "it won't hurt him much" is besides the point. He has literally no support he can afford to lose.

Don't forget VA-2 where "rising star" Taylor lost by 1.8%; his petition scandal is the only explanation for his loss.

Which is why Brat, who was in a more Republican district and didn't have a scandal, lost by more than Taylor, right?

Brat was facing a stronger opponent.

[nerd73]

I should point out that Harris actually lost the rurals in 2018. Guess there's one more hunt in the ol' blue dog.

[Young Conservative]

Depends on whether Harris actually knew or not and even then Democrats would have to have proof. Also depends if the election is Harris or another R

I think it would have to be Harris by law

There might have to be a primary redo. Looks like some issues in the primary too

[IceSpear]

Anyway, directly on the topic at hand, Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. He has zero margin to lose support. Even if the scandal only chases away 2% of his voters, he's screwed.

Note that both Collins and Hunter were dramatically wounded by their scandals, though their districts ended up too R to actually fall. Collins only won a hyper-Republican seat (Romney won by 12 and Trump won by 24) by 1.1%, while Hunter only won a similarly extreme seat (Romney by 23 and Trump by 15) by 2.5%. The whole "scandal doesn't do anything anymore" is clearly false: scandal can make a candidate run like 8-10% worse than you'd expect even now, it's just that that wasn't enough for these districts.

NC-09 is a seat that Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. Saying "it won't hurt him much" is besides the point. He has literally no support he can afford to lose.

Don't forget VA-2 where "rising star" Taylor lost by 1.8%; his petition scandal is the only explanation for his loss.

Which is why Brat, who was in a more Republican district and didn't have a scandal, lost by more than Taylor, right?

Brat was facing a stronger opponent.

True, but regardless, the "scandal" clearly didn't have anywhere near as much impact as Atlas thought it would, assuming it had any at all.

[Young Conservative]

Anyway, directly on the topic at hand, Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. He has zero margin to lose support. Even if the scandal only chases away 2% of his voters, he's screwed.

Note that both Collins and Hunter were dramatically wounded by their scandals, though their districts ended up too R to actually fall. Collins only won a hyper-Republican seat (Romney won by 12 and Trump won by 24) by 1.1%, while Hunter only won a similarly extreme seat (Romney by 23 and Trump by 15) by 2.5%. The whole "scandal doesn't do anything anymore" is clearly false: scandal can make a candidate run like 8-10% worse than you'd expect even now, it's just that that wasn't enough for these districts.

NC-09 is a seat that Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. Saying "it won't hurt him much" is besides the point. He has literally no support he can afford to lose.

Don't forget VA-2 where "rising star" Taylor lost by 1.8%; his petition scandal is the only explanation for his loss.

Which is why Brat, who was in a more Republican district and didn't have a scandal, lost by more than Taylor, right?

Brat was facing a stronger opponent.

Spanberger has scarily impressive charisma. Met her multiple times.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Anyway, directly on the topic at hand, Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. He has zero margin to lose support. Even if the scandal only chases away 2% of his voters, he's screwed.

Note that both Collins and Hunter were dramatically wounded by their scandals, though their districts ended up too R to actually fall. Collins only won a hyper-Republican seat (Romney won by 12 and Trump won by 24) by 1.1%, while Hunter only won a similarly extreme seat (Romney by 23 and Trump by 15) by 2.5%. The whole "scandal doesn't do anything anymore" is clearly false: scandal can make a candidate run like 8-10% worse than you'd expect even now, it's just that that wasn't enough for these districts.

NC-09 is a seat that Harris "won" by 0.3% pre-scandal. Saying "it won't hurt him much" is besides the point. He has literally no support he can afford to lose.

Don't forget VA-2 where "rising star" Taylor lost by 1.8%; his petition scandal is the only explanation for his loss.

Which is why Brat, who was in a more Republican district and didn't have a scandal, lost by more than Taylor, right?

Brat was facing a stronger opponent.

True, but regardless, the "scandal" clearly didn't have anywhere near as much impact as Atlas thought it would, assuming it had any at all.

I'd argue it cost him the election; given how close the race was, that seems pretty hard to deny.