MS-Mason Dixon: Hood (D) +2

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Likely R.

[Del Tachi]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

What's your hot take on the Realignment of 1987?

Fordice ousted Mabus in 1991 by focusing on affirmative action, it's clear that Republicans have exploited the racial tension in the state and made it virtually impossible for Dems to get the 30% of whites they would need to win statewide.

And Republicans just started exploiting racial tension in 1987?  Local Democrats just stopped around then?

When I said "since 1987", I meant that was the last time a Democrat won over 50% statewide. I realize other people use "since [insert year]" differently, and that statement would imply that 1983 was the last time the aforementioned happened, but that's not how I use it.

The Republican party wasn't that well established locally in MS until the 1980s, but they certainly did begin exploiting it almost immediately. "Local Democrats" are irrelevant to this question. The black vote was dominating Democratic primaries by the 1980s, no Democrat who was anti-black was ever going to win the nomination to statewide office, which is what we're talking about.

None of that is even remotely true.  The Mississippi Democratic primary electorate in 2015 was larger than the GOP primary electorate, and the Mississippi GOP wasn't a fully-functioning political party until the 2000s, at best.

[Mr. Smith]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

Vitter vs. JBE: LA will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2008 is comical.

Moore vs. Jones: AL will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1998 is comical.

Both cases still are, even as they happened.

[RINO Tom]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

What's your hot take on the Realignment of 1987?

Fordice ousted Mabus in 1991 by focusing on affirmative action, it's clear that Republicans have exploited the racial tension in the state and made it virtually impossible for Dems to get the 30% of whites they would need to win statewide.

And Republicans just started exploiting racial tension in 1987?  Local Democrats just stopped around then?

Unironically yes

The magical year of 1987 when everyone agreed to a clean switch!

[OSR stands with Israel]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

What's your hot take on the Realignment of 1987?

Fordice ousted Mabus in 1991 by focusing on affirmative action, it's clear that Republicans have exploited the racial tension in the state and made it virtually impossible for Dems to get the 30% of whites they would need to win statewide.

And Republicans just started exploiting racial tension in 1987?  Local Democrats just stopped around then?

Unironically yes

The magical year of 1987 when everyone agreed to a clean switch!

Realignment doesn't mean switch,

For example, 1932 was yes a realigning election where in one election cycle the Democrats went from being the party that spent the previous 36 years in the Wilderness to a Party that Dominated totally American Politics for the next 36-48 years.


For the Republicans 1980 was an election where the Neo-Liberal Conservative Wing took over and dominated Republican Party Politics till like in 2016.

[Sir Mohamed]

It's early, though this is not too strong for Hood because he has almost universal name rec. If I have to predict a result now, it would be 51-47% GOP. Lean R, but closer to toss-up than likely.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

This is so great that DEMS are winning in MS & LA. At the outset of the campaign season, the GOP were supposed to sweep

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

Vitter vs. JBE: LA will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2008 is comical.

Moore vs. Jones: AL will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1998 is comical.

I never would have said that about LA, which despite being inelastic is still is much more flexible than AL/MS.

Um, Doug Jones didn't clear 50%, he only received 49.97% (and a rounded 50% is not enough to win with MS laws, see Musgrove and his 1999 post election battle), and this with a pedophile as his opponent and half of Republicans not voting. Thanks for proving my point.

[MassBlueDog]

Given MS's inelasticity Hood ever leading by double digits is virtually impossible, if Hood wins it's a nailbiter.

Hood won by 10 points in 2015 of all years, when Bryant (R) won reelection by 34 points simultaneously. Doesn’t sound very #inelastic to me. Also, a Democratic sacrificial lamb came within 7 points of winning a federal race just two months ago.

Mike Espy had a pro Democratic national environment and more importantly Cindy Hyde Smith's scandals(which Reeves probably won't have) and it still wasn't particularly close.

Did you say something about Reeves not having any scandals?

https://american-ledger.com/accountability/mississippi-gop-gubernatorial-front-runner-tate-reeves-fraternity-yearbook-page-included-blackface/

[Ye We Can]

I think Hood will win tbh. Obviously he'll bleed white voters from his AG runs but the path is there he just needs to win a fraction of them

[MT Treasurer]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

Vitter vs. JBE: LA will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2008 is comical.

Moore vs. Jones: AL will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1998 is comical.

I never would have said that about LA, which despite being inelastic is still is much more flexible than AL/MS.

Um, Doug Jones didn't clear 50%, he only received 49.97% (and a rounded 50% is not enough to win with MS laws, see Musgrove and his 1999 post election battle), and this with a pedophile as his opponent and half of Republicans not voting. Thanks for proving my point.

1) What exactly makes the demographics of the Lousiana of 2019 more favorable for Democrats than MS/AL? Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the state less black than MS and less suburban than AL?

2) Okay, so a pro-choice Democrat won a Senate race in a Trump +28 (62%) Deep South state with 49.97% instead of 50%+1 of the vote? Welp, I guess that settles it, then. If only he had done .04% better, I’d be ready to call AL an elastic state. Actually, AL is even more inelastic than that, as Jones only won with 49.96559701049884% and not 49.97%!

3) I didn’t prove your point at all. If AL was as inelastic and partisan as people make it out to be, why did those Republicans who stayed home or voted for Jones, you know, care about candidate quality or the allegations in the first place? Why did they believe the women and not Moore?

[Bidenworth2020]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

Vitter vs. JBE: LA will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2008 is comical.

Moore vs. Jones: AL will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1998 is comical.

I never would have said that about LA, which despite being inelastic is still is much more flexible than AL/MS.

Um, Doug Jones didn't clear 50%, he only received 49.97% (and a rounded 50% is not enough to win with MS laws, see Musgrove and his 1999 post election battle), and this with a pedophile as his opponent and half of Republicans not voting. Thanks for proving my point.

1) What exactly makes the demographics of the Lousiana of 2019 more favorable for Democrats than MS/AL? Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the state less black than MS and less suburban than AL?

2) Okay, so a pro-choice Democrat won a Senate race in a Trump +28 (62%) Deep South state with 49.97% instead of 50%+1 of the vote? Welp, I guess that settles it, then. If only he had done .04% better, I’d be ready to call AL an elastic state. Actually, AL is even more inelastic than that, as Jones only won with 49.96559701049884% and not 49.97%!

3) I didn’t prove your point at all. If AL was as inelastic and partisan as people make it out to be, why did those Republicans who stayed home or voted for Jones, you know, care about candidate quality or the allegations in the first place? Why did they believe the women and not Moore?

1. True, but unlike MS or AL, LA still has areas that can be much more friendly down ballot. Just look at the registration numbers, and how well JBE did in 2015 compared to Clinton in Acadiana and the SW corner of the state. That and there is a decent suburban population around New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Shreveport to a lesser degree, etc. These are all areas Clinton did better and should at least trend D from 2016. Couple all of this with the fact that black turnout was horrible in 2015, and will likely be higher with the trend of high turnout elections in the Trump area, and you have better demographics than two almost purely rural states (I know Alabama has a fast growing suburban population, but it is still dominated by rural areas).

2.He won less votes than both Maddox and Clinton, and Moore won 91% of republicans. This was clearly a turnout affair, shown by how the swing to Jones was less pronounced in rural areas, which had lower turnout.

3. You can still be a complete partisan hack and see the writing on the wall when so many woman come out with their stories. Also, 44% of the electorate didn't believe the allegations, close to 95% of Moore's votes most likely, according to the cnn exit polls.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Popular, semi-moderate Democrat with a narrow lead in a deeply Republican state in a poll nine months before the election?  Where have we heard that before?

[Calthrina950]

Popular, semi-moderate Democrat with a narrow lead in a deeply Republican state in a poll nine months before the election?  Where have we heard that before?

Your home state just last year. Hood is another Bredesen, and will probably lose by high single to low double digits in the end.

[OSR stands with Israel]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

Vitter vs. JBE: LA will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2008 is comical.

Moore vs. Jones: AL will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1998 is comical.

I never would have said that about LA, which despite being inelastic is still is much more flexible than AL/MS.

Um, Doug Jones didn't clear 50%, he only received 49.97% (and a rounded 50% is not enough to win with MS laws, see Musgrove and his 1999 post election battle), and this with a pedophile as his opponent and half of Republicans not voting. Thanks for proving my point.

1) What exactly makes the demographics of the Lousiana of 2019 more favorable for Democrats than MS/AL? Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the state less black than MS and less suburban than AL?

2) Okay, so a pro-choice Democrat won a Senate race in a Trump +28 (62%) Deep South state with 49.97% instead of 50%+1 of the vote? Welp, I guess that settles it, then. If only he had done .04% better, I’d be ready to call AL an elastic state. Actually, AL is even more inelastic than that, as Jones only won with 49.96559701049884% and not 49.97%!

3) I didn’t prove your point at all. If AL was as inelastic and partisan as people make it out to be, why did those Republicans who stayed home or voted for Jones, you know, care about candidate quality or the allegations in the first place? Why did they believe the women and not Moore?

The Suburbs of AL are far more Republican than LA and that makes it much much harder for a party to find a path to victory.


Manchin would lose in AL even if he was the incumbent

[Tender Branson]

There's a chance for a Democratic sweep this year ...

LA, KY and MS.

[Fuzzy Bear]

MS will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1987 is comical.

Vitter vs. JBE: LA will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 2008 is comical.

Moore vs. Jones: AL will never vote Democrat because despite the delusions of some here it is very, very INELASTIC. The idea of a Democrat clearing 50%, which they haven't done in a major statewide race (gubernatorial/senatorial) since 1998 is comical.

It's certainly not impossible, but I don't see the sort of special circumstances that worked for JBE and Jones in play here, unless I'm missing something.

[ElectionsGuy]

There's a miniscule chance for a Democratic sweep this year ...

LA, KY and MS.

Fixed

[Some of My Best Friends Are Gay]

I can see this.


Mike Espy only lost by 6 and he was a liberal black man, surely a centrist white man who's been elected statewide many times before could win here in an off-year election.

[wesmoorenerd]

I can see this.


Mike Espy only lost by 6 and he was a liberal black man, surely a centrist white man who's been elected statewide many times before could win here in an off-year election.

Espy was hardly a liberal, he's always been a centrist. He even endorsed Barbour in 2007.

That said, Hood's clearly a more seasoned statewide candidate.

[HarrisonL]

Hood will eventually become Bredesen, same with Beshear, they will make it competitive, but Trump's conservative poll will have the final say in these conservative states.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Hood will eventually become Bredesen, same with Beshear, they will make it competitive, but Trump's conservative poll will have the final say in these conservative states.

Hood will have to face an Espy tyoe situation, unlike Beshear, if Hood falls short of 50, the Tory state assembly will pick Reeves as Gov.

[LoneStarDem]

Hood will eventually become Bredesen, same with Beshear, they will make it competitive, but Trump's conservative poll will have the final say in these conservative states.

Hood will have to face an Espy tyoe situation, unlike Beshear, if Hood falls short of 50, the Tory state assembly will pick Reeves as Gov.

Hoping it doesn't go that far.

[Suburbia]

Hood wins 51-46.

[Senator Incitatus]

Hood will eventually become Bredesen, same with Beshear, they will make it competitive, but Trump's conservative poll will have the final say in these conservative states.

Hood will have to face an Espy tyoe situation, unlike Beshear, if Hood falls short of 50, the Tory state assembly will pick Reeves as Gov.

Big fan of you calling Republicans "Tories" now.