Has Your First Post Aged Well?

[GeneralMacArthur]

My first post on this forum was a thread celebrating the end of the Mike Gravel campaign.

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=327638.msg6910480#msg6910480

Half of you voted FF for the Gravel Teens.  For shame.  One year later that number was down to 1/3, so I'd say my take aged pretty well.

If you're wondering what they're up to today, they run a YouTube channel with Nina Turner where they launder Russian disinformation about Ukraine.  Those are the only jobs they can obtain because, as I wrote in that well-aged post...

making enemies and burning bridges for attention can come back to bite you.  They've made themselves virtually unemployable outside of Jacobin-type organizations.

btw the other guy helping them run that YT channel?  Jacobin founder Bhaskar Sunkara.

[Kuumo]

Re: Rate GA-06

Likely D. The Atlanta suburbs have only moved further left since 2018.

Definitely yes.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

I don't even know what i was even trying to say with my first post, tbh

[politicallefty]

My first post was just an introduction post:

I suppose that I should make a topic, considering that I am the newest user. I've been a "lurker" for a couple years now (though I do hate that term). My original account here was created in the summer of 2008, which I basically let expire. I sort of consider joining a forum to be something of a commitment, so I've been hesitant to join until now. However, I am an election-junkie and a poll-addict so to speak, so I have felt obligated to join (especially since non-registered users are basically now forbidden on Election Day). Above all else, I'm definitely an election addict and am very excited about the upcoming election.

I will admit that my first eligible vote for President was in 2008 (upon being older than 18), and I did vote for Barack Obama in the general election, as I already have in the general election this year. Despite my username, I would not consider myself to be an ideologue. I do think of myself as mostly pragmatic, and I am quite proud of my number 3-tie-score prediction here in the 2008 presidential election (although not so much 2006, especially considering the early never-updated prediction). Unfortunately, I bet on North Dakota in 2008 for Obama, otherwise I would have been number 2 for overall score. I do display my predictions and political matrix score, so I would consider myself to pretty much be an open-book politically. Although I haven't been a member of a forum in recent years, I do hope to have a good time here. :-)

(I hope I made a good initial post, since my browser killed my first attempt, lol.)

My second post was about NE-02 in 2012:

This seems like a tough one for Obama. I don't think he'll win it (NE-02 that is), but I do think it's definitely within the realm of possibility. From what I understand though, the district only very marginally changed from its 2008 incarnation. According to the Cook PVI, it went from R+5 to R+6, which is hardly a significant shift.

The one thing I cannot reconcile is the 14-point statewide margin with the national tracking polls. I don't see how state polling can be reconciled with national polling, and I'm not saying one is more right that the other. Although, I am probably more predisposed to believe the consensus of state polling over national tracking polls.

I think my second post aged quite well. I put my faith in state polling and it was accurate.

[Zache]

RE: Which is the stronger ticket: Clinton/Warner or Clinton/O'Malley?

How about Clinton/Kaine? I'm not all familiar with Kaine but at first glance he appears to offer the same benefits as a Warner VP, except now Dems won't have to defend two Senate seats in Virginia come 2018.

I'd say so considering Clinton/Kaine actually happened.

[NYDem]

I'd say it has, given he ultimately won over most Dems and won the election. From the now-locked Joe Biden campaign megathread:

[dead0man]

I call shenanigans on the poll.  49% of Americans know who Kucinich is enough to know they wont vote for him?  Bull Fudge.

[TDAS04]

Keep in mind that in all of these states that have not gone Democratic since 1964, Goldwater performed better than his national average (except AK).  So it isn't surprising that Nixon won them, and have voted Republican since then.

Neutral, since it's just analyzing the past.

In my second post, however, I was just being silly:

I think that both parties should look at Anchorage and Honolulu as possible convention locations down the road.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Oregon followed by Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey and Washington.

My first post in the: Which state do Republicans have the best chance of winning? thread. None of these would be won by Republicans (all options are Safe D).

[Torie]

Mine lacks the gravitas to age at all, but it does show that I started kissing ass right out of the box.

I thought Russert was fairly tough on both of them. I didn't think he was much tougher on Santorum then he was on Casey.

I agree completely.

[Brother Jonathan]

Trump would be painted as Romney was, as a wealthy person out of touch with average Americans. Obama could pull that argument off in a way Clinton couldn't (and he would have made it way more). Couple this with higher black turnout, then he could easily win overall, even if he lost Ohio.

I mean it's in response to a counterfactual, but I think it is essentially correct still. Nothing has really disproven it, though maybe 2020 showed Trump was more durable as a candidate than I gave him credit for.

[fhtagn]

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=239326.msg5128909#msg5128909

   
Re: Politico: Why does The Left hate Hillary Clinton?
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2016, 02:55:29 AM »   
One of the many reasons I hate Hillary Clinton. I hated that the "woman" agenda was pushed so heavily, and fake "feminists" who know nothing about her flock to her simply because of her genitalia. We get it, first woman president and whatnot. However, her fake concern over rape victims (an example that's a huge feminist issue) doesn't speak to me as a voter considering how hard she tried to silence her husband's victims.

Other reasons include her horrible attempts to win the "black vote". It's borderline offensive the lengths she went to prove that she was "black enough" to earn their votes (ex. hot sauce in her purse). If this was any other candidate, there would be outrage, but she's a woman and a Democrat, and that somehow makes it okay.

While I fully support Bernie Sanders, prior to his bid for the Democratic nomination, I was fully supporting Jill Stein, and plan to return to doing so once he decides he plans to drop out. Hillary has done nothing to earn my vote.

Hillary Clinton is still evil, and I'd still rather vote for a Green Party candidate over her, so I'd say it's held up well.

[Crumpets]

Hahaha ha hahaha ha haha ha hahaha

No.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Pretty milquetoast, really. In response to a question about what type of electoral reform you'd adopt if you could.

Adopt a proportional  system of elections, without a doubt.

I stand by it and the House drama is proof for why we need it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My first post was about McCain's need for an effective attack dog as a VP and how Pawlenty was ill suited to that role.

I think it aged rather well, though for different reasons than I would have expected at the time.

[Meclazine for Israel]

My first post was on how fake the US media was in terms of following politics.

Aged perfectly.

Overall though, I would say I underestimated the sheer complexity of US politics.

Someone here correctly pointed out to me one day that the USA is, in many ways, akin to 50 small countries, each with their own rules and regulations.

That revelation helped me understand the US better.

[GregTheGreat657]

Wisconsin, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. Georgia will likely be the next Virginia, with Michigan and Minnesota likely missing a Republican win in the 2020s. North Carolina, Florida, and Texas will likely vote for the GOP in a Democratic victory.

I guess it aged alright, but the true test will be the 2024 and 2028 elections

[Cokeland Saxton]

The county is one of the richest in the state. I don't think they would want the Dems to raise their taxes.

Not really aged poorly, but more cringe.

[MABA 2020]

Well the rust belt states flipped to red because they tricked by Trumps false populism, but now his running the county like any other Republican but dumber

I missed out the word "were"

[soundchaser]

...No?

Ironically, yes.

[Vosem]

Bump...can't you at least give us the '96 congressional/gubernatorial elections?

Sure; the timeline did get updated to the 1996 elections, though unfortunately it never reached the present and Historico hasn't posted in over a decade.

[SWE]

lol no

Alabama: Jeff Sessions (R)
Alaska: Mark Begich (D)
Arkansas: Mark Pryor (D)
Colorado: Mark Udall (D)
Delaware: Chris Coons (D)
Georgia: Michelle Nunn (D)
Hawaii special: Brian Schatz (D)
Idaho: Jim Risch (R)
Illinois: Dick Durbin (D)
Iowa: Bruce Baley (D)
Kansas: Pat Roberts (R)
Kentucky: Mitch McConnell (R)
Louisiana: Mary Landrieau (D)
Maine: Susan Collins (R)
Massachusetts: Ed Markey (D)
Michigan: Gary Peters (D)
Minnesota: Al Franken (D)
Mississippi: Thad Cochran (R)
Montana: John Walsh (D)
Nebraska: Shane Osborn (R)
New Hampshire: Jeanne Shaheen (D)
New Jersey: Cory Booker (D)
New Mexico: Tom Udall (D)
North Carolina: Kay Hagan (D)
Oklahoma: Jim Inhofe (R)
Oregon: Jeff Merkley (D)
Rhode Island: Jack Reed (D)
South Carolina: Lindsey Graham (R)
South Carolina special: Tim Scott (R)
South Dakota: Mike Rounds (R)
Tennessee: Lamar Alexander (R)
Texas: John Cornyn (R)
Virginia: Mark Warner (D)
West Virginia: Shelley Moore Capito (R)
Wyoming: Mike Enzi (R)

I had basically every competitive race going Democratic, which was idiotically hackish even at the time. John Walsh? Michelle Nunn? lmao

If I was right (assuming there's no butterfly effect that causes any of the future cycles to be more R friendly in this timeline), Democrats would have continuously held the Senate up until today

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

lol no

Alabama: Jeff Sessions (R)
Alaska: Mark Begich (D)
Arkansas: Mark Pryor (D)
Colorado: Mark Udall (D)
Delaware: Chris Coons (D)
Georgia: Michelle Nunn (D)
Hawaii special: Brian Schatz (D)
Idaho: Jim Risch (R)
Illinois: Dick Durbin (D)
Iowa: Bruce Baley (D)
Kansas: Pat Roberts (R)
Kentucky: Mitch McConnell (R)
Louisiana: Mary Landrieau (D)
Maine: Susan Collins (R)
Massachusetts: Ed Markey (D)
Michigan: Gary Peters (D)
Minnesota: Al Franken (D)
Mississippi: Thad Cochran (R)
Montana: John Walsh (D)
Nebraska: Shane Osborn (R)
New Hampshire: Jeanne Shaheen (D)
New Jersey: Cory Booker (D)
New Mexico: Tom Udall (D)
North Carolina: Kay Hagan (D)
Oklahoma: Jim Inhofe (R)
Oregon: Jeff Merkley (D)
Rhode Island: Jack Reed (D)
South Carolina: Lindsey Graham (R)
South Carolina special: Tim Scott (R)
South Dakota: Mike Rounds (R)
Tennessee: Lamar Alexander (R)
Texas: John Cornyn (R)
Virginia: Mark Warner (D)
West Virginia: Shelley Moore Capito (R)
Wyoming: Mike Enzi (R)

I had basically every competitive race going Democratic, which was idiotically hackish even at the time. John Walsh? Michelle Nunn? lmao

If I was right (assuming there's no butterfly effect that causes any of the future cycles to be more R friendly in this timeline), Democrats would have continuously held the Senate up until today

This is the first time I've ever given any serious thought to John Walsh since 2014. I completely forgot about him. I had to use cntrl+F to even find him on your list.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Most of my early posts are of little or no value, which isn't to say my current ones are necessarily different.

[Mr. Smith]

   
Re: Hillary is an unrestrained warmonger
« Reply #37 on: 11-08-2014, 00:10:08 »   
I agree about not supporting the Iraq Quagmire,but let's face it, foreign policy that was good (read: NOT HAWKISH) was tossed out the window along with actual leftism, sound environmental policies, and non-polarization with Jimmy Carter.

The only thing this says is a reinforcement that GOP = Tough (despite most of them having no close-up experience) while Dems = soft. And what's more,the current policy is just a smarter implementation of the last guard.

While there are a lot posts that don't hold so well from that time, this one definitely does. Trump opened up a door for some isolationist thought in the GOP, so there's slightly more nuance.

The rest remains the same, and the 2020 primaries are proof of this.