Obama's out to save another Senate candidate

[Sam Spade]

The most important thing to take from this story is not wild guesses at his potential impact, but rather the fact that he is going there in the first place.

Both are important. His going there sends two signals: That they think Blumenthal could use help, and that they think they can help. Neither one is really a surprise if you have been following the collective polls and analyses.

I think most of us understand the strategy.

The question I ask, and most Democrats must ask is this:  How effective will it be?

You see, one of Obama's so-called assets in his past may well turn into one of his most dangerous weaknesses now and in the future.  Obama's base is not and has not been, with one obvious exception, the base of the Democratic party.  Since these base voters (with the one exception) have never supported him in the first place (yes I say that,) how willing are they going to be to come out and support him now if prodded?

This is a very legitimate question, and perhaps, one of the most important to ask...

[homelycooking]

Blumenthal will win, but it will be a narrow victory (5-10%). If Blumenthal cannot win CT, however, then there is nothing more the Democrats can do. Blumenthal is absolutely the strongest candidate here in Connecticut, and if he loses, well, then we can forget about Bennet and Feingold and Boxer.

[Torie]

The most important thing to take from this story is not wild guesses at his potential impact, but rather the fact that he is going there in the first place.

Both are important. His going there sends two signals: That they think Blumenthal could use help, and that they think they can help. Neither one is really a surprise if you have been following the collective polls and analyses.

I think most of us understand the strategy.

The question I ask, and most Democrats must ask is this:  How effective will it be?

You see, one of Obama's so-called assets in his past may well turn into one of his most dangerous weaknesses now and in the future.  Obama's base is not and has not been, with one obvious exception, the base of the Democratic party.  Since these base voters (with the one exception) have never supported him in the first place (yes I say that,) how willing are they going to be to come out and support him now if prodded?

This is a very legitimate question, and perhaps, one of the most important to ask...

Ah, the Lieberman white lunch pail voters. Well they voted for Obama in 2008. Anyway, I wonder what Lieberman will do in this race, come to think of it.

[Meeker]

I'll be glad when this election is over, if only because Torie will probably revert back to his normal, not-a-shrill-partisan form.

^^^^^

The transformation has been both remarkable and sad.

[xavier110]

I too have noticed the Torie change. If this is what the election has done to moderate Republicans/independents, then there is no hope.

[Torie]

It is called checks and balances, guys. It is time to put on the brakes, and digest. I do fear a GOP takeover of the House will lead to GOP abuses however. Issa is an ethically challenged madman, and if he chairs the House investigation committee, it could be potentially a huge cf, and an embarrassment.  Anyway, from Obama's standpoint, a GOP takeover of the House might be the equivalent of manna from heaven for him.

Anyway, the GOP wave is not my doing, however tempting it might be to punish the messenger.

[Meeker]

Forgive us for not taking you seriously when you predict things such as 90 seat Republican pick-ups, something which we will assuredly bump in three months time to laugh at you about.

[Torie]

Forgive us for not taking you seriously when you predict things such as 90 seat Republican pick-ups, something which we will assuredly bump in three months time to laugh at you about.

Please find that post please. Thanks.

By the way, I don't mind if you don't take me seriously. The important thing to me, is to take myself seriously (when appropriate).  Some might call that narcissism, but whatever.

By the way, things can change between now and the election. I don't anticipate that they will materially, but they might. We will see how the Dems play out the last couple of innings, and what events transpire. And the GOP will need a lot of money, and a lot of independent expenditures, to realize its full potential from this landscape. They might fall short.

Anyway, if I had to guess right now, the GOP will pick up 60-70 seats. That might well recede down to the low 50's however, if voters decide that the wave is getting too big, among other things, and not needed to put a check on matters. It is not as if they really want the GOP to take power or something, per se.

[Meeker]

Forgive us for not taking you seriously when you predict things such as 90 seat Republican pick-ups, something which we will assuredly bump in three months time to laugh at you about.

Please find that post please. Thanks.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=123506.msg2636695#msg2636695

ETA: And here's one where you say a 75 seat loss is possible: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=114844.msg2636883#msg2636883

[Torie]

Forgive us for not taking you seriously when you predict things such as 90 seat Republican pick-ups, something which we will assuredly bump in three months time to laugh at you about.

Please find that post please. Thanks.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=123506.msg2636695#msg2636695

Thanks for being so prompt with the link. You know, "if" is one of the most important words in the English language:

"How many seats would be the Dems lose, if they lost every seat that Obama got  56% or less of the vote in?"  

I then go on to say, given the if, the number is 93 seats. Is it realistic, that the swing will be so perfectly uniform, assuming the loadstar is the poll from KY-3, that the election might as well be just a computer program?  What do you think?  Do you think it is barely possible, it was just an illustration for explanatory purposes of what might happen if swings were uniform, just for purposes of parsing the inherent partisan balances, forgetting who is running, etc?

And yes a 75 seat loss is possible. Is it likely? No. Not unless things change in ways I  think are more likely than not, not to happen.

[Meeker]

Forgive us for not taking you seriously when you predict things such as 90 seat Republican pick-ups, something which we will assuredly bump in three months time to laugh at you about.

Please find that post please. Thanks.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=123506.msg2636695#msg2636695

Thanks for being so prompt with the link. You know, "if" is one of the most important words in the English language:

"How many seats would be the Dems lose, if they lost every seat that Obama got  56% or less of the vote in?"  

I then go on to say, given the if, the number is 93 seats. Is it realistic, that the swing will be so perfectly uniform, assuming the loadstar is the poll from KY-3, that the election might as well be just a computer program?  What do you think?  Do you think it is barely possible, it was just an illustration for explanatory purposes of what might happen if swings were uniform, just for purposes of parsing the inherent partisan balances, forgetting who is running, etc?

I think it was you carefully phrasing your language so that when someone pointed out how ridiculous your implication was you could weasel your way out of it.

[Torie]

OK Meeker. You have made your case. There is not much left to discuss if we are down to what you think my motives are, in this case making a prediction that I can later claim was a non prediction, because I am a clever lawyer or something. Anyway, this was a very useful exercise, and I appreciate it.

[Sam Spade]

The most important thing to take from this story is not wild guesses at his potential impact, but rather the fact that he is going there in the first place.

Both are important. His going there sends two signals: That they think Blumenthal could use help, and that they think they can help. Neither one is really a surprise if you have been following the collective polls and analyses.

I think most of us understand the strategy.

The question I ask, and most Democrats must ask is this:  How effective will it be?

You see, one of Obama's so-called assets in his past may well turn into one of his most dangerous weaknesses now and in the future.  Obama's base is not and has not been, with one obvious exception, the base of the Democratic party.  Since these base voters (with the one exception) have never supported him in the first place (yes I say that,) how willing are they going to be to come out and support him now if prodded?

This is a very legitimate question, and perhaps, one of the most important to ask...

Ah, the Lieberman white lunch pail voters. Well they voted for Obama in 2008. Anyway, I wonder what Lieberman will do in this race, come to think of it.

The question is whether they actually did cast for votes "for him" Torie, or whether the Obama lever was pulled for other reasons..

Anyway, unionized voters are not the only people I have in mind.

[Meeker]

OK Meeker. You have made your case. There is not much left to discuss if we are down to what you think my motives are, in this case making a prediction that I can later claim was a non prediction, because I am a clever lawyer or something. Anyway, this was a very useful exercise, and I appreciate it.

Your sarcastic arrogance does nothing but further erode the respect many of us used to have for you. Hopefully you snap back to normal come winter.

[Torie]

OK Meeker. You have made your case. There is not much left to discuss if we are down to what you think my motives are, in this case making a prediction that I can later claim was a non prediction, because I am a clever lawyer or something. Anyway, this was a very useful exercise, and I appreciate it.

Your sarcastic arrogance does nothing but further erode the respect many of us used to have for you. Hopefully you snap back to normal come winter.

Think how insufferable I will become, if the Dems do lose 65 seats.   As I say, I hope that does not happen.

[Vepres]

Forgive us for not taking you seriously when you predict things such as 90 seat Republican pick-ups, something which we will assuredly bump in three months time to laugh at you about.

On the off chance he is right, what will you do?

[Ronnie]

I'll be glad when this election is over, if only because Torie will probably revert back to his normal, not-a-shrill-partisan form.

And what I would like to see is the GOP gain 9 seats in the Senate, and 33 House seats. I have posted that before, and explained why. But unfortunately, the GOP is more likely than not to get at least 20 more seats than 33.

I actually agree with Torie in this regard.  Republicans taking complete control is a no-no.