Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 20, 2014, 11:32:07 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 [69] 70 71 72 73 74 ... 231
1701  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of your family? on: August 20, 2013, 10:24:38 am
A collection of lunatics. Though to be honest I probably fit in pretty well if you're looking in from the outside. Didn't vote.
1702  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What RL moments make you think, "yup, I frequent uselectionatlas.org"? on: August 20, 2013, 10:14:24 am
Saw an Oklahoma license plate today and thought of Bushie Tongue
1703  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What would be your 2012 House ACU rating? on: August 20, 2013, 10:01:27 am
Huh

Several people are counting weirdly here, so I don't know if I didn't explain this well enough or if something else is going on.

Sorry, I guess I didn't read the OP all the way through.  I put a "+" next to the proposals which I would vote on in the affirmative, not by the ones I agree with the ACU on.

Oh, I did the reverse...
1704  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: German election: Merkel vs. Steinbrück on: August 20, 2013, 09:50:11 am
Spontan: keinen von beiden

Sondern ernst, Merkel.
1705  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Is Russia a part of "Western Civilization"? on: August 19, 2013, 05:24:43 pm


The yellow areas are. The red are not.

EDIT: Except Karelia and Birobidzhan, those are Western too.
1706  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What RL moments make you think, "yup, I frequent uselectionatlas.org"? on: August 19, 2013, 05:21:13 pm
My school's trivia team was asked to name the obscure losers of a bunch of random long-ago presidential elections...and I got them all right.
1707  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: How come so many forumites were born in August? on: August 19, 2013, 05:18:31 pm
You're all clearly imitating me Tongue
1708  Election Archive / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: LA-Sen, Harper/conservativeintel: Cassidy in the lead on: August 19, 2013, 11:32:21 am
Let's have PPP take a look here before we get too excited.
1709  Election Archive / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: MI-LEA/DR: All tied up on: August 19, 2013, 11:31:08 am
Even if it's not a very politicized office, like state SecState, nobody wins by double-digits by mistake.

As I said earlier, she would've gotten smoked had she challenged Jenny or Debbie in 2006. She also won by double-digits in 2002, when Carl Levin won by >20 points and Democrats regained the Governor's mansion. This speaks less to Terri Lynn Land's strengths as a politician, and more to the idea that Michiganders don't really care which party their Secretary of State comes from. She has never had to stake out a meaningful position on anything, and comes from a part of the state that doesn't culturally reflect the majority of the state's population--she has her work cut out for her, if she wants to be competitive.

It would take a pretty bad environment for Peters to lose.

Can you just do me a single favor and explain, with details of the campaign beyond 'Michiganders don't care who their Secretary of State' is, why Butch Holloway lost in 2002?

I'm not disputing that Peters is favored, here in the present more than a decade later, and you being a Michigan native are obviously more familiar with the state than I am, but it seems ridiculous to just discount two decisive statewide victories, one during a wave year for the opposite party and the other while the Governor's Mansion flipped in the other direction.

Richard Austin was Secretary of State for two and a half decades, yet wasn't able to win his party's nomination for Senate.

1976 is rather a long time ago to be referring to, but I'll play along. Having looked this election up on Our Campaigns and then read about the candidates on Wikipedia, it seems Austin and another candidate split the Detroit vote and allowed Donald Riegle, who was from outside Detroit, and had made a profile for himself in the House, to win the primary with just 44% of the vote.

Republicans have held the SOS office since 1995--for the preceding 40 years, it was held exclusively by Democrats. It's possible that the GOP will hold that office for another 20 years.

Um, OK. Anything's possible, we know.

If Terri Lynn Land was so popular, she would've helped Mike Bouchard pull in more than 12.2% of the vote in the 2010 GOP gubernatorial primary.

If Lloyd Bentsen was so popular, he should've helped Mike Dukakis more than he did Roll Eyes

It doesn't necessarily work that way.

I can only speak from anecdotal observation, but it's not that people in Michigan "don't care who their SOS is," but party affiliation isn't necessarily as important for some more "local" elections--even if that election is still a statewide race.

True, but someone who has had a successful stint in a "local" office might be a stronger candidate than someone who hasn't. I hope you can admit.

Both Candice Miller and John Engler won big in 1998 (a relatively neutral year, nationally), but Gov. Engler won't win another election in Michigan

That's what happens to people who left politics a decade ago, yeah.

, and Candice Miller won't be due for a promotion for a long time, if ever.

She was just promoted to Chair of the House Administration Committee this past January. Rising through the House ranks is usually something that occurs slowly, dmwestmi, I don't know what else you expect.
1710  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What would be your 2012 House ACU rating? on: August 19, 2013, 12:03:05 am

1. Domestic Energy Production (ANWR, KXL) -
2. Conservative Alternative Budget +
3. Federal Land Management (Sportsmen’s Heritage Act) +
4. Elimination funding for Economic Development Administration +
5. Public-Private Competition (FPI) +
6. Elimination of funding for Legal Services Corporation -
7. Healthcare Law Litigation +
8. DOMA adherence -
9. NSF Political Science Funding +
10. Afghanistan Defense Spending +
11. Terror Suspect Trials +
12. Missile Defense +
13. Public-Private Competition (DoD) +
14. Sex-Selection Abortion -
15. Project Labor Agreements +
16. Science/Renewable Energy Funding -
17. Davis-Bacon Act +
18. Border Security/Environment -
19. Air Service Subsidies +
20. Elimination of Community Development Block Grants -
21. Healthcare Bill Repeal +
22. Offshore Oil and Gas +
23. Energy Project Loan Guarantees -
24. Welfare Reform Waivers +
25. Climate and Water Regulations -

16/25 = 64.0% -- the exact same amount as Mike Grimm, Richard Hanna, Frank Lucas, Jerry Moran, Mike Turner, Roger Wicker, and Frank Wolf. Some of the votes I only read about glancingly, so I might be persuaded to change some of these/might've voted differently were I actually in Congress.
1711  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Australia - 7 September 2013 on: August 18, 2013, 07:13:45 pm
So, what with a lot of new polling released, I'll be updating my useless foreigner predictions that are in large part small changes/elaborations made to/from Poll Bludger today.

New South Wales: Pretty strong swing to the Coalition here; especially in Sydney, but worth seats in the rural north and the Central Coast as well. The Coalition seems basically set to pick up Lyne and New England from the independents, but also likely to pick up 6 seats that elected an ALP member in 2010; Greenway, Robertson, Lindsay, Banks, Reid, and Dobell. (Dobell, technically, is a gain from the independents, but, you know, still).

Victoria: Absolutely brutal swing towards the Coalition here seems likely going off polling, with Libs easily gaining 3 seats off the ALP; Corangamite, Deakin, laTrobe, but the rest of the swing not getting them much of a dividend. Otherwise,  I'm still of the opinion that Bandt will get a large enough personal vote/sophomore swing in Melbourne to survive.

Queensland: A small swing to the Coalition here would result in the Libs gain 2 seats off the ALP; Moreton and Petrie. In spite of the national swing (and divisional polling Tongue ), I do think Beattie has enough star power to flip Forde in the reverse direction. So, Coalition +1 here when all is said and done. Katter will hold on, but it won't matter. (And, yeah, since Fisher is technically independent-held that'll be a Lib pickup as well).

Western Australia: This state seems to still be stubbornly swinging to the ALP, although not by very much. I have a hunch that Swan is more vulnerable than Hasluck, considering Wyatt seems pretty strong and he'll get a sophomore bounce (factors that aren't there in Swan), but ultimately I don't see any change at all as likely in Western Australia (except maybe intra-Coalition shifts in the rural East).

South Australia: The swing to the Coalition here is going to be absolutely brutal – rivaling Victoria for the worst in the country – but it would take more than a 6% swing to flip the most marginal seat, Hindmarsh. And I think -- just barely -- this'll happen.

Tasmania: Pretty much what everyone else has been saying; Bass and Braddon flip, Wilkie survives. Coalition+2.

Territories: I do think the swing to the Coalition at this election the most recent polls have been showing, combined with local trends, will be enough to swing Lingiari to the Coalition.

Summary:
Coalition 89
ALP 58 -- dangerous territory for Rudd's Leadership...
KAP 1
Greens 1
Independent 1 (Wilkie)

Coalition pickups (compared to 2010, alphabetical order):
Division of Banks
Division of Bass
Division of Braddon
Division of Corangamite
Division of Deakin
Division of Dobell
Division of Greenway
Division of Hindmarsh
Division of LaTrobe
Division of Lindsay
Division of Lingiari
Division of Lyne
Division of Moreton
Division of New England
Division of Petrie
Division of Reid
Division of Robertson

Labor pickups (compared to 2010, alphabetical order):
Division of Forde

EDIT: Switched the Divisions of Chisholm and Hindmarsh.
1712  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Prisoners on: August 18, 2013, 08:18:36 am
n00bz dunno opebo, but they gonna find out
1713  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Scott DesJarlais tells girl her father has to be deported; TP crowd cheers on: August 18, 2013, 07:54:39 am
...he won't even win renomination.
1714  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Sleeping position on: August 17, 2013, 10:15:19 pm
I lie in the Freefaller position and don't move to force myself to fall asleep. Otherwise, if I'm extremely tired I fall asleep in Soldier position, and if not Foetus.

1715  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Is the U.S. Republican Party the most dangerous political party in the world? on: August 17, 2013, 08:14:44 pm
Depends on what your definition of 'dangerous' is. To individual people? I would say the Korean Workers' Party. To the world order/people as a whole? Either the Communist Party of China or United Russia. US parties are vague coalitions that have no control over themselves. In and of themselves, they pose no danger to anybody. What they produce, of course, can be incredible. To put it mildly.
1716  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: I'm Back! on: August 17, 2013, 08:11:56 pm
Welcome back.
1717  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: How many firearms do you have in your home? on: August 17, 2013, 08:10:33 pm
There's a handgun in a safe in a closet of the parents' bedroom (everyone in the family except the 4-year-old knows the combination), and a handgun in the glove compartments of both cars. Just in case. The family goes to shooting ranges fairly frequently, but only my father hunts often; I've gone with him on several occasions, but I've yet to fire a weapon on such a trip; my younger brother has gone once, this past winter, when he became the sole member of my family to successfully bring down an animal. Wicked good shot, especially for his age/not-particularly-good eyesight. Doesn't compare with my late grandfather/family patriarch, of course, but then he's still learning.

I'm a pretty awful shot, so try never to be above my target Tongue Although considering some of the replies in this thread, perhaps I'm above-average for Atlas Forum.
1718  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Interactive: You are elected POTUS. What is your agenda for America? on: August 17, 2013, 07:50:46 pm
-- Strengthening privacy laws. The Patriot Act is basically to be repealed; the NSA is to be cut back. Echoing other posters here.

-- Weakening most anti-drug laws, but strengthening anti-tobacco law. Marijuana would be pretty much totally legalized, and the drinking age would definitely be lowered. Penalties for non-violent drug offenders would be drastically lowered. On the other hand, buying tobacco will remain legal "in principle", but both the selling and the buying of it would become as much of a hassle as is possible without illegalizing it outright.

-- Universal Adult Age. Probably should be below 18 -- 16 sounds about right to my ears. Age at which you can vote/join the military/buy legal drugs (except tobacco, age might be like ~25 for that)/learn to drive a car/get a driver's license.

-- Balanced Budget Amendment. Rather straightforward. Would have two exemptions: an open-ended exemption for times of declared war, and a "timed" one for the immediate future so that Congress could get to the business of balancing the budget, which would logically take time. To motivate Congress to pass a balanced budget amendment, we'll say every year there is none (past the deadline, in a time without a declared war) every member of the House is thereon banned for a period of let's say 7 years from running for federal elected office.

-- Electoral reform. Wyoming Rule, splitline redistricting every 10 years, third Senator for every state, preferential voting, national single-day primary (six months before the general election for the Presidency, and four months before the general election for everything else). The franchise and gubernatorial elections are to be synchronized (the first one, those sitting in prison are disenfranchised, those released can vote like anyone else, as long as they present a government-issued ID; the second, all gubernatorial elections are to be held every midterm year). State Senates are to be set at 40 members, with half elected every 4 years through an Australian-Senate-type system (to allow 3rd parties to have some chance), with state Houses redistricted splitline every 10 years, permanently set at either twice the delegation to the US House or a minimum of 80 (so 80 in most states, but perhaps more in the largest states). Legislators are not to have term limits, anywhere. The President and governors are both limited to 8 years.

-- Flatten the tax system; national sales tax. A flat tax probably isn't practical, but I would try to shift a large amount of the burden from individuals to businesses. At the same time, a national sales tax, along with a broad income tax cut for everybody, though it would be disproportionately heavier for a general "middle class" (to be defined when I think about it more), with not much cut for the poor or rich. Try to remove loopholes where this is possible.

-- Gay equality. Pretty straightforward.

-- Education reform. There would be a "national curriculum", with more of a focus on science/history/foreign language than before, and rather less on English/Literature, set by Congress and enforced by the Department of Education. All students would be required to study certain things that are presently controversial (most notably, the theory of evolution). Homeschoolers would be extremely regularly given state-run tests, which will be significantly more rigorous than those given public schoolers; if they do not pass, they are to be forced to attend public school. Private schools would also be required to teach to the "national curriculum".

-- Cut the military budget, but wisely. The military budget would be cut, rather significantly. Bases that serve no obvious strategic purpose will be closed, and programs considered outdated are to be done away with entirely. This one is rather broad.

-- Repeal of ObamaCare. Pretty straightforward, again.

-- Immigration reform. While, on the one hand, somebody with no criminal record and a minimum amount of education is to be allowed into the US, essentially no questions asked, at the same time illegal immigration is not tolerated; anyone who enters the US unannounced after the passage of the relevant legislation is to be thrown into jail for several years, then deported to their native country. For illegal immigrants already here, they are guaranteed not to be deported; they can apply for citizenship as long as they have no criminal record anywhere (here or in their home country) and receive it. Those who do are to be deported to their native countries.

-- Privatize/reform Social Security. This one takes more thought than I've put into it, but the current model can't last forever.

-- Repeal affirmative action/Equal Rights Amendment. Neither the US government nor any business or educational establishment in the country is to discriminate on the basis of race, sexual orientation, sex, or age (when somebody is above 16). The Equal Rights Amendment is to become part of the Constitution.

-- Capitals. Neither of these fit anywhere else, so I put them together: annex Washington DC to Maryland so that its residents can elect Representatives to Congress like anyone else. And finally move the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, along with recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

-- Vastly expand death penalty. Make the death penalty an option for serial rapists and thieves of a substantial enough caliber. In effect, I want to replace the sentence "life in prison" with the sentence "death".

-- Guns. No change at all Smiley

-- Pardon Snowden but not Manning. Everyone seems to be mentioning their policies on these two so I suppose I will too. Snowden is a very sympathetic figure to my eyes. Manning, not so much.

-- Legalization of prostitution. Pretty straightforward.

-- Energy reform. I thought I had this up there with the other stuff I really care about, that's where it belongs. Build the Keystone Pipeline, encourage fracking; but on the other hand, encourage nuclear power for all it is ing worth. Regulations against coal plants are to be kept and perhaps strengthened; 'clean coal' is to be made a reality as much as it is possible.

-- Try to make new free trade agreements with allied countries. Pretty self-explanatory.

-- Try to make access to abortion easier in hostile states. Haven't thought this one through, but everyone's writing their policy on abortion, so...

1719  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: The future of the two parties on: August 17, 2013, 05:12:01 pm
I predict that the GOP going through the "wilderness" for several years...clinging to power in the House.

You just contradicted yourself. A party going through the wilderness is not a party that controls a branch of the legislature.
1720  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Conservatives have been in denial about Virginia for years on: August 17, 2013, 05:08:53 pm
No they haven't stop using selective articles to help yourself feel secure about the success of your party. It's like wishful thinking about having more money in the future. You're trolling.

Dude there's no reason not to feel secure about the future success of the Democratic Party in Virginia. 

The Republicans having all statewide offices (except the 2 Senators), controlling both houses of the state legislature, a large (8-3) US House delegation majority, and Virginia having been more Republican than the nation in every election since I believe 1964 isn't cause for concern?

Virginia is trending Democratic, but it definitely still has a long ways to go before you can say the state Democrats are more powerful than Republicans.
1721  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: You Decide: 2016 to 2036 *optional 2052* on: August 17, 2013, 04:53:52 pm
I didn't think you bought into the "nationwide Democratic trend!!!1!", opebo. It should be fairly clear after 2010-12 that it is a myth.
1722  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Broad RNC support for earlier convention on: August 16, 2013, 09:37:28 pm
The polling bump never lasts more than a couple days so mid-summer vs. late summer is irrelevant on that count. The Democratic 2012 convention was in early September, 2 months before Election Day. To help things out, the 47% tape was 2 weeks after that. 2-3 weeks later, Romney was leading. And in 2008, when the RNC went last, in early September, McCain came out leading Obama. 2 months later he lost by 7.

The purpose of the earlier convention is to cut way down on the number of Republican debates so as to (a) keep the country from seeing the GOP field fall over themselves to out-conservative each other (the unanimously-passed CNN and NBC boycott ostensibly over Hillary is actually for the same purpose) and (b) reduce the free airtime for guys like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul which somewhat levels the playing field against better-funded candidates. In a nutshell, party leaders fear losing control of the party. Or losing even more control.

The debates are all held before the primaries even start (and so won't be affected) and guys like Cruz and Paul will still get airtime (especially considering they're both very likely candidates). If you'd gone through and read the thread, you'd know the point of earlier conventions was so that general-election money could be used earlier.
1723  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Assange: Rand Paul the "only hope" for America on: August 16, 2013, 09:20:17 pm
I actually want to see Assange successfully elected to the Australian Senate, just to see what would happen. It's not like the Coalition is going to get a majority anyway; might as well have interesting leftists instead of bland hacks.
1724  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: NE: Republicans feeling confident with Osborn on: August 16, 2013, 07:03:28 pm
He hasn't cleared the field. Indeed this race hasn't gotten any attention from conservative media  except for a Sasse TWS profile a few months ago. They should since Osborn has the bio and record.

Sasse has no electoral record, though...the one primary poll conducted (admittedly, a kitchen-sink, not a Osborn v. Sasse head-to-head) had Osborn at 18% and Sasse at 3%; Osborn at 48% name recognition and Sasse at 17%. It doesn't seem to me, as yet, that Sasse is a serious threat to Osborn.
1725  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: US 2014 Senate Tipping-Point State - August on: August 16, 2013, 06:55:03 pm
Agree with Miles; Louisiana is seat 6. Alaska should be seat 5 (after the three open seats and Arkansas).
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 [69] 70 71 72 73 74 ... 231


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines