MN-PPP: Close race with Democrats slightly ahead; #DeezNutsmentum

[Torie]

I never called you or anyone else a troll, or engaging in trolling, px, which is a personal attack. You are accusing me and others of being insincere. That is an insult. Attack the ideas, not the poster. You should read what Dave thought was infractable from the moderated post examples he put up. Turns out he has close to zero tolerance for personal attacks. You are over the line here, in my opinion. I guess in due course we will find out one way or the other, if need be.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I never called you or anyone else a troll, or engaging in trolling, px, which is a personal attack. You are accusing me and others of being insincere. That is an insult. Attack the ideas, not the poster. You should read what Dave thought was intractable from the moderated post examples he put up. Turns out he has close to zero tolerance for personal attacks. You are over the line here, in my opinion. I guess in due course we will find out one way or the other, if need be.

1)Trolling is quite a different thing from concern trolling, of which indeed I accuse you.

2)Care to comment the article I posted? Or doesn't titillate your intellect enough?

[bedstuy]

Minnesota is not going to be close.  What are you people smoking?  Is this your first Presidential race or something?

[Torie]

I never called you or anyone else a troll, or engaging in trolling, px, which is a personal attack. You are accusing me and others of being insincere. That is an insult. Attack the ideas, not the poster. You should read what Dave thought was intractable from the moderated post examples he put up. Turns out he has close to zero tolerance for personal attacks. You are over the line here, in my opinion. I guess in due course we will find out one way or the other, if need be.

1)Trolling is quite a different thing from concern trolling, of which indeed I accuse you.

2)Care to comment the article I posted? Or doesn't titillate your intellect enough?

What then is "concern trolling?" What does it mean? Doesn't trolling mean insincere? I consider it personally insulting. I really have no desire to engage with you on substance, until you adopt a more civil posting style.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I never called you or anyone else a troll, or engaging in trolling, px, which is a personal attack. You are accusing me and others of being insincere. That is an insult. Attack the ideas, not the poster. You should read what Dave thought was intractable from the moderated post examples he put up. Turns out he has close to zero tolerance for personal attacks. You are over the line here, in my opinion. I guess in due course we will find out one way or the other, if need be.

1)Trolling is quite a different thing from concern trolling, of which indeed I accuse you.

2)Care to comment the article I posted? Or doesn't titillate your intellect enough?

What then is "concern trolling?" What does it mean?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Concern_troll

The Hill published an op-ed piece by Markos Moulitsas of the liberal blog Daily Kos titled "Dems: Ignore 'Concern Trolls'". The concern trolls in question were not Internet participants but rather Republicans offering public advice and warnings to the Democrats. The author defines "concern trolling" as "offering a poisoned apple in the form of advice to political opponents that, if taken, would harm the recipient".

[Torie]

Here is another definition. It's an insult. It's not right to call posters names, or impugn their motives. If you think some political opponent is giving bad advice to your side (not that I did that here but whatever), just say that you think the advice is wrong headed because in fact it will ... .

[Skye]

Minnesota is not going to be close.  What are you people smoking?  Is this your first Presidential race or something?

But Minnesota has the potential to be close. The problem here is that people think this is going to be a Clinton win; in which case the prospect of Minnesota being close would certainly make less sense.

[bedstuy]

Minnesota is not going to be close.  What are you people smoking?  Is this your first Presidential race or something?

But Minnesota has the potential to be close. The problem here is that people think this is going to be a Clinton win; in which case the prospect of Minnesota being close would certainly make less sense.

That's a tautology.  If an election is close, it's close.  We agree on that.

Any state has the potential to be close.  Right, in theory.  But, it's silly to think that in 2016 Minnesota will be in play because Democrats have a consistent decided advantage.  No Republican has hit 50% in a statewide MN race in over 20 years.  Clinton is a solid candidate and the Republicans have no good candidates.

[Skye]

Minnesota is not going to be close.  What are you people smoking?  Is this your first Presidential race or something?

But Minnesota has the potential to be close. The problem here is that people think this is going to be a Clinton win; in which case the prospect of Minnesota being close would certainly make less sense.

That's a tautology.  If an election is close, it's close.  We agree on that.

Any state has the potential to be close.  Right, in theory.  But, it's silly to think that in 2016 Minnesota will be in play because Democrats have a consistent decided advantage.  No Republican has hit 50% in a statewide MN race in over 20 years.  Clinton is a solid candidate and the Republicans have no good candidates.

Everything about the argument was great before that.

[bedstuy]

Well, that's a matter of opinion.

In any case, I hope Republicans are foolish enough to contest Minnesota.  It would never make the 270 electoral vote difference.  Thus, it's not a real swing state, it would only be the icing on the cake of a Republican landslide on the measure of 2008.

[HillOfANight]

Well, that's a matter of opinion.

In any case, I hope Republicans are foolish enough to contest Minnesota.  It would never make the 270 electoral vote difference.  Thus, it's not a real swing state, it would only be the icing on the cake of a Republican landslide on the measure of 2008.

http://republic3-0.com/why-minnesota-will-crown-hillary-clinton-in-2016/

There was actually an article 2 months ago that predicted Minnesota would provide Hillary the 270th electoral vote. Lincoln Park Strategies has some kind of model, seems mostly demographic based, that predicts that Hillary would get 52.8% of MN's vote, just 0.2% better than 2012. On the other hand, Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado become more firm Democrat, with over 53%.

I don't think their model anticipated Hillary's private email server, but besides that, it was kind of cool seeing this close poll, and thinking about their article weeks back.

[EliteLX]

Minnesota is not going to be close.  What are you people smoking?  Is this your first Presidential race or something?

But Minnesota has the potential to be close. The problem here is that people think this is going to be a Clinton win; in which case the prospect of Minnesota being close would certainly make less sense.

That's a tautology.  If an election is close, it's close.  We agree on that.

Any state has the potential to be close.  Right, in theory.  But, it's silly to think that in 2016 Minnesota will be in play because Democrats have a consistent decided advantage.  No Republican has hit 50% in a statewide MN race in over 20 years.  Clinton is a solid candidate and the Republicans have no good candidates.

Oh the sweet sound of bias and bullsh**t. Hillary isn't a "poor candidate" by any means but to say she's a shining city on the Dem hill when in reality she's already showing wear & tear, and multiple nominees on the right aren't showing that awfully bad this early on (Rand, Rubio, Jeb), then you can't be so quick to jump on false accusations. GOP has various decent candidates this year, as do the Dems.

[Xing]

I remember a lot of polls in 2008 (and some in 2012) showing a very close race in Minnesota. I'm not surprised to see all of you jumping on this one poll as evidence that Hillary's toast, but I'm not convinced yet. Minnesota's not going Republican until Republicans moderate.

[Holmes]

Fun poll. One thing about Minnesota. It likes clean politics, and honest politicians. And when it comes to Hillary, well you know what the polls say about certain of her character traits at the moment. So maybe the dots are connecting here, maybe not.

Harnessing the spirit of Sam Spade?

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Remember in 2004 when everyone said Bush would win New Jersey and Hawaii?

[Torie]

Fun poll. One thing about Minnesota. It likes clean politics, and honest politicians. And when it comes to Hillary, well you know what the polls say about certain of her character traits at the moment. So maybe the dots are connecting here, maybe not.

Harnessing the spirit of Sam Spade?

Be patient f****t.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Fools gold for the Republicans.

Derp, why do those idiots even contest any states?!