West Virginia Poll: Manchin up double digits against possible 2018 challengers (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 11:17:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  West Virginia Poll: Manchin up double digits against possible 2018 challengers (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: West Virginia Poll: Manchin up double digits against possible 2018 challengers  (Read 1124 times)
SATW
SunriseAroundTheWorld
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,463
United States
« on: November 30, 2016, 10:35:27 AM »

Jenkins is by far the best choice for the WV GOP. I hope he runs. I think Manchin's lead will shrink as time goes on but this poll is certainly good news for him and he is in better shape then most people thought.

Logged
SATW
SunriseAroundTheWorld
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,463
United States
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2016, 10:54:24 AM »

Manchin may be helped simply by the fact that he is not running for re-election under a Hillary Clinton presidency.

Pryor and Lincoln both had to run under an Obama presidency.

West Virginia seems to have nearly unlimited ticket splitting, unlike Missouri where it is more limited. Perhaps West Virginia is a Democratic state at heart that fears Obama and Hillary would destroy all their coal jobs and switch to renewable energy.

News flash: we will have to transition out of fossil fuels at some point. Smiley

Polls for 2018 elections mean nothing 23 months before the fact.

No, what West Virginians feared is exactly what Hillary said: "We're going to put coal miners out of work."1 There was no mention of renewable energy. At all. I think people might be open to diversifying with new energy sources as long as we let them keep their old ones. Eventually they may switch over completely on their own. But, Democrats prefer to kill off coal without taking in the input of people who depend on those jobs.

Trump has talked about marcellus shale as a potential new source to innovate with but, of course, Hillary Clinton's ties to Saudi Arabia would prevent this from ever being explored on a national or even local scale.

1 = https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/06/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-and-the-unique-politics-of-coal-country-explained/?utm_term=.f912b6f52eac
Logged
SATW
SunriseAroundTheWorld
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,463
United States
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2016, 11:14:24 AM »

I don't know what point you are trying to make. Coal is still an important energy source for us, but we will have to move on at some point. Economies shift, jobs shift, etc

Also, there is no such thing as clean coal. I call it slightly less dirty coal.

My point is that Hillary did not ever make the clear intention to provide a new resource to the working class. She completely took the side of the environmental lobby and threw West Virginians overboard.

You are right, economies do shift but you can't just tell people that they will be unemployed and expect them to be happy about it. Hillary Clinton literally said this.

I see no reason to move away from coal but I am always an advocate for diversifying energy resources.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 12 queries.