The Hofoid House of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VII

[Politician]

Woah. Sinema is winning Maricopa County 51-39%

That is precisely the reason why I don't entirely trust this Poll. SSRS is a totally unknown quantity here...completely new to Statewide Polling.

Sinema is not ahead in Maricopa County by 11 Points. That is absolutely ludicrous from CNN/SSRS.

Consider this:
The Democrats are trying to pull off a Doug Jones type of victory here. Arizona hasn't elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1988 when Dennis DeConcini won Re-Election for the last time.

If Sinema gets elected it's not because of how she stands on policies but because she is pretty.

Maybe Republicans should play the sexsism card a bit.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This will boost libertarian and basement dweller neckbeard votes. Could be bad news for the Dems.

[America Needs R'hllor]

5. I was about to name Brian Schatz for Sarah Jeong support, but he's not up for re-election, so... Phil Scott because it would be advantageous to have someone like him lose to Christine Hallquist.

Yay transphobic dogwhistles.

[Politician]

It’s not a red state (at least not yet), but it’s trending Republican.

The only solid analysis here. Wisconsin is the next West Virginia. National Dems insulting the Midwest will ensure it.

[GeorgiaModerate]

It’s not a red state (at least not yet), but it’s trending Republican.

The only solid analysis here. Wisconsin is the next West Virginia. National Dems insulting the Midwest will ensure it.

Are all of hofoid's posts like that?  It seems like it must be a parody.

[RINO Tom]

It’s not a red state (at least not yet), but it’s trending Republican.

The only solid analysis here. Wisconsin is the next West Virginia. National Dems insulting the Midwest will ensure it.

Ya beat me to it.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

1. Thomas Jefferson
2. Ronald Reagan
3. George W Bush

This was in the "Best president in American history" thread.

[ON Progressive]

I wouldn't be surprised if Vukmir's ads have actually hurt her with voters rather than helped. She campaigns like she's in a red state.

She is.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

5. I was about to name Brian Schatz for Sarah Jeong support, but he's not up for re-election, so... Phil Scott because it would be advantageous to have someone like him lose to Christine Hallquist.

Yay transphobic dogwhistles.

I honestly can't see the dogwhistle in this. Am I missing something painfully obvious?(not that the post isn't vile of course).

[Politician]

This election made me just not care about approval ratings or polls. They are totally just meaningless statistics for me now. Trump showed they don't matter

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Finkenauer's lead is climbing back up again (now up to 13).

The cause of the drop seems to be that they got a couple of R responses in demographics where you wouldn't expect them -

The only age group Blum is winning is 18-29 year olds (Blum up 52-24), seems unlikely...

And the only racial group Blum is winning is non-whites (Blum up 75-18), seems also unlikely...

Who knew that 18-29s and non-whites were the next big thing in Republican politics?

So if you unskew the poll suitably, Finkenauer may "really" be up by more than 13 and perhaps her lead will keep climbing as they get more people in the 18-29 and non-white demographics.

[ON Progressive]

If Flores actually wins, then it means that Russians hacked the election totals to rig the results. No other rational explanation exists.

[America Needs R'hllor]

5. I was about to name Brian Schatz for Sarah Jeong support, but he's not up for re-election, so... Phil Scott because it would be advantageous to have someone like him lose to Christine Hallquist.

Yay transphobic dogwhistles.

I honestly can't see the dogwhistle in this. Am I missing something painfully obvious?(not that the post isn't vile of course).

Why would it be "advantageous" for Scott to lose to "someone like her"? In light of the rest of the post, it just smelled really bad.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

5. I was about to name Brian Schatz for Sarah Jeong support, but he's not up for re-election, so... Phil Scott because it would be advantageous to have someone like him lose to Christine Hallquist.

Yay transphobic dogwhistles.

I honestly can't see the dogwhistle in this. Am I missing something painfully obvious?(not that the post isn't vile of course).

Why would it be "advantageous" for Scott to lose to "someone like her"? In light of the rest of the post, it just smelled really bad.

Good point.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

5. I was about to name Brian Schatz for Sarah Jeong support, but he's not up for re-election, so... Phil Scott because it would be advantageous to have someone like him lose to Christine Hallquist.

Yay transphobic dogwhistles.

I honestly can't see the dogwhistle in this. Am I missing something painfully obvious?(not that the post isn't vile of course).

Why would it be "advantageous" for Scott to lose to "someone like her"? In light of the rest of the post, it just smelled really bad.

Too bad we can't ask posters to explain what they mean.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't really care for Ellison. However, I don't know anything about his Republican opponent.

I'm undecided on this race until further information. Obviously, my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not a Minnesota resident.

He works for Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-gay fundamentalist group which advocates for conversion therapy and has spent most of his legal career fighting school districts that allow transgender students to use their preferred bathroom.

Why is he in a leadership position in the democratic party?

[TheSaint250]

Most Americans, even in concept? No.

A majority of Republicans at least in concept? Yeah, sadly it's probably the case.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Lavenous Marco is just jealous because Salt bae became a dank meme.

False. Republican senators cannot be jealous, as they are incapable of any emotion except elation at the prospect of death and suffering.

[Florida Man for Crime]

There is literally NO WAY to prove this, so no he will not be.  This is a witch hunt against a Catholic.

Whatever else you may want to call this, you can't call it anti-Catholic bias. The Senate clearly does not have a bias against confirming - nor do Presidents have a bias against nominating - Catholics to the Supreme Court.

Of the 8 people on SCOTUS, 4 are Catholic (plus Gorsuch was raised Catholic, and Kennedy was Catholic, as were other recent Justices such as Scalia).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States

I'm talking about Catholics who live their faith, not Sotomayor.

[IceSpear]

It’s absurd that Republicans can easily win re-election in dark blue states yet Democrats have to go to all-out war to win red states

It comes with the territory of being the more open minded party sadly.

Ah yeah, that’s why all those deep red state Democratic candidates for Senate are losing right now, right? And why there are way more red state Democrats than blue state Republicans in the Senate? I kinda doubt someone like Phil Bredesen (R) would even have a 2% chance of making it competitive in a D+14 state.

Also not sure how Edwards leading by 13 and 23 points is a sign that Democrats will "have to go to all-out war" to win this race? Kennedy is probably the most popular politician in the state, so him being narrowly ahead makes sense. If he doesn’t run, it’s at least Likely D.

Heitkamp is already losing. The rest are fighting for their lives and are deeply vulnerable. Not a single one of them is coasting to re-election like Baker, Scott, or Hogan.

Republicans won a D+12 state by 5 points with someone who wasn't even a popular universally well regarded moderate former governor like Phil Bredesen, but instead was a relatively anonymous (at the time) state senator. And Bredesen will probably lose anyway, so...

Charlie Baker, Phil Scott, and seemingly now Larry Hogan are going to win in landslides in three of the deepest blue states in the country even during a probable blue wave. I guess we'll see what happens in the deep red states this time, but something tells me none of these will vote D even in a blue wave, much less in a red wave (unless there's pedophilia involved.)

Both you and MT are comparing apples to oranges. Senators are inheritly nationalized races, where the voter's choice influences Washington, while gubernatorial races are much closer to statewide issues. If comparing Democratic governors, the Ds have had their power in hostile states. MT has always elected a Democratic governor, WY did the same by large margins, AR as well. Alaska is currently lead by an Indie who sides with the Ds, and LA is still lead by a democrat. While the Rs have more governors in Safe D state, this is probably more because the GOP had wave elections that got these guys in power in the first place, giving a higher probability of holding on. And they are spending a lot of money to keep themselves afloat, I see a Baker ad probably in every commercial break.

On the Senatorial front, the Ds certainly have the advantage. Looking at the number of R safe states that have a D senator, excluding Doug, the Democrats have a staggering 5 senators, and, in Trump states, 10. The same cannot be said about the Rs, who hold 3 seats in Clinton territory, none of which are in safe states. And this is a Democratic low, in 2014, it was much more, 2010, the same thing.

To sum it up, it appears that IceSpear is right on statewide elections, where Republicans hold an advantage due to their platform(lower taxes, tough on crime,etc.), whereas Democrats hold the advantage on federal races(spending, healthcare, etc.), as MT is saying.

Here's my question: Is there a single state in the entire country where Democrats could nominate a literal pedophile during a red wave and only lose by 1 point? This goes for either Senate or gubernatorial races. Considering Baker, Scott, and Hogan are going to romp against non pedophiles during a blue wave solely for being nice moderate sane FFs, I kind of doubt it. And considering Coakley lost by 5 points in a red wave when her biggest sins were running a lazy campaign and being kind of elitist, I kind of doubt that as well.

I'm not sure we can really ascribe a definite political climate to a special in December 2017, so your trying to equate it to a wave is a stretch, but to answer the question, New York and California for sure, perhaps Hawaii, and while it's not a state, an election for Mayor in D.C. would also qualify.

[Politician]

Likely R. Dems have virtually no chance in this state.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Likely R. Dems have virtually no chance in this state.

North Carolina is an extremely heavy lift for a Democratic presidential candidate, but so was Pennsylvania for Trump.

[Badger]

Most Americans, even in concept? No.

A majority of Republicans at least in concept? Yeah, sadly it's probably the case.

Actually, polls showing support for such Bonafide fascist things as Trump shutting down certain newspapers or limiting what they publish has at least plurality support among Republicans. I'm stating only statistical fact.

Trust me, I don't like it any more than you do.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

What is your opinion of the new quote going around that real men don't vote Democratic. Is that true? Is there real men that do vote Democratic, you know, do manly things, like mow the lawn, don't act feminine, actually support their daughter on wedding day, get to see their grandchildren, and dress in tight clothes, etc., wear earrings, aren't afraid of combat?

[IceSpear]

I dont know what your obsession with beating down on rural voters is. Many of these guys have had the biggest swing towards Democrats. Its been the suburbs, the ones who voted for him by plugging their nose, and swung a bit Clinton, that have been the biggest obstacle. The fact that we are competitive in MT, and not in the GA suburbs show this.

Because VA-Gov, AL-Sen, PA-18, AZ-08, and OH-12 never happened apparently. And Comstock, Rothfus, Paulsen, Coffman, and Yoder are clearly in great shape for re-election.