Washington 2020: The Calm Before the Drizzle
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:43:51 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Washington 2020: The Calm Before the Drizzle
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 156 157 158 159 160 [161] 162 163 164 165 166 ... 252
Author Topic: Washington 2020: The Calm Before the Drizzle  (Read 837270 times)
Seattle
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 786
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4000 on: October 21, 2012, 01:35:00 PM »

I think that's more of a fluff piece. I think there's a pretty slim chance of the Senate changing to R control. Also, the Democrats have a decent chance of picking up the Republican held 5th district, on Seattle's Eastside.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,511
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4001 on: October 21, 2012, 02:11:19 PM »

I think that's more of a fluff piece. I think there's a pretty slim chance of the Senate changing to R control. Also, the Democrats have a decent chance of picking up the Republican held 5th district, on Seattle's Eastside.

Does Republicans+conservative Democrats=effective Republican control of the state Senate, as Chris Vance suggests?  
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4002 on: October 21, 2012, 02:15:33 PM »

I think that's more of a fluff piece. I think there's a pretty slim chance of the Senate changing to R control. Also, the Democrats have a decent chance of picking up the Republican held 5th district, on Seattle's Eastside.

Does Republicans+conservative Democrats=effective Republican control of the state Senate, as Chris Vance suggests? 

They already have some control through such a coalition, which is how Republicans took over the budget. It would get one seat stronger under such a scenario.

I assume Democrats would maintain Speaker and committee chairmanships, though.
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,164


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4003 on: October 21, 2012, 02:18:26 PM »

It's distressing that a state as heavily Democratic as Washington is at the national level can be so evenly divided between conservatives (of both parties) and liberal Democrats at the state level:

Another perversion caused by FPTP single-member districts. Electoral reform is a non-starter outside of San Francisco and Burlington, however, so whatevs.
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4004 on: October 21, 2012, 04:24:12 PM »

The Seattle Times plans an independent expenditure of $75,750 for Rob McKenna and $75,000 to help get a yes vote on R-74.

http://www.nwcn.com/news/politics/174888741.html

While it is unlikely this will have a significant effect on the election, it strikes me as unethical and  hackish.  The Blethens are making life hard for their politics and news staff, because now their work is going to be seen as compromised, especially on anything related to these issues.  How is anyone supposed to believe what appears in print there when the paper has such a large financial investment on one side of the fence?
Logged
Fuzzybigfoot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,211
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4005 on: October 21, 2012, 07:21:34 PM »

I always knew the Seattle times was a really douchy paper, but damn. 
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4006 on: October 21, 2012, 08:15:44 PM »

The Seattle Times plans an independent expenditure of $75,750 for Rob McKenna and $75,000 to help get a yes vote on R-74.

http://www.nwcn.com/news/politics/174888741.html

While it is unlikely this will have a significant effect on the election, it strikes me as unethical and  hackish.  The Blethens are making life hard for their politics and news staff, because now their work is going to be seen as compromised, especially on anything related to these issues.  How is anyone supposed to believe what appears in print there when the paper has such a large financial investment on one side of the fence?

I know this may sound dumb/crazy, but why do people see this as so ridiculously different from an endorsement?
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4007 on: October 21, 2012, 09:31:07 PM »

The Seattle Times plans an independent expenditure of $75,750 for Rob McKenna and $75,000 to help get a yes vote on R-74.

http://www.nwcn.com/news/politics/174888741.html

While it is unlikely this will have a significant effect on the election, it strikes me as unethical and  hackish.  The Blethens are making life hard for their politics and news staff, because now their work is going to be seen as compromised, especially on anything related to these issues.  How is anyone supposed to believe what appears in print there when the paper has such a large financial investment on one side of the fence?

I know this may sound dumb/crazy, but why do people see this as so ridiculously different from an endorsement?

I would say that there is a big difference between merely endorsing a candidate, which is what many papers do -- and investing a (large) sum of money in a candidate, an action I have never seen by a major newspaper before.  It is impossible to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest when you have such big financial investment at stake.  It's going to be very hard to look at any story about Inslee or McKenna in the Times (or the failure to cover certain things about them) without wondering if the paper was simply motivated by wanting to make good on its investment.  For an organization which claims to be an independent, third party source of journalism, this is very damaging to its credibility.  If other papers were to follow the Seattle Times down this rabbit hole, then it will give the appearance that the news we read is merely the mouthpiece of political campaigns. 

Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4008 on: October 22, 2012, 12:09:15 AM »

It's an in-kind, no?  They're just using space that would otherwise be for advertising to promote their endorsement, in essence.  It was free advertisement given on the condition of being endorsed...so it's not like the newspaper is being "bought" here.  I suppose it does then become in their interest to support their candidate of choice on news items, but honestly, I don't mind that as much as most people to; it's potentially better than a false neutrality.  I'm against it, I'm just not quite as outraged as most other people seem to be.
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4009 on: October 22, 2012, 12:20:41 AM »
« Edited: October 22, 2012, 12:29:34 AM by Ogre Mage »

The cost of the ads they are running is being reported in the WA PDC as an independent expenditure for Rob McKenna, that is what I would consider it to be.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4010 on: October 22, 2012, 12:24:18 AM »

Sorry, you're right...I'm not sure why I even asked if it's an in-kind.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4011 on: October 22, 2012, 01:12:57 PM »

Strategies360 (R) - WA, 500 LVs, 10/17-20

Obama 52%
Romney 39%

Inslee 46%
McKenna 46%

Initiative 1240 (Charter schools)
Yes 51%
No 34%

Referendum 74 (Same-sex marriage)
Approved 55%
Rejected 38%

Initiative 502 (Marijuana legalization)
Yes 54%
No 38%

No Senate horserace (just favorables), but some very interesting stuff on taxes too

http://www.strategies360.com/client/12-165_OctWACrosstabs.pdf
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,164


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4012 on: October 22, 2012, 01:46:19 PM »

The marriage equality and marijuana legalization crosstabs are interesting though not intuitively surprising. Both are passing by similar margins but thanks to different coalitions:

- Women support marriage equality by +27% but marijuana legalization by only +11%. Men support marriage equality by only +5% but support marijuana legalization by +22%.

- King County is +44% for marriage equality but +31% for marijuana legalization. "Western Washington" (defined as Pierce, Thurston, Kitsap, Southwest Washington and the Olympic Peninsula) opposes marriage equality by -2% but favors marijuana legalization by +12%.

- Those with a college degree favor marriage equality +31% but marijuana legalization +23%. Those without opposed marriage equality -1% but favor marijuana legalization +11%.

- Non-whites support marriage equality by only +3% but support marijuana legalization by +16% (small sample size, however).
Logged
Seattle
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 786
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4013 on: October 22, 2012, 02:17:51 PM »

Another interesting tidbit on the  "Do you think it should be legal or illegal for gay and lesbian couples to get married?" question.

The "West Wash" region thinks it should be legal 51-42, but the "East Wash" region was higher at 54-43. What? lol.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4014 on: October 22, 2012, 05:49:39 PM »

I got my ballot today. Here's what I'm voting so far:

I-1185 (2/3 Req): No
I-1240 (Charter Schools): No
R-74 (Gay Marriage): Undecided
I-502 (Marijauna): No
ESJR-8221 (Debt Limit): No
SJR-8223: No
ESB-6635: Maintained
SHB-2590: Maintained

President: Obama (D)
Senate: Undecided
Congress: Larsen (D)
Governor: Inslee (D)
Lt Gov: Owen (D)
SoS: Wyman (R)
Treasurer: McIntire (D)
Auditor: Undecided
AG: Undecided
CoPL: Goldmark (D)
SoPI: Dorn
IC: Kreidler (D)

Anyone care to persuade me on Auditor or AG?
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4015 on: October 22, 2012, 06:43:41 PM »
« Edited: October 22, 2012, 06:45:33 PM by Grad Students are the Worst »

Undecided on R-74?  Come on, man.  I've seen you write on the subject, and I just don't understand how you could vote Reject in good conscience.  It seems like taking out your frustrations with the modern treatment of marriage (which are fair) on the people who would probably be most likely to understand why the institution is important.

Otherwise...I'm curious why you're undecided on Senate, unless I missed that.

I'm voting for Watkins for Auditor.  Kelley's business dealings are just, I'm sad to say, signs of either incompetence or dishonesty.  I probably agree with Watkins on nearly nothing, but he seems like an ethical professional.  AG, I haven't really thought about that much, although Ferguson impresses me more personally than Dunn does.
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,164


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4016 on: October 22, 2012, 06:48:34 PM »

Watkins is a Tea Party loon, Alcon. Imagine Dale Washam on the state level. It would not end well.
Logged
Fuzzybigfoot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,211
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4017 on: October 22, 2012, 06:59:12 PM »

Realistic, I didn't know you still lived in the second!
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4018 on: October 22, 2012, 07:01:25 PM »

Watkins is a Tea Party loon, Alcon. Imagine Dale Washam on the state level. It would not end well.

Meh, I've met him and communicated with him quite a few times.  That's not what I pick up, but if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

What's your take on the NPR Kelley story?
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4019 on: October 22, 2012, 07:14:05 PM »

I don't really know much about down-ballot offices in Washington, but how are the Republicans able to hold the SoS - or are they in danger of loosing it this year?
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4020 on: October 22, 2012, 07:24:36 PM »

Realistic, I didn't know you still lived in the second!

Yeah, I'm still in that thin strip of coast left in the second.

Undecided on R-74?  Come on, man.  I've seen you write on the subject, and I just don't understand how you could vote Reject in good conscience.  It seems like taking out your frustrations with the modern treatment of marriage (which are fair) on the people who would probably be most likely to understand why the institution is important.

Otherwise...I'm curious why you're undecided on Senate, unless I missed that.

I'm voting for Watkins for Auditor.  Kelley's business dealings are just, I'm sad to say, signs of either incompetence or dishonesty.  I probably agree with Watkins on nearly nothing, but he seems like an ethical professional.  AG, I haven't really thought about that much, although Ferguson impresses me more personally than Dunn does.

I'll probably vote for R-74; I just haven't quite made the full commitment yet. As for the Senate, I like Cantwell well enough, but I also rather like Baumgartner as a person. He's an involved Catholic, and I'm sympathetic toward his schooling choices. Plus, Cantwell is going to win comfortably anyway, so I don't see much harm in voting for Baumgartner.

I have zero strong feelings about the other two races. I think I voted for Dunn and Kelley in the primary, but I don't have any attachment to them.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4021 on: October 22, 2012, 07:28:10 PM »

I don't really know much about down-ballot offices in Washington, but how are the Republicans able to hold the SoS - or are they in danger of loosing it this year?

From my perspective, they've, at least recently, been running moderate/apolitical candidates from liberal areas of western Washington (ie Olympia) who haven't been threats to liberals. Sam Reed, the last SoS, I've met personally and seemed like a great guy. I'm voting for Wyman this time because she seems to be emphasizing modernizing election records much moreso than Drew. The SoS is a pretty-nonpartisan position (or at least it should be), and it seems like the Republicans, as of late, have done a better job in being seen as nonpartisan.
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4022 on: October 22, 2012, 11:15:32 PM »

Anyone care to persuade me on Auditor or AG?

Reagan Dunn strongly supported AG Rob McKenna's decision to join the national lawsuit to overturn the President's Health Care Reform Act.  Bob Ferguson opposed McKenna's decision.

http://www.q13fox.com/news/politics/CRsTake/kcpq-are-the-state-attorney-general-candidates-more-similar-than-different-20120608,0,1691254.story
Logged
bgwah
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,833
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4023 on: October 22, 2012, 11:42:23 PM »

Why are you undecided on AG?
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4024 on: October 23, 2012, 12:55:11 AM »

Republican AG's are almost always total fascists. That's really the last position I'd want a Republican in.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 156 157 158 159 160 [161] 162 163 164 165 166 ... 252  
« previous next »
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 0.074 seconds with 12 queries.