FWIS3

Thumper wrote:Didn't want to start a new thread so slight derail. We got our absentee ballots this week as we will be out of town on election day. I know it's an off year so not many contests, but our township is ridiculous. There are 4 contests total: Township trustee, fiscal officer, state board of ed rep and local board of ed officers. Each contest says: do not vote for more than 1. In each contest there is a total of 1 person to choose from. I've voted in every single election since I turned 18. My vote yesterday means absolutely, totally nothing.

Now that you have a little more spare time you could run for public office.

And ... Beto is gone.

Honestly we could stand to lose a few more without blinking. Props to him for realizing he should though.

The field is shaking out.

Kamala Harris might be the next one to drop out. Her campaign has laid off all of her staff in New Hampshire. Thisstory in Politicoreports that her campaign states she is realigning resources to focus on Iowa. If she is having to cut back due to money issues it's probably a sign that she won't last much longer.

I figured Sen. Harris to be one of the better candidates in terms of elect-ability. Politics is fickle, I guess. I look for Sen. Booker to drop out soon, too. He isn't polling well.

I think there are just so many good people this year that it's hard to make much of a splash.

I will say though, Harris's case made me think how huge Iowa is this year for the second tier candidates. Maybe it's because Bernie and Warren are both from neighboring states for New Hampshire, but it seems like Pete, Kamala, and all those are basically praying for doing exceptionally well in Iowa and getting some momentum that way.

Meanwhile, I hear Biden's plan is to hold out to win in South Carolina and Nevada, and he is now accepting super PAC money because he can't get enough donations either. Sounding more and more like Jeb Bush's campaign four years ago every day.

Rommie wrote:I think there are just so many good people this year that it's hard to make much of a splash.

I will say though, Harris's case made me think how huge Iowa is this year for the second tier candidates. Maybe it's because Bernie and Warren are both from neighboring states for New Hampshire, but it seems like Pete, Kamala, and all those are basically praying for doing exceptionally well in Iowa and getting some momentum that way.

Meanwhile, I hear Biden's plan is to hold out to win in South Carolina and Nevada, and he is now accepting super PAC money because he can't get enough donations either. Sounding more and more like Jeb Bush's campaign four years ago every day.

I think that with rare exceptions any candidate for a national level election is going to have to take Super PAC donations if they want to win. Until none of them can accept big money then all of them are going to be forced to accept big money. That is one reason why so-called conservatives have worked so hard to destroy the ability of Unions to donate to candidates. They want to destroy a source of "big money" for more progressive candidates.

So anyway guys, question time. I have free on Monday, and Liz Warren is giving a town hall in Exeter, NH which is about an hour away from here. Worth the trek up? I mean, I'm definitely curious to see her in the flesh, but I also kinda wanted to have a spare day to explore around here a little.

The good thing is I guess I don't have to decide just yet.

Yes, I think it's worth the trek. I've told my story about how, in 2008, Barack Obama was in St. Paul, in an arena near where MrPi and I lived. We figured we'd head on over to check it out, and found that the line to get in wound all the way through downtown, practically back to our apartment. We just kept walking toward the arena, enamored by the spectacle, but figuring we wouldn't get in. By the time we got there, we walked all the way around to the opposite door, which was wide open and we walked right in. That was the night that Hillary unofficially conceded, so we were there on an historic night.

You'll have plenty of spare days in the future without the possibility of seeing a presidential candidate in person!

I agree, if for no other reason the spectacle, as PP mentions. I haven't been to too many presidential campaign rallies. Probably the most entertaining was Howard Dean.

Yeah I'll probably go unless there's terrible weather- might get some ice rain this weekend.

My sister said I should go if I want a Warren selfie. Apparently she's famous for staying around for hours to take one with everyone who wants one.

Rommie wrote:Yeah I'll probably go unless there's terrible weather- might get some ice rain this weekend.

My sister said I should go if I want a Warren selfie. Apparently she's famous for staying around for hours to take one with everyone who wants one.

That would be really cool for Warren to get her picture with a rock star astronomer.

The Daily podcast reported on a NYT poll regarding Trump's re-electability. In 6 battleground states that Trump won, Biden has the best chance to beat Trump (by a small margin), Sanders is about even, and Warren would lose (again by a small margin.) The podcast acknowledges that the poll results are close enough for it to go either way for any of the candidates, and that they still have the problem of not reaching a true representative sample of voters.

My take: it doesn't surprise me. They even had a question worded so that people could answer in a way that allowed them to be sexist, and it showed that people just won't vote for Warren because she's a woman.

There is a lot more good information in the podcast. Good, but disheartening.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/podc ... pe=Article
There is a transcript there if you don't want to listen.


Right now, I don't want the candidate with the best policy agenda to be the nominee. I want the one who can beat Trump.

Yeah, I cynically am not shocked that a lot of America doesn't mind an election where two 70+ year old men duke it out for the presidency either. Personally though, I think it's very hard for someone to win the presidency less because people are excited for them as a candidate, and more because you think everyone else supports him and his platform is "I'm not the incumbent!" I concluded this was a huge reason Kerry lost in 2004 and have yet to see evidence that changes my mind since.

On another note, wasn't it nice to wake up this morning and hear Kentucky has a Democrat for governor? Not worth a huge deal in the grand scheme of things (unless you live in Kentucky I guess), but I thought it was nice to see.

pumpkinpi wrote:Right now, I don't want the candidate with the best policy agenda to be the nominee. I want the one who can beat Trump.

Ditto.

Rommie wrote:On another note, wasn't it nice to wake up this morning and hear Kentucky has a Democrat for governor? Not worth a huge deal in the grand scheme of things (unless you live in Kentucky I guess), but I thought it was nice to see.

It was also great to find Virginia Democrats will be redistricting the state after the 2020 census.

geonuc wrote:

Rommie wrote:On another note, wasn't it nice to wake up this morning and hear Kentucky has a Democrat for governor? Not worth a huge deal in the grand scheme of things (unless you live in Kentucky I guess), but I thought it was nice to see.

It was also great to find Virginia Democrats will be redistricting the state after the 2020 census.

My Virginian sister was pretty excited. Apparently they were like 49th in the nation for voter accessibility, which I had no idea about because her corner (the DC dominated part) just so does not give that impression. But I guess it's a big state.

Re: Kentucky, Republicans are openly talking about refusing to give up power there.

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/n ... 174103002/

If they try this I hope the courts toss it out, but I'm not optimistic TBH.

An interesting turn of events. When Trump took office about 2/3 of the governors in the U.S. were Republican. As of this election, there are 24 Democrat and 26 Republican governors. In some ways, the state level is where the average person feels the impact the most. For example, the states where they refused to expand Medicaid coverage were all Republican. Newsweek has a bit more information.

I think it's very fair to say that Democrats were really asleep at the switch about how much state elections matter and influence our daily lives, and Republicans were the opposite. That seems to be changing a lot now.

Rommie wrote:I think it's very fair to say that Democrats were really asleep at the switch about how much state elections matter and influence our daily lives, and Republicans were the opposite. That seems to be changing a lot now.

And how much state legislatures matter when it comes time to redraw districts for the US House of Representatives.

lady_*nix wrote:Re: Kentucky, Republicans are openly talking about refusing to give up power there.

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/n ... 174103002/

If they try this I hope the courts toss it out, but I'm not optimistic TBH.

Keep your fingers crossed. I was half expecting some type of challenge when I saw how close the tally was between the two candidates.

https://apnews.com/ab2c6b32ad17417aae56988c0a4798db

He conceded, yay. I'm actually quite surprised.

lady_*nix wrote:https://apnews.com/ab2c6b32ad17417aae56988c0a4798db

He conceded, yay. I'm actually quite surprised.

I was relieved. Apparently, he was so disliked by his own party they decided to refuse to help steal the election.