re: Differences between Cassidy & Maness?

On a very simple level that is probably correct, assuming turnout would be the same, and what the candidates had to spend was equal, and nothing significant happens in that month.

quote:

---

If Maness and McMorris "steal" votes away from Cassidy it doesn't matter because there will be a run-off unless Mary gets 50%

---

The frick? If they steal votes away and keep him below 50% it keeps Mary alive for a few weeks longer.

quote:

---

If Cassidy would have gotten 50% in the primary then why wouldn't he also get it in the run-off?

---

He probably would.

But Mary's goal is to get there in the first place.

quote:

---

Mary's goal is to get there in the first place.

---

It's about playing the long game and analogus to small ball in baseball.

quote:

---

you just never know.

---

You know. Your lizard brain doesn't. Our lizard brains are easily manipulated.

quote:

---

It's about playing the long game and analogus to small ball in baseball.

---

Yep.

At Asgard Device acting like this isn't the plan. And defending his point with the lazy "stupid Louisiana voter" comment.

The candidates may not be similar but this approach worked out pretty well for democrats in the Virginia gubernatorial election.

quote:

---

Virginia does not have a jungle primary. That would have gone to a run-off in Louisiana.

---

Which is what Mary's goal is. She's just trying to stay alive until December.

Here is the difference.

In an open field poll, the numbers are about as follows:

Cassidy: 36.5%
Landrieu: 33.55%
Maness: 8.5%

+ or - 3 points for margin of error

RealClearPolitics

In the one poll that Maness is pimping lately, the one funded by the "Senate Conservatives Fund," he only gets 16% of the vote with + or - 4 points for the margin of error. Cassidy gets 32%, Landrieu 43% with 8% undecided.

Senate Conservatives Fund

So let's just say that the poll conducted by SCF is legit and that the best case scenario is true for Maness; that he actually has 20% of the voters. Let's also say that the worst is true for Cassidy, who would have 28%, and Landrieu, who would have 39%. Let's also imagine that undecideds are as numerous as possible within the margin of error at 12%. Let's also assume that all undecideds vote for Maness.

If that is the case (it's not), then Landrieu has 39% and Maness has 32%. Cassidy has 28%. No candidate wins the jungle primary and a runoff occurs. Maness squeaks by Cassidy by 4% points to go head to head with Landrieu.

Does anyone else see the absurdity in the mental gymnastics that have to be performed for Maness to win this thing? The margins of error will not swing that way. Maness will not pick up every undecided voter. Senate Conservative Fund is telling you, at best case scenario, that Maness currently has 20%. Real Clear Politics, an average of multiple polls, tells you that, at best, he has 11.5%.

If you want to vote for Maness on principle, power to you. I can understand why one would do that. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012. That being said, he has absolutely no chance of winning this thing, barring a dead girl or live boy in Cassidy's bed.

But make no mistake; a vote for Maness is more likely to keep Mary in office. Others, such as myself, consider this a referendum on the ACA vote. Removing an incumbent since 1997 who blatantly ignored the will of her constituents on the biggest piece of legislation in the last 10 years is also "voting on principle."

I don't even like Cassidy, but I'm not delusional enough to think a Maness vote is anything other than an exercise in pie-in-the sky, feel-good wishing.