- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Democrats won the House but THIS is the harsh political reality -fox news
Posted on 11/8/18 at 12:41 am to Midget Death Squad
Posted on 11/8/18 at 12:41 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:
This requires explanation and some evidence to support. I get what he's saying, but saying it alone is not enough. I'm not buying this yet.
You shouldn't buy it. It's Fox news.
The majority will live in 15 states. Does that necessarily mean that Democrats still couldn't outnumber Republicans in any number of the other states? Nope.
This is completely ridiculous. And almost everyone in the thread swallowed it like guppies.
0
Posted on 11/8/18 at 12:45 am to 756
Wisconsin statewide election goes democrat. Evers wasn’t even a good candidate
Michigan statewide election goes democrat
Pennsylvania statewide elections goes democrat
If Trump loses Penn, Mich, and Wisconsin what blue will he pickup in 2020.
Penn and Mich statewide races were not even close statewide elections.
That brings his electoral college down to 270 if he just loses Penn and Mich.
Florida allowing ex-felons to vote can only help democrats if they vote. 1.5 million new voters and over half are AA’s or Hispanic. Trump won by less than 150,000 votes and FL will be more blue in 2020 than it was in 2016.
2020 will be much closer than 2016
Trump might win the popular vote and lose the electoral college.
Arizona is turning more blue. They have came close to electing a Green Party candidate running as a democrat for Senate.
Texas is red. Cruz looks and sounds like a douche. That is the only reason it was close.
Kansas is turning more blue. Many of the democrats in Kansas City are now on the Kansas side of the metro area. 2 of the 4 members of Congress from Kansas are now democrats and both are in the KC metro area. Kansas also elected a democrat governor. With a good pro life moderate Democrat candidate the 4th congressional district will be in play.
Michigan statewide election goes democrat
Pennsylvania statewide elections goes democrat
If Trump loses Penn, Mich, and Wisconsin what blue will he pickup in 2020.
Penn and Mich statewide races were not even close statewide elections.
That brings his electoral college down to 270 if he just loses Penn and Mich.
Florida allowing ex-felons to vote can only help democrats if they vote. 1.5 million new voters and over half are AA’s or Hispanic. Trump won by less than 150,000 votes and FL will be more blue in 2020 than it was in 2016.
2020 will be much closer than 2016
Trump might win the popular vote and lose the electoral college.
Arizona is turning more blue. They have came close to electing a Green Party candidate running as a democrat for Senate.
Texas is red. Cruz looks and sounds like a douche. That is the only reason it was close.
Kansas is turning more blue. Many of the democrats in Kansas City are now on the Kansas side of the metro area. 2 of the 4 members of Congress from Kansas are now democrats and both are in the KC metro area. Kansas also elected a democrat governor. With a good pro life moderate Democrat candidate the 4th congressional district will be in play.
This post was edited on 11/8/18 at 12:59 am
Posted on 11/8/18 at 1:15 am to MizzouBS
The more I think about it, the more I actually like this method. Critics use real outcomes like when the eventual winner of the Oakland mayor race who had 24.4% of the first place votes beat the candidate who initially led with 33.7% of the vote. But I don’t understand this criticism since that’s the reason why the system exists, so a candidate with a plurality of support alone doesn’t represent the majority, unless the others voters support him enough to rank him near the top and he’ll eventually win anyways.
In fact, I think that’s an example of its benefit. Candidates, can have a small but passionate base that represents a plurality of support but the remaining voters do not support him whatsoever. And this is especially problematic in elections with numerous competitors that can take the votes from one another, allowing a candidate with an even smaller base with a single preferred candidate to benefit from majority having multiple candidates who are equally preferable but can only pick one.
And a unique election format like the Electoral College, with most states awarding their largely population-based proportional share of the EC to the candidate with the most votes even if just a majority, I think something like this should be used. I mean in 1992 Bill Clinton won 43% of the popular vote (5.6% advantage) but 69% of the EC vote while Perot won 19% of the popular vote and 0% of the EC vote. So maybe Clinton would have won anyways, but it was a victory that of a with a clear strong majority (probably at least 53%) but without evidence to support that. Furthermore, it gives credence to the argument against a third party vote, and encourages people to choose between two candidates who do not best represent their views, and treating the candidate who does the same as the worst representation. And if they choose the third-party candidate, the worst choice isn’t negatively impacted yet instead benefits from the main competition having one less vote even though that candidate would have gotten it in the next round.
In fact, I think that’s an example of its benefit. Candidates, can have a small but passionate base that represents a plurality of support but the remaining voters do not support him whatsoever. And this is especially problematic in elections with numerous competitors that can take the votes from one another, allowing a candidate with an even smaller base with a single preferred candidate to benefit from majority having multiple candidates who are equally preferable but can only pick one.
And a unique election format like the Electoral College, with most states awarding their largely population-based proportional share of the EC to the candidate with the most votes even if just a majority, I think something like this should be used. I mean in 1992 Bill Clinton won 43% of the popular vote (5.6% advantage) but 69% of the EC vote while Perot won 19% of the popular vote and 0% of the EC vote. So maybe Clinton would have won anyways, but it was a victory that of a with a clear strong majority (probably at least 53%) but without evidence to support that. Furthermore, it gives credence to the argument against a third party vote, and encourages people to choose between two candidates who do not best represent their views, and treating the candidate who does the same as the worst representation. And if they choose the third-party candidate, the worst choice isn’t negatively impacted yet instead benefits from the main competition having one less vote even though that candidate would have gotten it in the next round.
Posted on 11/8/18 at 2:40 am to jchamil
quote:
It's inevitable. The takers will eventually outbreed the producers
I wonder how many generations before said the exact same thing
Posted on 11/8/18 at 6:16 am to 756
2020 elections for senate has 21(probably Mississippi) states held by republicans and 12 held by Democrats.
1: Alabama will be a Democrat loss even though Jones votes with Republicans 69% of the time. (Rand Paul 75% of the time)
2: New Mexico-Tom Udall considering retirement probably safe Democrat
Seats held by Republicans that will be close:
1: Arizona-Special
2: Colorado-Corey Gardner
3: Iowa-Ernst
4: Kansas-open probably safe
5: Kentucky-open probably safe
6: Maine-Susan Collins
7: Montana-Steve Daines will face really popular Democrat Governor Steve Bullock
8: North Carolina-Thom Tillis he won last election by less than 50,000
9: Tennessee-Lamar Alexander probably retiring and probably safe Republican
10: Alaska-Dan Sullivan won last election by 6,000 votes
3 of the 10 likely safe and 12 to 13 other safe seats
1: Alabama will be a Democrat loss even though Jones votes with Republicans 69% of the time. (Rand Paul 75% of the time)
2: New Mexico-Tom Udall considering retirement probably safe Democrat
Seats held by Republicans that will be close:
1: Arizona-Special
2: Colorado-Corey Gardner
3: Iowa-Ernst
4: Kansas-open probably safe
5: Kentucky-open probably safe
6: Maine-Susan Collins
7: Montana-Steve Daines will face really popular Democrat Governor Steve Bullock
8: North Carolina-Thom Tillis he won last election by less than 50,000
9: Tennessee-Lamar Alexander probably retiring and probably safe Republican
10: Alaska-Dan Sullivan won last election by 6,000 votes
3 of the 10 likely safe and 12 to 13 other safe seats
This post was edited on 11/8/18 at 6:27 am
Posted on 11/8/18 at 6:26 am to MizzouBS
If people actually vote in more democrats after the way they will thoroughly embarrass themselves over the next 2 years the country is doomed.
probably already is given how close the clowns running for governor in FL/GA got
In 30 years the country will be a big Venezuela and leftists will be blaming everybody else for it, you know, just like Venezuela
probably already is given how close the clowns running for governor in FL/GA got
In 30 years the country will be a big Venezuela and leftists will be blaming everybody else for it, you know, just like Venezuela
Posted on 11/8/18 at 6:38 am to uway
quote:
I would be in favor of peacefully breaking up the Union
I sure hope you don't bitch and moan when athletes kneel for the flag/anthem. The flag doesn't represent our militarism, it represents the union. If you don't respect the union, you don't respect the flag.
Posted on 11/8/18 at 6:39 am to uway
quote:
Good. They will want to break up the nation.
And we will do that, amicably.
They can have the beaches. I want the mountains and the open spaces to ski and hunt and hike
Posted on 11/8/18 at 8:10 am to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I sure hope you don't bitch and moan when athletes kneel for the flag/anthem
I sure don’t. I understand and empathize with their position.
quote:
The flag doesn't represent our militarism, it represents the union. If you don't respect the union, you don't respect the flag
They’re just making a statement.
And this union won’t last forever. A nation of Americans has a chance. A flimsy union of people that hate each other will not.
The left side of the aisle wants to regain control and then ensure that people like me and the 63 million that voted for Trump never have a say-so in American politics again. I’ve paid attention since November 2016, so you can’t convince me that’s a paranoid exaggeration.
Don’t talk to me about the union.
Posted on 11/8/18 at 10:39 am to ShortyRob
quote:
And, a Senate that is only going to get harder for Democrats to win.
Why would you say that? Because Fox news says so?
Republicans are all giddy about the gains in the Senate, but the only reason they gained is because they were defending fewer seats.
The Democrats were defending 24 Senate seats and the Republicans were defending 8.
The Democrats have won 21 races (so far) and the Republicans have won 11.
In 2020 the number of seats to be defended will just about flip and the Republicans will be defending about twice as many an the Democrats.
quote:I hope you're not dead in 2020 because the Deomcrats will very most likely win the Senate.
I'll be dead before that's not the case. So. I'm good
This post was edited on 11/8/18 at 11:05 am
Posted on 11/8/18 at 10:41 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
I wonder how many generations before said the exact same thing
Probably a few, but it wasn't until the 20th Century that you could survive here in America without working and pulling your own weight.
Posted on 11/8/18 at 10:46 am to cahoots
quote:
Just gonna let Rs take over
No, the Dems will forever use dead people and illegals to shore up their vote totals.
Posted on 11/8/18 at 12:19 pm to uway
quote:
I’ve paid attention since November 2016, so you can’t convince me that’s a paranoid exaggeration.
I've paid attention since 1972, so I'm here to tell yuou that not only that that's a paranoid exaggeration, but that you're falling victim to the very propaganda that foreign interests are using to foment discord in our country.
quote:
Don’t talk to me about the union.
You really might want to find another country to live in. I'm sorry you hate your country so much.
Posted on 11/8/18 at 12:43 pm to jchamil
quote:
but it wasn't until the 20th Century that you could survive here in America without working and pulling your own weight.
That's not even true. That right-wing myth really needs to die
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News