RayDog

He should have a cigar in his hand.

I hope this does not become a thing. King running in 2020 is good for the Democrats chances of winning Iowa and flipping a Senate seat.

I started thinking about what happens when we go from 2 to 3 candidates. If the final two are Biden and Warren, Warren gets Bernie's votes and wins. If the final two are Biden and Bernie, Bernie gets Warren's votes and wins. If the final two are Warren and Bernie, Warren gets Biden's votes and wins. Warren is also well positioned to pick up Harris, Pete, Yang and Beto supporters even before that. I don't see Biden getting to 50% under any scenario and Warren should be favored.

The Civiqs polls of Trump's approval rating are still trending down. In Arizona and North Carolina Trump is 9 points under water at 44/53. Maine is 39/57 and Colorado 40/58. Those 4 seats continue to look like solid pickup opportunities. Iowa 47/50, Georgia 47/49, and Texas 47/49 are the next group. If the democrats pick up even 1 of those in addition to the first 4 they will be in good shape. Kansas 50/46, South Carolina 50/47, and Montana 51/46 are still leaning toward Trump but trending toward toss-up territory where the Senate candidates could matter. These are long shots along with Kentucky and keeping Alabama. Note that Ohio flipped in the recent polling so if the current Civiqs polls reflected the final electoral college it would be 419 to 119. https://civiqs.com/results/approve_president_trump?annotations=true&uncertainty=true&zoomIn=true&utm_campaign=ticker

In 2022 there are already open seats in Wisconsin and North Carolina and those along with Pennsylvania a good targets for flipping. Florida, Georgia and Iowa are also targets and could be close in 2020 and tell us if they are toss-ups in 2022. Murkowski will have to defend her seat after her Kavanaugh vote. Kansas, Missouri, and Ohio are longer shots, but could be competitive, depending on the candidate and trends in the states and parties. All together the Democrats have good prospects to pick up 3 or 4 seats in 2022, and possibly more.

A's vote for A's, B's vote for C's, C's for D's, and D's for F's. The F's vote for Trump.

The current Civiqs Trump approval ratings show Trump even or under water in states where there are important senate races. Arizona 45/52, Colorado 40/57, Georgia 47/50, Iowa 48/49, Maine 39/57, North Carolina 45/52, Texas 48/48 Maine, Colorado, Arizona, and North Carolina are looking like the states where a Democratic senate pickup is most likely. Georgia could end up leaning democratic as well if Democrats continue to have a 3% advantage there. Iowa and Texas appear to be true toss-ups. Note that Florida is also 47/50. The following states have important Senate races and still support Trump, Alabama 55/42, Kansas 52/45, Kentucky 60/36, South Carolina 51/46. But, Democrats have a small chance in each race due to unlikable Republican candidates namely Moore, Kobach, Moscow Mitch, and Lennigrad Lindsey. Moore wants to lose to Jones for the second time, and he might get the nomination. Kobach lost the 2018 governors race and now wants to lose the Senate race, and he might get the nomination there. In Kentucky an unpopular Republican governor is running behind a popular Democrat in 2019 as an early test of Kentucky's loyalty to the Republican party. The MoscowMitch name appears to be sticking. South Carolina could continuing trending into toss-up territory, but is not there yet. Civiqs Trumps Approval Ratings by State

Rachel Bitcofer put out an electoral college map where she lists Arizona, Iowa, North Carolina and Florida as toss-ups. Three of those have senate races, with Arizona looking like the best pickup opportunity followed by North Carolina and then Iowa. She has Georgia as a lean R and Texas as a Likely R. I think both of those will be considered toss-ups by this time next year. With 16 Months to go, Negative Partisanship Predicts the 2020 Presidential Election She has Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, and New Hampshire as lean D, predicting a democratic presidential victory.

Rachel Bitcofer's latest house prediction has 9 Texas seats in her top 18 most likely to flip. They are mostly the usual suspects TX- 2, 3, 10, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 31. Her model puts a lot of emphasis on education. 18 Top Targets for Democrats in the House for 2020 I would personally subtract the aggies and recalculate.

I guy I knew last year owned a restaurant and treated his female staff as his personal harem. Most of them were ex-bargirls and didn't mind. One day he had a heart attack in the afternoon while having sex with one of the girls. He went to the hospital but left declining treatment. That evening he was having sex with another girl before doing his thing at the restaurant, had another heart attack and died. I really miss his restaurant, the best German food in Angeles. I know lots of guys here looking to go that way, although preferably in one shot. Their are lots of Filipinas hoping to inherit in the process, so it is win-win.

I also researched which democratic house members took the most corporate PAC money into their campaign and looked at their ratings and grades on progressivepunch to see which ones tended to vote republican looking for a link. To no surprise there is a correlation. I did this to point to candidates that progressives should consider primarying, although those with an A or B rating should probably just be more careful who they accept donations from. Name District Corp. PAC PAC % Rating Grade Richard Neal MA-1 $2,501,791 76.33% 2.60 C Steny Hoyer MD-5 $2,163,715 60.92% -5.48 F Ron Kind WI-3 $1,683,793 78.05% -4.77 F Frank Pallone NJ-6 $1,637,066 67.22% 3.99 B James Clyburn SC-6 $1,428,608 86.34% -1.08 D Terri Sewel AL-7 $1,324,628 81.63% -16.96 F Kurt Schrader OR-5 $1,322,953 70.99% -19.70 F Scott Peters CA-52 $1,274,573 56.20% -31.84 F Mike Thompson CA-5 $1,150,309 61.43% -0.95 D Ben R Lujan NM-3 $1,120,126 68.67% -2.66 D Linda Sanchez CA-38 $1,100,788 77.99% 11.76 A Josh Gottheimer NJ-5 $1,094,326 24.28% -35.34 F Cheri Bustos IL-17 $1,072,622 41.77% -24.70 F Derek Kilmer WA-6 $1,045,221 51.78% -14.06 F Henry Cuellar TX-28 $1,030,377 66.63% -44.44 F Suzan DelBene WA-1 $1,004,698 53.22% -10.72 F John Larson CT-1 $987,993 70.94% 2.48 C Collin Peterson MN-7 $961,513 79.59% -30.80 F Jim Himes CT-4 $937,673 48.28% -12.69 F Ami Bera CA-7 $933,047 40.79% -27.39 F David Scott GA-13 $921,249 94.12% -15.45 F Ed Perlmutter CO-7 $893,069 63.84% -15.66 F Cedric Richmond LA-2 $892,392 77.90% -5.14 F Jim Costa CA-16 $892,340 58.10% -40.27 F Stephanie Murphy FL-7 $866,738 46.95% -32.67 F Nancy Pelosi CA-12 $866,700 26.58% 10.31 A Raul Ruiz CA-36 $808,925 39.07% -30.67 F Earl Blumenauer OR-3 $779,038 64.09% 6.15 B Bill Pascrell NJ-9 $776,498 61.26% -2.64 D Pete Aguilar CA-31 $760,552 37.28% -26.57 F Tony Cardenas CA-29 $753,184 61.16% -5.43 F Eric Swalwell CA-15 $730,154 31.85% -2.19 D Doris Matsui CA-6 $720,303 76.77% 6.98 B Peter DeFazio OR-4 $712,925 58.97% 5.98 B Sanford Bishop GA-2 $711,270 80.41% -21.17 F Gregory Meeks NY-5 $706,100 76.04% -0.26 D Brad Schneider IL-10 $698,603 27.29% -30.53 F Joe Kennedy MA-3 $697,331 20.25% 6.96 B Dennis Heck WA-10 $695,200 52.31% -7.95 F Paul Tonko NY-20 $674,250 64.61% 6.97 B David Loebsack IA-2 $673,650 54.30% -8.34 F Carolyn B Maloney NY-12 $671,900 42.98% 3.14 C Ann Kuster NH-2 $670,639 34.81% -13.83 F Joyce Beatty OH-3 $665,188 74.22% 1.10 C Lisa Blunt Rochester DE $664,823 69.44% -6.94 F Don Norcross NJ-1 $655,006 45.61% -11.30 F Emanuel Cleaver MO-5 $653,500 73.60% 1.93 C Bill Foster IL-11 $652,050 31.41% -19.24 F Gerry Connolly VA-11 $648,650 44.00% -12.02 F Marc Veasey TX-33 $640,134 58.78% -10.52 F Raja Krishnamoorthi IL-8 $622,083 19.42% -5.85 F Rick Larsen WA-2 $613,250 73.56% -8.25 F Gwen Moore WI-4 $594,850 73.92% 9.79 A Lou Correa CA-46 $591,918 65.34% -27.70 F Hakeem Jeffries NY-8 $584,500 48.71% 9.27 A Dan Kildee MI-5 $578,750 68.00% 11.78 A Debbie Dingell MI-12 $578,600 58.96% 3.51 B Diana DeGette CO-1 $573,050 54.50% 7.32 B G.K. Butterfield NC-1 $571,348 86.41% -5.24 F Bennie Thompson MS-2 $567,696 80.28% -1.11 D Jimmy Panetta CA-20 $567,165 57.61% -10.48 F Adam Smith WA-9 $567,154 57.34% -10.49 F Juan Vargas CA-51 $565,400 77.18% -4.16 F Seth Moulton MA-5 $549,838 28.40% -8.90 F Daniel Lipinski IL-3 $548,477 56.46% -25.47 F Dutch Ruppersberger MD-2 $548,350 69.61% -17.21 F Filemon Vela TX-34 $542,157 61.79% -27.84 F Charlie Crist FL-13 $522,815 31.65% -24.59 F Sean Patrick Maloney NY-18 $514,857 31.15% -27.89 F Pete Visclosky IN-1 $514,704 64.94% -7.57 F Mike Quigley IL-5 $514,450 50.43% -0.23 D Nydia Velazquez NY-7 $511,465 64.32% 12.30 A Peter Welch VT-1 $510,850 75.76% 6.08 B Vicente Gonzalez TX-15 $507,333 53.89% -23.07 F Mike Doyle PA-18 $497,500 79.95% -11.32 F Brian Higgins NY-26 $493,849 61.85% -5.42 F Anna Eshoo CA-18 $487,930 39.66% 3.46 B G.K. Butterfield NC-1 $571,348 86.41% -5.24 F Brendan Boyle PA-2 $473,779 71.30% -6.76 F Maxine Waters CA-43 $469,590 35.46% 9.65 A Tom O'Halleran AZ-1 $467,227 40.80% -32.67 F Darren Soto FL-9 $456,611 58.54% -4.52 F Julia Brownley CA-26 $456,099 35.94% -20.44 F Robin Kelly IL-2 $443,350 65.46% 6.81 B Brad Sherman CA-30 $438,050 43.86% -1.10 D Tom Suozzi NY-3 $423,253 31.21% -26.26 F John Lewis GA-5 $421,297 15.72% 11.60 A Suzanne Bonamici OR-1 $419,323 52.94% 8.41 A Kathleen Rice NY-4 $417,750 35.70% -20.29 F Yvette D. Clarke NY-9 $417,392 59.52% 12.54 A Marcia L Fudge OH-11 $412,384 90.75% 7.03 B John Garamendi CA-3 $412,263 64.37% -4.79 F Jerry Nadler NY-10 $411,609 40.85% 11.65 A Katherine Clark MA-4 $406,520 50.18% 13.68 A Joe Courtney CT-2 $403,950 54.58% -3.70 F

Unless Trump goes to jail or dies he will be tweeting regularly undermining the new president and keeping his control over the Trump Republicans and racists.

Me too. I had it the other way but I hated Beto's healthcare stance.

TX-31 is Williamson and Bell. Beto won Williamson by 5,993 votes. The democrats are trending positive in Williamson using the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections for comparison. 2018-50.84% 2016- 41.59% 2012-37.90% For Bell he lost by 9,020 with the trend being 2018- 44.37% 2016-39.79% 2012-41.19% In 2018 Williamson had 208,221 voters and Bell 86,577. With about 25% more new voters expected in 2020 than 2018 and most of them coming form urban and suburban areas the number and percentage of Williamson voters will be higher in 2020. Making up a 4,027 vote deficit is very doable for a strong candidate. It is already a toss-up and should be, but with a a strong democratic candidate it could end up leaning democratic. Carter will also turn 80 in 2021. I suspect he will retire, which definitely would make it an open race .

To use nuclear in the time frame we want we cannot use the commercial reactor paradigm, but rather the naval nuclear reactor paradigm. Here are a few strategies to mitigate known problems. a. Make them at a few locations and small enough that they can be easily transported. The 250 MW to 350 MW size range works well for naval reactors. b. Lease them so that they are returned at the end of life and allowed to decay at a safe location for another 50 years or so before dismantling and reprocessing. c. To eliminate refueling outages and associated costs, design them to operate without refueling during their lifespan of 50 to 60 years. This will require using breeder technology to avoid using very high enrichment fuels. d. Using breeder technology (U and Th) extends the fuel supply to potentially thousands of years. e. Make them pressurized water reactors and use mono-block steam generators that do not need to be routinely inspected nor have tubes plugged. The clean steam that leaves the reactor compartment is used to power the generators. f. The generators can be built at central locations and transported and leased as well to minimize construction time and costs. g. By minimizing access points for maintenance the design can be simplified and have with fewer weak structural and security points. They can be designed for only one-time dismantling at the end of life. h. Design them to operate automatically with only a small number of skilled operators and no safety overrides. It should go without saying that the reactor design must be intrinsically safe. i. Make them watertight and mount them on barges to eliminate earthquake, environmental, and local construction concerns and problems. A body of water will still be needed for cooling so we might as well float the reactors and eliminate local construction as much as possible. Those are a few ideas about how I would do it if I were in charge of the project. This is still only part of the solution, but it is possible to increase the percentage of nuclear power.

2 million more people voting with the vast majority of them coming from the 10 biggest counties.

And Red Don.

That's ok, there are lots of Democrats who are right of center.

It will be more interesting to see how much gerrymandering gets unwound. In my list of the 71 closest Republican held districts a few states account for a high percentage of them; Texas, North Carolina, Michigan, Ohio, Florida, and California. Texas could shift 5 or 6 seats this time making the representation roughly equal as it should be. If the Texas house flips the nap may end up fair. North Carolina and Michigan should get fixed along with some other states where fewer seats are affected. A number of seats currently in Democrat hands will be made safer for Democrats. Ohio and Florida probably stay that way unless new Federal laws are passed or successful court challenges. California could pack Republicans into even fewer districts if they decide to fight back, but I doubt they will. I expect a 20 seat shift in 2022 due to fixed gerrymandering which will make it difficult for Republicans to gain many seats even if it is a midterm where they should.

If it was not for Watergate and the cover-up Nixon would have been the best Republican presidential of my lifetime. I sometimes still wonder if he was anyway.

My extrapolation was simpler. 8 million votes in Texas in 2012, 9 million in 2016, and 8.3 million in 2018. A minimum of 10 million is expected to vote in 2020. District 21s share if that increase is 35,000 to 70,000, but could be more if 11 million vote statewide. Then you add the 20,000+ new voters who replace old voters that died or moved. I consider 60,000 new voters in district 21 to be the minimum, with 70,000 being likely and 80,000 or more being possible. Roy won by 10,000.

350,000 voted in that district in 2016 and 2018. It will be 400,000 in 2020. At least 10,000 died and 10,000 moved so there will be 70,000 new voters in a district that is over 30% Latino. Almost all of those new 70,000 voters will come from Comal, Bexar, Travis, and Kyle counties. The Democratic percentage in those counties is going up over 3% every two years. Except Comal which has been flat due to non participation of Latino voters.

In the 2017-2018 school year in Texas students were 52% Latino, 12% AA, and 27% white. About 200,000 Latinos and 50,000 African Americans turn 18 every year in Texas. And the ratio of Latinos to whites that die every year is roughly the opposite.

In 2016 Texas swung further away from the Republican presidential candidate when compared to 2012 than every state except California. Texans did not buy into Trump then, unlike people from most states. I think they will buy into him even less now.

We wont see landslides in Texas for the next decade and when we do they will go the other way. I still feel pretty certain that it was the fact that the Kavanaugh hearings increased Republican voter enthusuasm that gave Cruz the extra 215,000 votes he needed to beat Beto. If the Republicans don't do something to similarly generate enthusiasm in 2020 their results will be significantly below 2018. That will have a bigger effect on house races.