Jump to content

Huckleberry

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    13691
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    21

Posts posted by Huckleberry

  1. 3 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

    Now think about Texas, 15% margin for Romney, 9% margin for Trump and 2.5% margin for the Weasel. I see a trend and the right candidate can win this thing in 2020 and for sure in 2024 if the republican party continues down the Trumpkin track.

    You skipped Cornyn's 27% win over Alameel. Just sayin'.

    But you're absolutely right in terms of high turnout elections.

  2. Harris County totals:

    Straight Ticket Republican - 408,413
    Straight Ticket Democrat - 511,282

    Ed Emmett total - 572,816
    Lina Hidalgo total - 590,524

    Non straight ticket totals:

    Emmett - 164,403
    Hidalgo - 79,242

    Emmett is correct that straight ticket voting cost him the election. 2020 is going to be a different landscape in Texas once there is no more straight ticket, but it's not necessarily going to help just one of the parties in every race.

    For a comparison and because we're in this thread:

    Non straight ticket Cruz - 87,538
    Non straight ticket O'Rourke - 121,679

    So there are people who actually voted based on the race in Harris County, just not nearly enough in Emmett's case.

    • Like 1
  3. 2 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    Straight ticket voting in Harris county was a lot of that.  It also ousted Ed Emmett for a 27 year old with no experience.  We are fucked in the case of a Hurricane.

    I hope that there will be enough people around her that will quietly call Emmett and ask for advice if necessary. Hidalgo herself doesn't strike me as someone with the wisdom to do that, but I'm hoping career public servants help her out. You are still quite right that this is the absolute worst result of the night personally for those of us in Harris County.

    • Like 2
  4. 3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

    VBM in California.  Everything just had to be postmarked by Tuesday.  I would bet some of these races may not be called until Thanksgiving-ish.

    Oh yeah, anyone have any data on number of ballots expected by mail and their usual split?

  5. 2 minutes ago, Whitman said:

    We all have our lines, whether they are rational/logical or not.  Heck, there are people on this board who would not bang Carrie Underwood because she is an Okie. That' sir, is commitment to hatred there....

    Those people have never heard of the term "hate fuck."

  6. 1 minute ago, Foosters said:

    Yes. I'm aware of that. We're precluded from voicing criticism because that was it's intent? 

    No, you're precluded from voicing inaccurate criticism. What you want to do is abolish the Senate, so say that.

  7. That's the entire point of the Senate you doofuses (I wish it was doofi).

    Complain about the House. Right now there are 1,050,493 Montanans (and 961,939 Delawareans) and one Representative while there are only 529,820 Rhode Islanders (and 579,315 Wyomingites) per Representative.

    • Like 1
  8. Because that's what was circled in the infographic posted?
    And?

    The data is easily available. Your analysis based on the Senate votes appears to be contradicted by the House numbers. That's all I'm saying. It's not like it's a landslide but there are clearly more Democratic votes tonight than Republican votes.
  9. 18 safe Dem seats in large states vs 4 safe Republican seats in small states. That popular vote is not good for Dems.

     

    There are approximately 2.4 million more D votes in House races than R votes so far. Not sure why you're trying to adjust and unskew based on Senate races, it's completely unnecessary. Approximately all of the 435 House seats were up for election tonight.  

     

     

  10. 4 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

    Well fuck it, just let everyone on earth claim asylum.   Maybe we can annex their countries while we’re at it to provide more and better opportunities to spread our wealth and influence more equally once we start running out of space 

    Our asylum policies are based on international agreements and treaties to which we are a signatory.

    Just admit you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to asylum, go read, then make an argument.

    • Like 1
  11. Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Maybe Trump will start pushing a liberal agenda to keep the heat off him.

     Lord knows he can get the Republicans in the Senate to rubber stamp literally anything.

    Just yesterday he said that Obamacare and coverage for preexisting conditions are good.

  12. 1 minute ago, Trey3216 said:

    So like applying for asylum and then making a journey.  Or requesting a visa and then coming.  Or coming here, working, and documenting yourself daily (Lot Of that on the border).  

    Why is it a must that our country should have the most slack-jawed immigration laws on earth?   It’s not an absolute chore to get in this country 

    Our asylum laws literally require the claim to be made after or while entering the country. Please make an effort to understand the law you're talking about.

  13. 4 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

    I really don’t think it is tbh.  Most GOP folks want people to be documented and accounted for in the proper manor.  I fully support people being able to come here, but go through the channels.   My ancestors did.   It’s not racist or heartless to ask for documentation.   

    Were you asleep when the current administration developed policies to examine and deport legal and fully documented immigrants or to examine naturalized citizens and potentially remove their citizenship?

  14. 3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

    Meh. My vote appears it’ll take care of it. 

    You clearly don't understand how the asylum process works. You should really try to learn something, it might be fun.

  15. Just now, fattyflattie said:

    Yeah, too bad “my country sucks, I’d like to come bum in yours” isn’t a good enough excuse.  Catch the first thing smoking back amigo, safe travels.  

    No, that's not what the applications say. You're going to have to try harder, put a little thought into your arguments, and bring something reasonable to the conversation. There are valid reasons to oppose asylum for these people, but so far you haven't hit on any of them.

    Keep trying, you might get there yet.

  16. 1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

    Well, most of the Hispanics I know don’t give a fuck about an illegal, unless they missed that spot in the yard again. But I’d guess that’s it?  Their kin from another country that doesn’t want to put in the time to come here legitimately defines their politics?  Seems ignorant af but whatever.  I was asking a serious question, thanks for the smart ass reply.   Oh yeah, those same Hispanics put their Catholic values pretty far ahead of cheap labor, but I’m obviously not a pollster. 

    Speaking of ignorant, you realize that the caravan shows up and applies for asylum, right? You know, putting in a bunch of time to go about the legitimate way to come here.

    You were saying?

    • Like 2
  17. Just now, fattyflattie said:

    Question to the Dems; why the assumption that  Hispanic votes are so blue?  60 and 66% is good but well short of damning. If even 5% of that is lost to the Red, say I don’t know, on an issue such as abortion/religion, you would be further fucked (in Texas).  Why not more emphasis on getting the AA vote #’s up, which are slam dunk Blue? 

    Can you think of any reason at all that Democrats might not be currently worried about losing Latino votes to Republicans? Any at all?

×
×
  • Create New...