Cruz vs Beto

[FondrenRoad 4378]

16 hours ago, MidTexHorn said:

As someone who voted Dem in reliably Republican Midland County, I think I can pretty safely say that more than anything folks out here are simply straight ticket Republican voters. They look at you like you're an absolute loon if you even suggest the idea of voting for anyone who's not a republican. I don't care how good the Democratic candidate was, or even how conservative he was, I think it would be nearly impossible to cut into that straight ticket margin.

I would list the issues that I heard discussed by all of my Republican friends and co-workers, in order, as follows:

1) Guns

2) Immigration/caravan (lots of subtle and not so subtle racism in these comments)

3) General jabs at liberals/SJWs/MeToo/liberal women/Kavanagh, etc.

I'm sure religious conservatism and abortion underlie a lot of the undying devotion to the Republican brand, but those weren't hot topics of discussion this go round.

If those 3 are really big issues to them, then of course you aren't going to get them to stop voting straight ticket R. Other than guns, the other 2 issues are the deplorable core.  And even guns are just an excuse really.  Like everywhere else, Midland is still 50% female. That's where Dems need to focus their efforts. 

[Jack Burton 35]

12 hours ago, Incredulity said:

I bet you have direct deposit.

Do you honestly ever look at your gross pay?  You think that income taxes are too low?

 

Yes I have direct deposit like 99% of people. I also can look up a payslip with one click of the mouse in Workday. Are you a teenager?

I, however, understand the necessity of taxes being collected for the public good on things I use, things others may use that require funding, and things I may need to use in an emergency. I don't scream or bitch about socialism cause of a 25-39% tax rate cause I know I'm better off than most.

[relapse98 634]

18 hours ago, bolverk said:

As someone who has many Facebook friends in the PB, I can affirm these were the three that seemed consistent. Well, that and "KEEP TEXAS RED!!!"

Well.. they failed pretty spectacularly on that one.

[RPM 26228]

8 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Now that he lost, his campaign promises don’t have the be kept from an ethnical standpoint.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13412]

5 hours ago, Jack Burton said:

Yes I have direct deposit like 99% of people. I also can look up a payslip with one click of the mouse in Workday. Are you a teenager?

I, however, understand the necessity of taxes being collected for the public good on things I use, things others may use that require funding, and things I may need to use in an emergency. I don't scream or bitch about socialism cause of a 25-39% tax rate cause I know I'm better off than most.

Yep.  One of the downsides of earning more money in your career is that the actual amount paid in taxes can get to be a large number even though you're not consuming more public services than a poor person.   In fact, the poor are most likely directly consuming more than the rich.

As incomes continue to become more unequally distributed, the tax burden on the better-off will grow even that much more.  It's not going to get better but worse.   People earning a high salary will need to get used to that.  The average salary in the US is 56K.  People earning less than that cannot contribute much.  

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

On 11/12/2018 at 5:12 PM, MidTexHorn said:

As someone who voted Dem in reliably Republican Midland County, I think I can pretty safely say that more than anything folks out here are simply straight ticket Republican voters. They look at you like you're an absolute loon if you even suggest the idea of voting for anyone who's not a republican. I don't care how good the Democratic candidate was, or even how conservative he was, I think it would be nearly impossible to cut into that straight ticket margin.

I would list the issues that I heard discussed by all of my Republican friends and co-workers, in order, as follows:

1) Guns

2) Immigration/caravan (lots of subtle and not so subtle racism in these comments)

3) General jabs at liberals/SJWs/MeToo/liberal women/Kavanagh, etc.

I'm sure religious conservatism and abortion underlie a lot of the undying devotion to the Republican brand, but those weren't hot topics of discussion this go round.

Those 3 reasons are in order in my experience as well, although i don’t discuss politics in group settings all that often.  

[Celery Man 20886]

 

[David Dennison 18656]

On 11/12/2018 at 10:16 PM, Incredulity said:

Is this the part where we get a lecture on the historical 90% rate?

What's your effective tax rate?

[Longhorn94 2427]

 

 

Edited November 15, 2018 by Longhorn94

[relapse98 634]

He's running.

[Longhorn94 2427]

3 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

He's running.

Literally.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

It was nice writeup.

 

HOWEVA, I started watching Jack Ryan on Netflix the other day and my eyes almost rolled out of my head at the opening shot of him rowing with the Jefferson Memorial or whatever behind him.  It has become so cliched in every political thriller now to have the protagonist going for a determined bit of exercise with the monuments passing in the background.  

[bolverk 29399]

SIAP here or elsewhere.

This is a really great 538 analysis on the Texas election:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-beto-orourke-shifted-the-map-in-texas/

Plus, a couple of nice infographics:

[Lagunamadre 1975]

1 hour ago, Longhorn94 said:

 

 

J. D. Salingeresque 

[David Dennison 18656]

24 minutes ago, bolverk said:

SIAP here or elsewhere.

This is a really great 538 analysis on the Texas election:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-beto-orourke-shifted-the-map-in-texas/

Plus, a couple of nice infographics:

This is very good news for Democrats. 

[Brandywine 1313]

Do you think Beto has a chance to beat Cornyn? I don't think Cornyn has had to sweat to win the Senate. It's been easy peazy. It would be great for him to actually be scared and have to try hard. But, I'd hate for Beto to do what he did against Cruz and lose again because of the forces against him. 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

5 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

Do you think Beto has a chance to beat Cornyn? I don't think Cornyn has had to sweat to win the Senate. It's been easy peazy. It would be great for him to actually be scared and have to try hard. But, I'd hate for Beto to do what he did against Cruz and lose again because of the forces against him. 

I think he'd lose worse. 

Two things:   

- Cornyn doesn't have the negatives Cruz has

- Cornyn has been such a fixture there that he has his own personality.  A vote for or against him would feel like a vote for or against him, as opposed to a proxy vote for or against Trump.  So you wouldn't get the same downward effect Trump apparently had on Cruz in Texas. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

3 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think he'd lose worse. 

Two things:   

- Cornyn doesn't have the negatives Cruz has

- Cornyn has been such a fixture there that he has his own personality.  A vote for or against him would feel like a vote for or against him, as opposed to a proxy vote for or against Trump.  So you wouldn't get the same downward effect Trump apparently had on Cruz in Texas. 

Also doubt Beto would get the same turnout of first time voters in 2 years. The energy wouldn't be the same. As strange as it sounds I think Beto would have a much better chance becoming president than senator (as long as he lives in Texas). 

[RayDog 682]

10 million Texans will vote in 2020. The Republican margin will be 1.1 million in the rural counties instead of 1 million as it was In 2016. In the urban and suburban counties there will be 1.7 million more voters. Will those 1.7 make up a 320,000 Republican rural advantage? Maybe.

The Republicans also lose a net 100,000 to 150,000 every 2 years due to deaths, so factor that in.

This year there was also an 8 point Democratic advantage among under 30 rural voters, so old rural voters voting 80% Republican are being replaced by voters who are less polarized. 

[LCHorn 2585]

I don't know why there's such a prevalent perception that Cornyn won't have his own negatives to contend with.  He'll attach himself wholly to Trump if he feels like he has to run in a competitive race. 

It's been repeated here ad nauseum, but the conservative coalition that Republicans relied on under GHWB and GWB has fallen apart.  It's been back filled by increasing voting homogeneity amongst evangelicals but both that population and the older MAGA types are dying faster than they can be replaced.  It's align with Trump or lose.  There's an argument to be made that Beto ran two or four (or more?) years too early, but no one could know until they had the data from an election to work with. 

Beto's success in a race against Cornyn probably requires someone who isn't alienating at the top of the ticket, which pretty much rules out all the coastal Senate candidates. 

[hayden_horn 11360]

16 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think he'd lose worse. 

Two things:   

- Cornyn doesn't have the negatives Cruz has

- Cornyn has been such a fixture there that he has his own personality.  A vote for or against him would feel like a vote for or against him, as opposed to a proxy vote for or against Trump.  So you wouldn't get the same downward effect Trump apparently had on Cruz in Texas. 

except that trump will actually (well, presumably) be on the ticket.

i generally agree with your analysis, though.

the only difference of opinion i may have is that while beto vs cruz was a bit of a referendum against cruz and trump (and we know nobody likes cruz), the democratic machine created by beto may actually help flip a few more representative districts, and may get more of the vote out. 

another thing to think of is that latinos may turn out in higher numbers for a presidential election. more voters = more democratic votes, i think. will that overcome the rural advantage?

i dunno.

right now, the situation is advantage: aggy.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

7 minutes ago, RayDog said:

10 million Texans will vote in 2020. The Republican margin will be 1.1 million in the rural counties instead of 1 million as it was In 2016. In the urban and suburban counties there will be 1.7 million more voters. Will those 1.7 make up a 320,000 Republican rural advantage? Maybe.

 The Republicans also lose a net 100,000 to 150,000 every 2 years due to deaths, so factor that in.

This year there was also an 8 point Democratic advantage among under 30 rural voters, so old rural voters voting 80% Republican are being replaced by voters who are less polarized. 

The changing demographics is a nice thing.  I think I saw we become .7% more bachelor degree'd every year.  And if you get get all the new voters from 2018 to vote again in 2020 (likely, voting a 2nd time is easier than voting the first time plus presidential vs midterm year) coupled with another get-the-kids-to-vote effort for the new 18 year olds, that's a pretty leftward swing in the overall vote.   

[Nice Guy Eddie 13412]

You can create a scenario where Beto has a good chance against Cornyn but like many said it seems like a longer shot than beating Cruz.  

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

13 minutes ago, RayDog said:

 

 The Republicans also lose a net 100,000 to 150,000 every 2 years due to deaths, so factor that in.

 

I think your numbers here are too high.  About 170,000 people die every year.  At about 50% vote rate, that is 85k.  If they go 2-1 R (that's what WaPo exit polls said), that is a net 28k loss per year.  So Rs would lose about 56k net votes by 2020.

[Your Mom 4797]

All this talk about the old right wingers dying off... the problem is every redneck in the 2 generations behind them has 5 kids.  I don’t know why but I see it in old aquaintences and in my own extended family.  The rural conservatives all have more kids than the urban liberals I know.   The olds are dying off but there are new right wingers turning 18 every day in large numbers.  

[Guest Lobo]

Beto got just 18% more votes than Noriega did against Cornyn in 2008, and that was peak Obama fever.  And  O'Rourke spent 15x more money than Noriega did.  Granted the state is more purple now than it was just ten years ago.  I know the supporters of Robby O'Rourke don't want to hear this, and maybe he can lean on his father-in-law for more tens of millions in cash, but he'd lose to Cornyn.

What should happen, what I'd love to see...since I can't stand our current Lieutenant Governor, is Beto versus Dan Patrick in 2022.  I know both will have likely moved onto other office goals.  You want to push back against red-state bullshit, you take on their poster child.  You run Beto against Dan Patrick.  That would be a sight.  

Beto loves the federal government too much though, so I know it'd never happen.  But I'll call my moonshot-Governor of Texas 2022 race:  Robby O'Rourke v. George P. Bush.  

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

3 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

All this talk about the old right wingers dying off... the problem is every redneck in the 2 generations behind them has 5 kids.  I don’t know why but I see it in old aquaintences and in my own extended family.  The rural conservatives all have more kids than the urban liberals I know.   The olds are dying off but there are new right wingers turning 18 every day in large numbers.  

It seems true, but the numbers don't really bear it out.  Exit polls said 18-29 year olds voted 69-29 Beto.  

 

 

[Your Mom 4797]

Good.   Maybe it’s just my warped circle of family and acquaintances but sometimes I look around  and wonder how we won’t end up living in caves again within a few generations. 

[RPM 26228]

4 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

The olds are dying off but there are new right wingers turning 18 every day in large numbers.  

This

 

2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I know the supporters of Robby O'Rourke don't want to hear this,

I see you are of the fake name conspiracy crowd.

3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

You run Beto against Dan Patrick.  That would be a sight.  

Don't you mean Danny Goeb? (if you're calling out fake names, at least be consistent)

[Guest Lobo]

Fake names?  His name is Robert F. O'Rourke.  Isn't it?  I grew up around more Irishmen than I can ever count.  Rob, Robby, Robert.  All just as acceptable as Beto.  His mama call him Robby, Imma call him Robby. 

And yeah, I think Dan Patrick changed his name.  He's also hiding his homosexual shame, so changing names is the least of our problems.  To the outside world, Lt. Gov. of Texas doesn't sound like much.  But Beto would have beaten him, actually led the state in a meaningful position, and knocked off the standard bearer for the Trump/Patrick/Hannity wing of the Party.  It would have been a victory on more levels than beating Cruz.  But it's unrealistic I know. 

 

But don't count out O'Rourke v. Bush for Governor in 2022.  

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

And his name is Barack HUSSEIN Obama!

[jimmyjazz 45558]

Beto needs to go national.  VP or P on the 2020 ballot.  He may not have foreseen a rise on the national radar the way it played out, but this is what is in front of him.  Strike while the iron is hot.

[RayDog 682]

17 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think your numbers here are too high.  About 170,000 people die every year.  At about 50% vote rate, that is 85k.  If they go 2-1 R (that's what WaPo exit polls said), that is a net 28k loss per year.  So Rs would lose about 56k net votes by 2020.

Over 65s vote at more like a 70% rate nationwide. There were over 189,000 deaths in Texas, so probably 200,000 is a realistic number now. Over two years, as I stated, 400,000 people will die with about 280,000 being voters. If you use the 2-1 number you get 93,000. 

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

I think one place where we differ is that the voting is much lower as they approach death.  That 70% is attributable to the healthy 70 year old, not the decrepit 92 year old.

[Guest Lobo]

^
I don't think you appreciate the motivational power of a complimentary bowl of soup served at the proper temperature. 

[jimmyjazz 45558]

1 minute ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think one place where we differ is that the voting is much lower as they approach death.  That 70% is attributable to the healthy 70 year old, not the decrepit 92 year old.

Most people don't live to 92.

[gmr548 16513]

538 analysis is interesting. Not necessarily anything we didn't know at a conceptual level, but good to see a well made visualization of the real numbers.

I'm surprised they didn't discuss Beto's underperformance in the Valley or how drastically the battle lines have shifted in the large suburban counties in just four years. Except Montgomery of course. They're swamp aggy for life.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[RayDog 682]

6 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think one place where we differ is that the voting is much lower as they approach death.  That 70% is attributable to the healthy 70 year old, not the decrepit 92 year old.

Even so you still have to consider when they stop voting on a rolling average. It does not change the end result.

[RayDog 682]

As I mentioned before from 2012 to 2016, while the states on average went 4.5% more Republican, Texas went 6% more Democratic. Texas had the second biggest Democratic shift behind California (not counting Utah).

The 2018 results largely fell on the same trend line in the largest counties. I expect that trend will continue through 2020. In real terms that means another net gain of 600,000 or so Democratic votes.

[Celery Man 20886]

Some percentage of the rural right wing kids get into college and move to civilization.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

And those 19-29 year olds start paying taxes, having families, and moving right.  

[Celery Man 20886]

lol

[UrbanAchiever 276]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

And those 19-29 year olds start paying taxes, having families, and moving right.  

I'm 40 [insert Mike Gundy rant here], have a family, and I'm as liberal as I was at 18. I don't mind paying more taxes if it means taking care of things the boomer generation of elected officials has spectacularly failed at, primarily addressing the exorbitant costs of college, health care, child care and housing. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, UrbanAchiever said:

I'm 40 [insert Mike Gundy rant here], have a family, and I'm as liberal as I was at 18. I don't mind paying more taxes if it means taking care of things the boomer generation of elected officials has spectacularly failed at, primarily addressing the exorbitant costs of college, health care, child care and housing. 

That’s great.  Most people move to the right as they age.  Just a fact.  

[Longhorn94 2427]

2 minutes ago, UrbanAchiever said:

I'm 40 [insert Mike Gundy rant here], have a family, and I'm as liberal as I was at 18. I don't mind paying more taxes if it means taking care of things the boomer generation of elected officials has spectacularly failed at, primarily addressing the exorbitant costs of college, health care, child care and housing. 

Same. but i will add the deficit, the debt, ya know all of the things the boomers are kicking down the road for someone else to pay for. SOMEONE will have to start being fiscally responsible at some point. It boggles my mind that Repubs think that when people grow up they will become less fiscally responsible like the Republican party. Adults pay their bills.

[Brisketexan 104613]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

That’s great.  Most people move to the right as they age.  Just a fact.  

They used to.

I'm genuinely surprised at how many of my peers (and even older folks) have shifted left (or, more accurately, have shifted in strong opposition to the hard lurch to the right we've seen by the Dan Patrick and Trump crowds).  The farther right the Patrick-Trump wing runs, the more centrist and center right folks they leave behind.

[Celery Man 20886]

It is possible that enough Ed Emmett types will start speaking sense for the party to the right of the democrats to get rebooted or replaced with a modern group that is actually defined by conservative ideals.  The GOP has been replaced by a party that is different than the one that people gravitate to as they get older and naturally more conservative.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

They used to.

I'm genuinely surprised at how many of my peers (and even older folks) have shifted left (or, more accurately, have shifted in strong opposition to the hard lurch to the right we've seen by the Dan Patrick and Trump crowds).  The farther right the Patrick-Trump wing runs, the more centrist and center right folks they leave behind.

The Dems have moved farther to the extreme than the GOP. By an order of magnitude.  

The Dems used to have blue dogs.  Now they don’t.  Bill Clinton’s 1996 platform is right of Trump.  JFK is even farther right.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Yes but the GOP has moved to Russia