2018 midterm gameday thread

['stache 21816]

11 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

You basically argued it was unfair that your friend lost an election because he is a nice guy and was winning by one run in the 4th inning. That’s a dumb take, whether or not you’re a never-Trumper.

Well technically, he claimed that his friend will lose because of VOTER FRAUD!!!!!  The nice guy stuff was just on top of his claim that he could only lose because of VOTER FRAUD!!! It sort of implies that because he's a nice guy he could only lose by VOTER FRAUD!!! Or maybe its proof because his nice guy friend could only lose because of VOTER FRAUD!!!! It's rampant, librul VOTER FRAUD!!!  So much proof of VOTER FRAUD!!!

[AtticusFinch 155]

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Have you been called a nazi or a racist?

You got negged (not by me) because you made a terrible post. You came in and declared that you intentionally don't look for information but you believe what you believe but you're willing to change your mind if you see some information that you intentionally try to avoid. It was a terrible post revealing a terrible mindset. Suck it up, buttercup.

I dont think I have.  I might have been and laughed.  I don't typically jump on people without knowing them which is the norm of many in here on the left.  My point was I dont look at accusations and automatically check them off as facts.  That is a responsible act.  Nowadays, if someone posts something on twitter or an article is written it is usually without substance, only opinion, innuendo and unverified sources.  I wait until all the facts are in.

Edited November 9, 2018 by AtticusFinch

[yoladu 4094]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Shag said:

I don't see what's so outrageous about calling him a good man.  I've known him for thirteen years.  We've worked together, socialized together...he's a good guy.

But you'd all rather assume he's a bastard because he's a Republican, and that if there's voter fraud, it must obviously because of the Republicans. 

Fuck yourselves.  You'll get six more years of Trump and like it.  

there is nothing outrageous about you calling him a good man, but it is irrelevant bulletpoint in your argument. don't be so sensitive.

Good men lose elections all the time. 

Edited November 9, 2018 by yoladu

[Dahobbs 17534]

3 minutes ago, AtticusFinch said:

I dont think I have.  I might have been and laughed.  I don't typically jump on people without knowing them which is the norm of many in here on the left.  My point was I dont look at accusations and automatically check them off as facts.  That is a responsible act.  Nowadays, if someone posts something on twitter or an article is written it is usually without substance, only opinion, innuendo and unverified sources.  I wait until all the facts are in.

Right, but you won't actually go and look for the facts, so they never arrive.

Now, here is a test. Do you use the same process for accusations that fit your political view? For instance, do you wait for facts showing actual voter fraud or do you simply accept the argument that it exists?  

[yoladu 4094]

1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

Sarcastic Trump is boring.

[AtticusFinch 155]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Right, but you won't actually go and look for the facts, so they never arrive.

Now, here is a test. Do you use the same process for accusations that fit your political view? For instance, do you wait for facts showing actual voter fraud or do you simply accept the argument that it exists?  

Well, as a lawyer I receive and read multiple publications on interesting case resolutions so I'm prob more informed than you are on how things really turn out around the country

[yoladu 4094]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

Really weird that large, populous counties often take the longest to count their votes.  I can't think of any reason why that would be the case...besides FRAUD.

you think it is really weird that county that has 750,000 votes takes longer to count their votes than a county like Union or Hamilton that have 4,500 total votes?

Edited November 9, 2018 by yoladu

[Js1 85342]

Good on the Arizona SOS (R) to release this statement.  It ain't fraud, you yokels.

Quote

Many people across Arizona, in the media, and across the United States are wondering why it takes so long to count ballots. So we wanted to take the time to explain the process.

 

In Arizona, there are 15 elected County Recorders and their elections divisions tabulate the ballots and upload them to the Secretary of State’s website.

The Secretary of State’s only role in this process is to display the results once they are uploaded by each county.

 

One of the major reasons it takes time to count ballots is that there are hundreds of thousands of early ballots dropped off at the polls on election day – approximately 320,000 statewide this time. The counties are currently working to verify the signatures on each and every one of those early ballots before they can be tabulated. Once the county election officials verify the signature on each of those ballots (which is no small task!), they then make sure that a voter didn’t cast an early ballot AND vote in person at a polling location. All of these processes take a little bit of time and is done to ensure that voters can trust the outcome of their elections.

 

Another reason it takes time to tabulate the ballots is to ensure the security of our elections. It comes as no surprise that the security of our elections is at the top of everybody’s mind right now. Arizona has made it a top priority to make sure that our critical election infrastructure is secure from any nefarious actors. Some of these new security measures do however slow down the ballot tabulation process. For example, in Maricopa County, the data cartridge from each voting machine at the polling locations is physically removed from when the polls close and securely transported to a central location. Once at the secure location, each and every cartridge is then tabulated. Previously, the data was transmitted over secure phone lines instead of physically moved. This, while more secure, does slow down the process.

 

Arizona takes elections seriously – from the poll workers to the county elections officials, and the Secretary of State’s office and everybody is working diligently to tabulate all of the election results in a manner that Arizonans can be proud of and, most importantly, trust the results.

 

[AtticusFinch 155]

7 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Right, but you won't actually go and look for the facts, so they never arrive.

Now, here is a test. Do you use the same process for accusations that fit your political view? For instance, do you wait for facts showing actual voter fraud or do you simply accept the argument that it exists?  

You mention voter fraud, here is a case you wont hear about unless you live in Hidalgo County. 14 people have been arrested for fraudulently moving voter registrations in the city limits of Edinburg to assist in local elections.  Fraud is everywhere. 

[Huckleberry 32861]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Good on the Arizona SOS (R) to release this statement.  It ain't fraud, you yokels.

 

Yes, that's a very good statement. And a big "fuck off" to the complainers.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Huckleberry

[Dahobbs 17534]

54 minutes ago, AtticusFinch said:

Well, as a lawyer I receive and read multiple publications on interesting case resolutions so I'm prob more informed than you are on how things really turn out around the country

Curious, in a conversation discussing jumping to conclusions without evidence, you choose to make several very interesting assumptions:

(1) You assume that lawyers are innately more informed about "how things really turn out around the country." I don't see any reason why that would be the case. Lawyers may be more qualified to provide legal analysis of certain factual situations (assuming it is within the lawyer's area of practice or proper research is done), but nothing about being a lawyer suggests you have greater access to the facts; 

(2) You assume that I'm not lawyer. 

Both of those assumptions are wrong.

Of course, the entire inquiry is also irrelevant. I never said anything about our relative levels of knowledge. I simply asked a question about whether your method of analysis changes depending upon your political biases. Given your willingness to make the assumptions above, it seems that you've demonstrated the answer:  "yes." 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Dahobbs

[Brew 3049]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Well technically, he claimed that his friend will lose because of VOTER FRAUD!!!!!  The nice guy stuff was just on top of his claim that he could only lose because of VOTER FRAUD!!! It sort of implies that because he's a nice guy he could only lose by VOTER FRAUD!!! Or maybe its proof because his nice guy friend could only lose because of VOTER FRAUD!!!! It's rampant, librul VOTER FRAUD!!!  So much proof of VOTER FRAUD!!!

When the current governor comes out with a statement that uses fraud 6 times in it and then sued two counties over suspected voter fraud, it’s not hard to see why the base gets worked up. Throw in Trump’s tweets and the R’s in FL are going hard in the paint to make the count invalid because there is a likelihood that result flips. Add Nelson suing the state and it’s a clusterfuck.

Again, voting should not be this hard and inconsistent. You can’t say there aren’t major issues when election workers are sitting around 3 days later making a determination as to whether a signature is legit.

My right to vote and the assurance that my vote is counted should be the same everywhere that votes are counted. This isn’t rocket science and anything that limits those rights should be a problem to everyone.

[atomheartbevo 89674]

2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

Something...something...everything...confession.  

[atomheartbevo 89674]

3 hours ago, 'stache said:

Republicans are so aggy.  If they lose they cry "voter fraud!" with no evidence whatsoever.  But actual voter suppression "stop whining losers!"

There is a reason why TexAgs as a whole loves Trump.  

[Gil Bang 25960]

CA update, if anybody's interested

 

 

[David Dennison 18860]

If Nelson ends up winning this election the right wing freak out will be oh so sweet.

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

If Nelson ends up winning this election the right wing freak out will be oh so sweet.

Billable hours by attorneys involved in this one race will probably equal the GDP of Guyana.

[Gil Bang 25960]

 

[dcar00 14210]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

Good on the Arizona SOS (R) to release this statement.  It ain't fraud, you yokels.

 

yes good on the SOS but how in the world do you have a process where someone can cast an early ballot AND show up in person and be allowed to cast a vote.  that is ripe for fraud.  would be interesting if they would say how many times this particular situation happened in this election or even previous elections.

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

yes good on the SOS but how in the world do you have a process where someone can cast an early ballot AND show up in person and be allowed to cast a vote.  that is ripe for fraud.  would be interesting if they would say how many times this particular situation happened in this election or even previous elections.

Texas allows the same thing. Both aren't counted. In Texas if you were registered for vote by mail and showed up to vote in person, you would be given a provisional ballot (unless you properly cancelled you mail in ballot). The provisional ballot is only be counted if no mail in ballot for the voter is received by the county. This is important because many people didn't actually receive their mail in ballot despite requesting it. While volunteering for the Democratic Voter Protection Hotline, I talked to several folks in Harris County in that position. Not allowing them to vote at all would have the perverse effect of taking away their vote due to an error (or even malfeasance) by the county. 

[Js1 85342]

 

[Js1 85342]

New batch was 5 points more D 

[Gil Bang 25960]

14 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

yes good on the SOS but how in the world do you have a process where someone can cast an early ballot AND show up in person and be allowed to cast a vote.  that is ripe for fraud.  would be interesting if they would say how many times this particular situation happened in this election or even previous elections.

They prevent the fraud by verifying that the person didn't live vote.  If you live voted, the mail ballot is tossed out. 

[dcar00 14210]

7 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Texas allows the same thing. Both aren't counted. In Texas if you were registered for vote by mail and showed up to vote in person, you would be given a provisional ballot (unless you properly cancelled you mail in ballot). The provisional ballot is only be counted if no mail in ballot for the voter is received by the county. This is important because many people didn't actually receive their mail in ballot despite requesting it. While volunteering for the Democratic Voter Protection Hotline, I talked to several folks in Harris County in that position. Not allowing them to vote at all would have the perverse effect of taking away their vote due to an error (or even malfeasance) by the county. 

I get provisional if that is what AZ has.  when does the mail in ballot have to show up?  by election day?  the AZ SOS also says that early ballots are dropped off at the polls.  why request a mail in if you are going to the polls?

I know it would cost more but this is so important people that request mail in ballots should maybe have to sign for them when they get them.

Does the mail in ballot have your name printed on it by the elections office?  just wondering because I have never requested a mail in ballot.

[Js1 85342]

5 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I get provisional if that is what AZ has.  when does the mail in ballot have to show up?  by election day?  the AZ SOS also says that early ballots are dropped off at the polls.  why request a mail in if you are going to the polls?

I know it would cost more but this is so important people that request mail in ballots should maybe have to sign for them when they get them.

Does the mail in ballot have your name printed on it by the elections office?  just wondering because I have never requested a mail in ballot.

I dunno, maybe someone just decided to drop theirs off on the way to work.  Maybe they were undecided until Monday/Tuesday.

[Gil Bang 25960]

4 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I get provisional if that is what AZ has.  when does the mail in ballot have to show up?  by election day?  the AZ SOS also says that early ballots are dropped off at the polls.  why request a mail in if you are going to the polls?

I know it would cost more but this is so important people that request mail in ballots should maybe have to sign for them when they get them.

Does the mail in ballot have your name printed on it by the elections office?  just wondering because I have never requested a mail in ballot.

OK, so this year my girlfriend didn't get her ballot done before election day, so she dropped it off at the polling place.  She was out of stamps and it was convenient.  No waiting in line, you just walk up and drop it in the box.  

I can't imagine having to sign for receipt of the ballot.  Some of us work for a living and aren't always around when the mail is delivered. 

The ballot doesn't have your name printed off, but the (return) envelope does, and you have to sign the outside of the envelope before you can return it. 

[Js1 85342]

And they do conduct signature verification in some states. 

[Js1 85342]

I've resigned myself to Nelson losing (a 2nd time, technically, bc he lost Tuesday night really).

But Sinema has to win.  The West will save us.  Flohio is a lost cause.

[dcar00 14210]

2 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

OK, so this year my girlfriend didn't get her ballot done before election day, so she dropped it off at the polling place.  She was out of stamps and it was convenient.  No waiting in line, you just walk up and drop it in the box.  

I can't imagine having to sign for receipt of the ballot.  Some of us work for a living and aren't always around when the mail is delivered. 

The ballot doesn't have your name printed off, but the (return) envelope does, and you have to sign the outside of the envelope before you can return it. 

got it.  as long as there is something from the elections office with your printed name on it that has to be with the ballot for it to be certified then it seems pretty foolproof. 

[dcar00 14210]

got to give it to Broward though.  they are the Cleveland Browns of running elections.

[Js1 85342]

5 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

got it.  as long as there is something from the elections office with your printed name on it that has to be with the ballot for it to be certified then it seems pretty foolproof. 

It is.

It's just slow - between signature verification and double checking the rolls to ensure no one voted twice by accident.  But I'd rather they do this diligence than just slap some results up and call it a day. In some counties, there may not even be a polling place on Tuesday.  There's a Ballot Replacement Center - for instance, it never arrived, damaged or destroyed - and you can receive a new one, complete it, sign it and then they verify signature prior to tabulation.

FYI, unlike California, ballots must be received BY ELECTION DAY @ 7pm.  They cannot just be postmarked on Election Day (like in California).  So someone who maybe decided on Friday/over the weekend had to take them in person to ensure arrival by the Tuesday 7pm deadline.

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Js1

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

Uh, yeah.  Rick Scott, Donald Trump and Marco Rubio are bitching about a Supervisor of Elections in Broward County that was appointed by......Jeb Bush. And Scott could have removed her in his 8 years as governor, but didn't:

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/rubio-wrongly-claims-florida-elections-being-stolen-10896660

 

 

Quote

Look, the Broward County Supervisor of Elections Office sucks. It screwed up in 2000, got caught breaking the law by deleting ballots in 2016, and is in full-scale chaos right now. Oft-embattled Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes says she has no idea how many provisional and absentee ballots are left to be counted in her office.

Quote

Though Rubio is correct that the Broward elections department absolutely sucks, the office has never been accused (credibly, at least) of tampering with election results or illegally tipping the scales toward one candidate. There's also zero evidence that the Democratic "lawyers" Rubio references are up to anything more nefarious than normal.

Rubio is also leaving out some really important details. For one, Snipes was a Jeb Bush appointee, so she's not exactly an obvious partisan. Two: The person in charge of election recounts at the state level is Secretary of State Ken Detzner, whom Scott appointed to the job. Detzner and Scott were repeatedly accused of working together to hatch schemes designed to suppress Democratic votes over the past eight years. It is, frankly, a blatant conflict of interest for Detzner to oversee Scott's recount, but Rubio isn't complaining about that here.

 

Quote

That hasn't stopped members of the right-wing-media echo chamber from repeating Rubio's bunk assertions. Federalist writer and reptile-creature Sean M. Davis already claimed today that the Democrats are "working to steal another election in Florida." It's unclear what he means by "another," because there's no evidence Democrats ever "stole" an election in the first place.

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Francisco 2.0

[Js1 85342]

Santa Cruz and Yavapai posted.  +8256 lead for Sinema.  Santa Cruz moved it further in Sinema's favor, Yavapai moved it back.  Less than 100 vote swing towards McSally.   McSally is not getting any swings in her favor from the counties she wants.  Especially with Pima, Maricopa and Coconino out.

[dcar00 14210]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

It is.

It's just slow - between signature verification and double checking the rolls to ensure no one voted twice by accident.  But I'd rather they do this diligence than just slap some results up and call it a day. In some counties, there may not even be a polling place on Tuesday.  There's a Ballot Replacement Center - for instance, it never arrived, damaged or destroyed - and you can receive a new one, complete it, sign it and then they verify signature prior to tabulation.

FYI, unlike California, ballots must be received BY ELECTION DAY @ 7pm.  They cannot just be postmarked on Election Day (like in California).

 

hmm. on the ballot replacement center..what if I say my ballot never arrived, go there, ask for a new ballot fill it out and then drop the other one at another location.  I realize they all go to the same location to be counted(I guess at least) but someone would have to verify that only one of the ballots count.

Its a lot of trouble, I agree, and there aren't going to be thousands of people trying to do that but it seems like a hole.

yeah California is a cluster all the way around.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

 

It's a little obvious to say "these senate seats are important" but they really are. 

 

Above is the 2020 senate map, and Rs don't have to defend a lot of states where you'd think things might go awry, especially in a presidential year, and you've got Ds defending Doug Jones in Alabama.  There's not a big risk of things swinging further right, but the Rs don't really have the sort of exposure Ds had this year despite the number of seats up.

[Js1 85342]

3 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

hmm. on the ballot replacement center..what if I say my ballot never arrived, go there, ask for a new ballot fill it out and then drop the other one at another location.  I realize they all go to the same location to be counted(I guess at least) but someone would have to verify that only one of the ballots count.

Its a lot of trouble, I agree, and there aren't going to be thousands of people trying to do that but it seems like a hole.

yeah California is a cluster all the way around.

If you request a new ballot, your old ballot # is immediately voided in the system.  I would assume the computer would kick it out during tabulation.

[G650 14257]

2 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

 

It's a little obvious to say "these senate seats are important" but they really are. 

 

Above is the 2020 senate map, and Rs don't have to defend a lot of states where you'd think things might go awry, especially in a presidential year, and you've got Ds defending Doug Jones in Alabama.  There's not a big risk of things swinging further right, but the Rs don't really have the sort of exposure Ds had this year despite the number of seats up.

Colorado and Arizona are definitely achievable for Dems, and Iowa and North Carolina are not impossible.

[lemonlime 5503]

Just now, G650 said:

Colorado and Arizona are definitely achievable for Dems, and Iowa and North Carolina are not impossible.

Also Maine.

[dcar00 14210]

Just now, Js1 said:

If you request a new ballot, your old ballot # is immediately voided in the system.  I would assume the computer would kick it out during tabulation.

oh so there is a computerized ballot # that is tied to your name in the case of requesting a mail in ballot?  didn't know that. I picture a blue hair at the BRC saying sorry yours didn't show up here is a new one, fer ya!

[Js1 85342]

6 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

oh so there is a computerized ballot # that is tied to your name in the case of requesting a mail in ballot?  didn't know that. I picture a blue hair at the BRC saying sorry yours didn't show up here is a new one, fer ya!

They have a unique number and a barcode on the inside.  So I'd imagine that # is tied to your voter registration.  So when you have to request a new one, they verify you're registered, void your first ballot number and issue you a new one.  Computer scans barcode during tabulation and rejects ones that were voided.

I think @Bateshornis/was an Arizona guy so he may know more about this.  Either way, it's clear the Republican SOS office of Arizona takes this very seriously and does their due diligence or it wouldn't still be going on.

Edited November 9, 2018 by Js1

[JBJ 3654]

The systen is designed to be a clusterfuck.  They either need to do 100% live electronic vote reporting directly from the polling machine, or wait until all votes are accounted for and unseal the reports all at once.

Going back in a close race and discovering new ballots is begging for controversy and corruption. 

If it were a 5% margin, were they planning to just not count all the votes?

Edited November 9, 2018 by JBJ

[FondrenRoad 4378]

7 minutes ago, G650 said:

Colorado and Arizona are definitely achievable for Dems, and Iowa and North Carolina are not impossible.

Jones is the only Dem in real danger, but even there, odds are good that the Tahoe GOP will nominate someone who is a complete piece of shit like Roy Moore which may give Jones a puncher's chance again.  In addition to the 4 states you mention, the Dems probably have a shot at Maine and Georgia also.  Louisiana can also surprise sometimes depending on what Dem is running.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Also Maine.

Oh yeah. I expect Spineless Susan to get bounced.

Hasn’t something like $3 million already been raised for her yet to be determined opponent?

THAT is actually a race where the Kavanaugh thing will be a factor, albeit two years later.

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

Jones is the only Dem in real danger, but even there, odds are good that the Tahoe GOP will nominate someone who is a complete piece of shit like Roy Moore which may give Jones a puncher's chance again.  In addition to the 4 states you mention, the Dems probably have a shot at Maine and Georgia also.  Louisiana can also surprise sometimes depending on what Dem is running.

Saw some noise that Sessions would want to possibly run for his old seat.  Just can't see that happening, for any serious candidates for a senate seat in 2020 is going to have to suck Trump's cock in public....and I just don't believe ole' Jeff will stoop that low.

Then again, Cruz did.  But he might also be a psychopath.

[Patrick Bateman 3916]

9 minutes ago, G650 said:

Colorado and Arizona are definitely achievable for Dems, and Iowa and North Carolina are not impossible.

Agree with this.  Colorado is a very gettable flip and maybe should be considered a most likely.  North Carolina has turned into a battleground state which Obama won.  Maine and Susan Collins is absolutely vulnerable.  Beyond that, it's all about the candidate.  I'd say Democrats look at Colorado, Maine, Zona, NC, Iowa, and Georgia as opportunities.  They'd love to run  a star from Kentucky to fuck Mitch McConnell up.  George Clooney doing anything?

[gmr548 16580]

 
It's a little obvious to say "these senate seats are important" but they really are. 
 
Above is the 2020 senate map, and Rs don't have to defend a lot of states where you'd think things might go awry, especially in a presidential year, and you've got Ds defending Doug Jones in Alabama.  There's not a big risk of things swinging further right, but the Rs don't really have the sort of exposure Ds had this year despite the number of seats up.

I'd think the way things are going Colorado is pretty sure to flip. Maine has to be a lean D too. Alabama will flip back R. Best case scenario for Republicans is holding on to one of CO or ME, more likely the latter, and keeping the count the same.

IA, GA, NC, and AZ will all be reasonably competitive. Would take a perfect storm for Ds to run the table on those and take the Senate outright but it isn't completely out of the question. I think a shift towards the Ds of 1-2 seats is most likely.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Bateshorn 9927]

11 minutes ago, Js1 said:

They have a unique number and a barcode on the inside.  So I'd imagine that # is tied to your voter registration.  So when you have to request a new one, they verify you're registered, void your first ballot number and issue you a new one.  Computer scans barcode during tabulation and rejects ones that were voided.

I think @Bateshornis/was an Arizona guy so he may know more about this.  Either way, it's clear the Republican SOS office of Arizona takes this very seriously and does their due diligence or it wouldn't still be going on.

Not an AZ guy, have an Aggie cousin that lives there.  I guess this is just par for the course.  It's not a fucked up situation like FL every year.  AZ just counts slow.

[Js1 85342]

16 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

 

It's a little obvious to say "these senate seats are important" but they really are. 

 

Above is the 2020 senate map, and Rs don't have to defend a lot of states where you'd think things might go awry, especially in a presidential year, and you've got Ds defending Doug Jones in Alabama.  There's not a big risk of things swinging further right, but the Rs don't really have the sort of exposure Ds had this year despite the number of seats up.

I think Gov. Bullock (MT) and John Hickenlooper (CO) will test waters on presidential bids and end up going for the Senate races.  Bullock has the honor of being a Democrat governor re-elected the same time Trump won the state in 2018.  Cory Gardner (CO) is target #1b, right behind Susan Collins.  Collins may not run in order to run for governor in 2022.

Democrats have to defend Jones (hard to do) and maybe worry a tiny bit about Peters (MI - he's so boringly generic), Shaheen (NH - she will be 73 in 2020) and Tina Smith (MN - running for full term but she just won by 11).  Otherwise, Oregon, NM, VA, NJ, DE, MA, CT, IL are safe.

Besides CO and ME, Democrats will seriously contest GA, NC, Iowa and maybe South Carolina (fuck you Lindsey you sniveling little bitch).  I'd pump some money into Kentucky too, because McConnell is DESPISED.  A Beto-type candidate could probably raise $80 million to take down Cocaine Mitch.  There's no Manchin 2.0 for WV, so I wouldn't even touch it, as tempting as having Ojeda run might be.

[G650 14257]

I still think GA is quixotic for Dems at this juncture.

[Gil Bang 25960]