2020 Senate Elections

[High Plains Drifter 10,979]

5 hours ago, Jive Turkey said:

Probably (hopefully) too little too late. 

 

 

That's one. Romney is two? How many more do we need to keep Felito from being confirmed to the supreme court.?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,414]

4 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

That's one. Romney is two? How many more do we need to keep Felito from being confirmed to the supreme court.?

I don’t read Susan Collins statement that she won’t vote to confirm a trump nominee now. She just is saying she thinks they should wait. That can be her opinion right up to the point as she’s voting to confirm the nominee next month, or in December after she loses.

Democrats have long read into Collins statements seeing what they want.

But since this is an election thread, let’s stick to the topic. a tough part for Collins will be in any remaining debates. I’m sure she will be asked by the moderator, town hall participant, or by her candidate on whether will she vote to confirm prior to the election or even in the lame duck session.  I doubt she can talk her way out of answering by stating her concerns or that she needs to look into it. Gideon needs to push for Yes/No.

all of the GOP senate incumbent candidates face these tough questions. I’m sure they’re scrambling to understand the impact of their answers. 

[Brandywine 1,313]

Susan Collins is your typical 2 face Republican. She’ll tell you what you want to hear and then do the opposite. I hope she gets voted out because she’s played these same games for too long. Which is why her seat is in such jeopardy. 

[G650 14,108]

5 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

That's one. Romney is two? How many more do we need to keep Felito from being confirmed to the supreme court.?

Murkowski is a no as well.

[GopherRock 1,765]

Wasn't Murkowski the other one who already said no to a pre-election confirmation?

Speaking of Alaska, that's a seat that could be a surprise flip. Al Gross has a hell of a resume.

[troph 24,563]

So what’s the score card based on polling now? Dems +4...? 538 shows dems slightly favored to take control of the senate.

[Pancho 44,487]

Someone posted that Act Blue link somewhere on this website (I think on this thread) and now I can’t find it. 

If y’all can repost that link, that’s would be great. 

[lemonlime 5,503]

nm

Edited September 20, 2020 by lemonlime

[lemonlime 5,503]

13 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Someone posted that Act Blue link somewhere on this website (I think on this thread) and now I can’t find it. 

If y’all can repost that link, that’s would be great. 

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/getmitch

[Biff Tannen 45,499]

Just got a campaign email from Amy McGrath claiming she is up 41-40 on Mitch.  That seems...unlikely.

[thepop 4,409]

10 hours ago, thepop said:

Not that he would win but yeah he has been neglected.

 

 

[lemonlime 5,503]

19 minutes ago, thepop said:

 

Probably worth donating to him, if you're going to donate.  At the least, force the Trumpublicans to spend resources in Mississippi of all places.

[Bevo14 8,274]

3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Just got a campaign email from Amy McGrath claiming she is up 41-40 on Mitch.  That seems...unlikely.

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

6 hours ago, Brandywine said:

Susan Collins is your typical 2 face Republican. She’ll tell you what you want to hear and then do the opposite. I hope she gets voted out because she’s played these same games for too long. Which is why her seat is in such jeopardy. 

No- her seat is in jeopardy because Maine is a blue state and she’s a republican and in the increasingly nationalized senate races those things don’t go together anymore. 

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

4 hours ago, troph said:

So what’s the score card based on polling now? Dems +4...? 538 shows dems slightly favored to take control of the senate.

Dems +3 and Biden being the tie breaker in a 50/50 senate- having control that way. They could win in IOwa or Montana or Georgia but that’s not likely ass of now. 4 pickups in AZ, CO, ME, NC and a loss in Alabama. Net +3. 

[Chuckie Finster 22,600]

Made my first political donation ever to Biden a few weeks ago. Now, just threw some money at Harrison, Greenfield, Gideon, and Cunningham. Don’t have as much disposable income as we used to thanks to Covid zapping my wife’s job, but fuck it. Ready to burn this motherfucker down.

[atomheartbevo 89,452]

7 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don’t read Susan Collins statement that she won’t vote to confirm a trump nominee now. She just is saying she thinks they should wait. That can be her opinion right up to the point as she’s voting to confirm the nominee next month, or in December after she loses.

If she loses, it's because she's in a blue state, and more importantly, Trump dragged her down.  This was a woman who won with 68% of the vote just 6 years ago, and thanks to Trump, she's got a decent chance of losing. Don't think she will be too keen on rewarding Trump getting her fired by confirming his pick.  

Her voting no, or saying she will, is one of the few ways she can try and help herself in the voting booth.  

She's 67, she's going to have to decide if she is beholden to the people of Maine, or to the GOP.  Voting yes, she will be a pariah in Maine, and she's got very deep roots in Maine.    Voting no will make her return back to Maine go amicably, but it will unleash Trump and the GOP on her.  Arguably, her political career would be over if she loses anyways, but a no vote and she could easily return to Maine and take a university position or something along those lines.   I remember a profile a while back that mentioned she was pretty heavily invested in working with a few universities in Maine.

[Biff Tannen 45,499]

40 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

8 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

 

If she loses, it's because she's in a blue state, and more importantly, Trump dragged her down.  This was a woman who won with 68% of the vote just 6 years ago, and thanks to Trump, she's got a decent chance of losing

Yeah, it’s a shame she had to make decisions against her will because of trump. If only she could have done something different. I guess spines don’t just grow on trees. 

[Brisketexan 104,631]

Yeah, it’s a shame she had to make decisions against her will because of trump. If only she could have done something different. I guess spines don’t just grow on trees. 

Yeah. Fuck her. She chose who to ride with.

“Ride with an outlaw, die with him," he added. "I admit it's a harsh code. But you rode on the other side long enough to know how it works. I'm sorry you crossed the line, though."

[Voldemort86 2,259]

I hardly ever say this about anyone..... 

 

but man I wish something bad would happen to McConnell where he couldn’t work anymore. The senate would be a much better place without that guy.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,414]

The senate is in a downward spiral that each time the majority flips, there is an increase of punishment of the now-minority. Either in their voice or actual voting. Court packing is feeling justified the way McConnell restricted nominations in Obama’s years and has opened the floodgates for trump. And his behavior with election year nominees.

if the Dems take the WH, senate and house, I would expect a punishment by packing the courts which may not be limited to scotus.

Which will then lead to the reverse happening when it flips back to gop control.  This is a cycle that is bad for America. Everyone feels justified in the actions because they want to hurt the other side for action X.

[atomheartbevo 89,452]

18 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yeah, it’s a shame she had to make decisions against her will because of trump. If only she could have done something different. I guess spines don’t just grow on trees. 

Like I said she was one of those Republicans in a purple/blue state, who were hoping to run out the clock with a Trump Presidency, and not have to make any direct decisions concerning him at the last minute, which a vote for his nominee is.  She wanted/tolerated his base, but thought she could get away without having to carry his luggage.

[totallynotabuttpirate 5,342]

11 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The senate is in a downward spiral that each time the majority flips, there is an increase of punishment of the now-minority. Either in their voice or actual voting. Court packing is feeling justified the way McConnell restricted nominations in Obama’s years and has opened the floodgates for trump. And his behavior with election year nominees.

if the Dems take the WH, senate and house, I would expect a punishment by packing the courts which may not be limited to scotus.

Which will then lead to the reverse happening when it flips back to gop control.  This is a cycle that is bad for America. Everyone feels justified in the actions because they want to hurt the other side for action X.

Umm...The republicans have already packed the court for 50+ years. There's literally nothing to lose for Democrats. 

[Horn Dog 9,674]

31 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The senate is in a downward spiral that each time the majority flips, there is an increase of punishment of the now-minority. Either in their voice or actual voting. Court packing is feeling justified the way McConnell restricted nominations in Obama’s years and has opened the floodgates for trump. And his behavior with election year nominees.

if the Dems take the WH, senate and house, I would expect a punishment by packing the courts which may not be limited to scotus.

Which will then lead to the reverse happening when it flips back to gop control.  This is a cycle that is bad for America. Everyone feels justified in the actions because they want to hurt the other side for action X.

Don’t start none won’t be none.  But since it’s been started and its a full blown gun fight now thanks to McConnell, objective one is kill the opponent.   Pack the courts, add the states, expand HOR representatives, address voter suppression.  Sure the GOP will one day hold all 3 levers of power, but hopefully when that happens in 100yrs, they will be a different entity.

[Gil Bang 25,898]

 

5 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Just got a campaign email from Amy McGrath claiming she is up 41-40 on Mitch.  That seems...unlikely.

Among Registered Lesbians.

[Gil Bang 25,898]

On a serious note:  Statehood for DC and/or PR

So each would get 2 senators.  How about the house?  How many reps?  Congress stays at 435, so somebody loses a congressman for them to get one, correct?

[Horn Dog 9,674]

6 hours ago, lemonlime said:

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/getmitch

Shit.... there goes another $100.   Fund is over 20 million now

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,093]

On a serious note:  Statehood for DC and/or PR
So each would get 2 senators.  How about the house?  How many reps?  Congress stays at 435, so somebody loses a congressman for them to get one, correct?

We need to expand the HoR. 435 isn't enough.

[tx 3 putt 76,409]

I haven’t seen any R say they’ll vote ‘no’, only they prefer to wait until after the election.

 

[thepop 4,409]

They listened. I don't know when they distribute funds. Not sure if the 20 million raised includes Espy or everything raised after 20 includes Espy.

 

Edited September 20, 2020 by thepop

[thepop 4,409]

Side note, the phrase "don't judge a book by its cover" does not apply to Cindy Hyde Smith, because one look at her and you know she's racist.

[Ghost of LL 15,492]

Explain. That wasn’t my sense and I’ve spent all of 30 seconds reading about it/thinking about it. I’m interested in being informed. 

PR politics is entirely about the question of statehood/continued commonwealth status. The two parties in PR split on that issue.

The PNP is the larger of the two parties, and is pro-statehood. But the politics on other issues tends to be conservative. Broadly speaking, it would be more in line with the GOP.

The PDP supports continuing PR’s current status. And it tends to be the bore liberal of the two parties. But it is out of power, largely because of its position on statehood.

Puerto Ricans on the island tend to be relatively conservative. They’re heavily church-going and traditional. But, it has to be noted, that Puerto Rican’s tend to vote Democratic once they move to the mainland (with the possible exception of South Florida, where they get subjected to the Cuban-dominated Spanish-language mass media, which is just this side of Q in its craziness).

So it’s really tough to predict how PR would vote as a state.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[totallynotabuttpirate 5,342]

1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

So it’s really tough to predict how PR would vote as a state.
 

Sounds like it's a good idea to not find out then. 

[Ghost of LL 15,492]

Sounds like it's a good idea to not find out then. 

Well, if your sole criteria is partisan politics, I would agree.

But I happen to think that it has put up with enough shit, and inasmuch as a significant majority of its citizens want statehood, fairness dictates that it be granted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[totallynotabuttpirate 5,342]

Just now, Ghost of LL said:

Well, if your sole criteria is partisan politics, I would agree.

But I happen to think that it has put up with enough shit, and inasmuch as a significant majority of its citizens want statehood, fairness dictates that it be granted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's about more than partisan politics. If PR somehow helps republicans, it will just allow them to screw more people than they are now. So they might have to remain suffering, so that millions more are spared. 

[thepop 4,409]

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,151]

I think if we were able to raise as much money for education based charities as we do for campaigns there wouldn’t be a need for all these political donations. 

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

2 hours ago, totallynotabuttpirate said:

It's about more than partisan politics. If PR somehow helps republicans, it will just allow them to screw more people than they are now. So they might have to remain suffering, so that millions more are spared. 

So in other words exactly about partisan politics as your sole stated justification is harming the GOP. Which is literally what the definition of partisan politics is. 
it’s ok- own it- you are almost all the way there. 

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

49 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I think if we were able to raise as much money for education based charities as we do for campaigns there wouldn’t be a need for all these political donations. 

A couple billion doesn’t really go as far as you’d think it would, honestly. That works out to like $24 per kid or something equally pointless. Let’s say you only want to target the bottom quarter- that’s like $100 per kid. 
you’d certainly hope that private charity could spend the money better than the government- but not that much better. You are talking about asking for miracle of loaves and fishes there. 

[totallynotabuttpirate 5,342]

9 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

So in other words exactly about partisan politics as your sole stated justification is harming the GOP. Which is literally what the definition of partisan politics is. 
it’s ok- own it- you are almost all the way there. 

Yeaa....... no.......... it's about avoiding to help the party that is out do shit like destroying healthcare and shit like that. I never said anything about the Democrats. 

Would you like me to go on? 

Edited September 21, 2020 by totallynotabuttpirate

[Brisketexan 104,631]

 

I want to do more than rattle him. I want to bury his hypocritical, closeted, spineless, sycophantic, ladybug-laden ass. End his fucking career. Let his entire line in the history book be “another spineless weasel who couldn’t wait to kneel and suck in supplication. He’s not even uniquely pathetic.”

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

3 minutes ago, totallynotabuttpirate said:

Yeaa....... no.......... it's about avoiding to help the party that is out do shit like destroying healthcare and shit like that. I never said anything about the Democrats. 

Would you like me to go on? 

You aren’t getting what I said- that’s literally the definition of partisan how you framed your response twice now in stopping the gop. You had a because. The because doesn’t matter, it’s still partisan.  Now, most Americans are partisans at their core and come from partisans so this is not a critique but rather an observation. 

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I want to do more than rattle him. I want to bury his hypocritical, closeted, spineless, sycophantic, ladybug-laden ass. End his fucking career. Let his entire line in the history book be “another spineless weasel who couldn’t wait to kneel and suck in supplication. He’s not even uniquely pathetic.”

I don’t know. I think his situation is somewhat unique. I seriously think Trump has blackmail material on him. 

[totallynotabuttpirate 5,342]

8 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

You aren’t getting what I said- that’s literally the definition of partisan how you framed your response twice now in stopping the gop. You had a because. The because doesn’t matter, it’s still partisan.  Now, most Americans are partisans at their core and come from partisans so this is not a critique but rather an observation. 

What the fuck are you going on about.  Partisan, in most definitions requires a "blind" adherence to some principle or party. Nothing that I said indicates I'm blindly advocating anything. 

Also, who gives a flying fuck about it?  

Are you going to tell me next that facebook doesn't employ any humans? 

Edited September 21, 2020 by totallynotabuttpirate

[Wulaw Horn 18,983]

2 minutes ago, totallynotabuttpirate said:

What the fuck are you going on about.  Partisan, in most definitions requires a "blind" adherence to some principle or party. Nothing that I said indicates I'm blindly advocating anything. 

Also, who gives a flying fuck about it?  

Are you going to tell me next that facebook doesn't employ any humans? 

Dude- partisan means as its primary definition, a strong supporter of a party or cause. 
LL said he supports PR statehood as a principal of fairness for PR outside of any partisan aims and you said you don’t support it if it in any way helps the GOP. Which is literally the definition of partisanship. Which he was pointing out and which I agreed with. It’s literally in the definition, and then you answered by incorrectly defining the word. Or at least using what is at best a tertiary definition by adding a word like “blind” adherence which isn’t actually in the definition. 
I expanded on my tech post and immediately said my initial post was bad and apologized for trying to put out a half baked thought while I was multi tasking at work, but whatever, man. This is like the definition of mean, median and mode to all be properly thought of as average. 
just say you are for PR statehood of it fits your partisan agenda and against it if it doesn’t. Because that’s true. It’s up to you if you find partisanship distasteful but as I said- it’s definitionally what you are talking about here. 
feel free to have the last word. 

[totallynotabuttpirate 5,342]

8 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Dude- partisan means as its primary definition, a strong supporter of a party or cause. 
LL said he supports PR statehood as a principal of fairness for PR outside of any partisan aims and you said you don’t support it if it in any way helps the GOP. Which is literally the definition of partisanship. Which he was pointing out and which I agreed with. It’s literally in the definition, and then you answered by incorrectly defining the word. Or at least using what is at best a tertiary definition by adding a word like “blind” adherence which isn’t actually in the definition. 
I expanded on my tech post and immediately said my initial post was bad and apologized for trying to put out a half baked thought while I was multi tasking at work, but whatever, man. This is like the definition of mean, median and mode to all be properly thought of as average. 
just say you are for PR statehood of it fits your partisan agenda and against it if it doesn’t. Because that’s true. It’s up to you if you find partisanship distasteful but as I said- it’s definitionally what you are talking about here. 
feel free to have the last word. 

The term is mostly used with the indication of blind adherence or the like. That's the appropriate use, imo. 

If you want to be pedantic about it, the more broad application of the term would apply to everything and everyone on this planet. Do you strongly believe you should live and not be murdered? That's a partisan belief.  What about the right to freedom of expression?? Also a partisan belief. There's no belief that couldn't be considered partisan, in that definition. If you strongly believe in fairness for the people of PR, that's a partisan belief. And on and on.....

 

Edited September 21, 2020 by totallynotabuttpirate

[lemonlime 5,503]

 

3 hours ago, thepop said:

They listened. I don't know when they distribute funds. Not sure if the 20 million raised includes Espy or everything raised after 20 includes Espy.

 

I donated to them Friday night.  At least at that point, it didn't include Espy.  But it showed up as multiple charges to various candidates---i.e $10 to Greenfield, $ 10 to Jones, $ 10 to Harrison, etc.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,151]

54 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

A couple billion doesn’t really go as far as you’d think it would, honestly. That works out to like $24 per kid or something equally pointless. Let’s say you only want to target the bottom quarter- that’s like $100 per kid. 
you’d certainly hope that private charity could spend the money better than the government- but not that much better. You are talking about asking for miracle of loaves and fishes there. 

It would still be a better use of the money than giving it to any career politician. 

[atomheartbevo 89,452]

3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

So it’s really tough to predict how PR would vote as a state.

Would Trump's, and by proxy the GOP's, attitude towards them during their recent encounters with natural disasters influence that?

[atomheartbevo 89,452]

2 hours ago, thepop said:

 

49 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I don’t know. I think his situation is somewhat unique. I seriously think Trump has blackmail material on him. 

I still wonder about the blackmale angle as well.

And the irony is that Graham probably wouldn't be having his election problems if it were somebody else in office.  Guy won by almost 17% in his last election.  That's a massive turnaround.