bigsky, do you think Sen. Tester will be able to hang on to his seat?
Printable View
bigsky, do you think Sen. Tester will be able to hang on to his seat?
bump
Yes. Matt Rosendale is unlikeable and from Maryland. Tester is a folksy high-line farmer/rancher with overwhelming outside money.
We needed a better R, Judge Russ Fagg, but Rosendale beat him in the primary with lots of outside money.
Hey, we Kentuckians have to hold our nose and vote for McConnell and the rest, you guys have to step up. ;)
I agree, citizen, but I’m giving my realistic assessment. The national pundits put way too much emphasis on Trump’s margin of victory — in the same election we elected a Democrat Governor.
Oh, I get it and I appreciate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsky
The measures like "this guy won by x so that means y" are all meaningless. Tip O'Neill said it best: Congressional politics is local politics. People still vote for the candidate, at least the people who decide the outcomes, so it's all about the candidates more than their affiliation, at least to a large degree.
It's true areas that are deep red or blue will be difficult to flip, but much of the nation is more in the middle and then it comes down to the local race and who is running.
In Ky 6 the Dems got a retired Air Force pilot and woman to run. now she's Democrat right down the national party line and her undoing if she loses will be that she went out and got caught on audio at Hollywood fundraisers promising how liberals she'd be, but her overall persona is a good sell here. Veteran, woman, it's a good pitch.
And in truth many if not most voters are basically clueless. That's why ad money and name recognition are so important, b/c people vote for candidates in large part the same way they pick their toothpaste or laundry detergent. They've heard that name before and have some vaguely positive or negative impression and that's how they vote.
So I get you, totally, but it's also depressing. Still, you're highly influential out there, so get everyone to hold their nose and do the right thing.
Gotta hold the Senate, that's more important than punishing carpetbaggers. ;)
This is what Wyoming Alan Simpson told me, “I have held my nose and voted for some jerks in my time, but they were my jerks”.
Thanks for the boots on the ground assessment.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsky
Man, I miss Alan Simpson. Not many of the old school guys left. Grassley is one of the few considered people still left in the Senate, but he's in slim company.
no different than Floridians who will do the same when voting for Rick Scott to hopefully unseat Bill NelsonQuote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
Yep. We have to do our part, b/c they're all jerks, better to have jerks there who are closer to our views.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
BTW, my biggest disappointment is the people of Alaska. One of the last bastions of rugged individualism has put a RINO in as their representative, and I just don't get it. She's the weak teat on this mama cat and has been for a long time on many issues.
I'm not sure she is a RINO....closer to a blue dog democratQuote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
No argument. I don't get it. I know Alaskans have their oil welfare program, but you'd think people who live in that environment by and large would prize a true limited government representation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
I know the state well. The problem in Alaska is who wields the power. The smaller the state, the easier it can be for a few political forces to join together and control things. There is a Pastor up there who has a megachurch. He is the Fallwell of the state (and in fact sits on the Board of Directors at Liberty University). He wields tons of political power. He marches candidates onto the stage at his church on a "Politics Sunday". And everyone knows if you don't go you can't win.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
And in 2010, Murkowski didn't go. The Pastor there clearly favored a different candidate. And that election was basically the two parts of the Republican Party going head to head. And Murkowski won as a write in candidate.
As you said, Alaska is a very libertarian state. But they take that VERY seriously. Meaning, if a Republican is too socially conservative, they take that as anti-libertarian. So a moderate Republican like Murkowski will often have a difficult time in the primary, but has won 3 times in the general.
Frankly, I wish we had more "moderate" Senators on both sides of the aisle.
I'm all for putting in 100 Libertarians. :)
And I may not agree with the moderate view on everything, but I can live with it. But she's not really a GOP moderate at all, at best she's a Democrat moderate, but I'm not convinced she is that either.
I could live with Bob Dole but she seems to at best be a Joe Lieberman, and doesn't seem to have the insight of either of those guys.
It's not like McConnell is a radical, or any of the other GOP Senate leadership. Grassley is very mainstream, and so is this candidate before the Judiciary Committee. Honestly Trump has done a good job putting up very acceptable candidates for all these judiciary positions, despite him being far more extreme in many areas. There's no reason a moderate Republican should have any issues with any of these candidates, but she was weak on it even before any issues emerged.
So far the Senate hasn't tried to do anything that's even close to outside the GOP mainstream, yet they've had to drag her and a couple of others along every time. Heck, they haven't even tried to fund the wall, or change immigration to a merit based system, etc.
This is a very cool website. It allows you to compare voting records of Senators with an easy drop down menu.
So, I compared Murkowski with Ted Cruz (since he is most definitely not a moderate Republican). They voted the same 91% of the time.
Grassley, by comparison, voted with Cruz 95% of the time. So, at least in the same ball park.
On the flip side...Her voting record in comparison to just about any Democrat is way different.
With Kamala Harris - 31%
SHerrod Brown - 42%
Bob Casey - 45%
McCaskill - 58%
Just for fun, I also did McCaskill (since she is a moderate) with Cruz = 52%
Anyways, I thought it was fun to look at. Based on her voting record and comparison, she is definitely a Republican and Conservative. A moderate one...yes, but one nonetheless.
https://projects.propublica.org/repr...e-grassley/115
The problem with that measure would be if it measures all votes equally b/c in truth most Senate votes are procedural and very safe. But I'll check it out b/c I'm curious, and it is a neat concept for sure.
I have thoughts on our other thread as well, but just too busy tonight to write them down, lol. But I wanted to mention on both topics I really enjoy your considered and thoughtful posts. I'm enjoying the discussion immensely. :)
There are also sentors and representatives that are just publicity whores. They put out this "I'm undecided" for the attention (and often so they can be influenced with campaign contributions). Ever notice its always Collins, McKaskill, Paul, Flake and formerly McCain.
Jon Tester of Montana too, Doc.
The problem in low population states like Montana and Alaska is the a few urban centers can negate the rural population's wishes.
Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane in this case talks in Montana like a Montanan, Votes in DC like Nancy...Pelosi
Rosendale making a push
link
No doubt the Kavanaugh issue will rally the GOP, whip up the base.
I always doubt how much national talk plays in the local and state elections, but I do think the Democrats are making a huge mistake to go on record saying if they win they will investigate and even impeach Kavanaugh if he is seated on the bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
that only encourages GOP turnout, giving people even more reason to keep the GOP in power.
Yep, Dems are giving people a reason to get out and vote for the GOP.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
The idea of impeaching a sitting Justice over these claims is highly disturbing.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithKSR
Its all posturing. He's going to get confirmed and he won't be impeached. Like I've been saying, them doing this FBI investigation hurts the Dems cause...not helps. I'm not sure who is making the calls on that side, but it was a poor one. Btw, I thought the same of the Republicans fighting it. They should have just made this one week deal all along.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
I also don't get why they're calling for impeachment. Maybe they think it helps their base get motivated, i.e. if they win they can reverse this, but it also pumps up the GOP base easily as much as they see it as a threat. In fact usually threats work better, so it may help the GOP more.Quote:
Originally Posted by ukpumacat
But I still find the call for it disturbing. I find the calls for impeachment disturbing at this point for Trump as well, just as I have when the fringe wing of the GOP has done it for Democratic Presidents. I wasn't for impeaching Clinton either. He's a louse, and certainly a self absorbed womanizer, and maybe rapist, but there wasn't enough there from just his perjury to impeach a sitting President, and it wasn't going to happen so why go through the process and distract from important business? Many Republicans felt that way as well, I think it hurt the GOP as much as helped.
I also agree the FBI week investigation thing only helps the GOP, even with the subsequent calls it wasn't thorough. Those calls ring a lot more hollow with at least some kind of FBI process.
Politicians and their circle of advisers and washington power brokers get way too much inside their own bubble, as does the media that covers them. They lose sight of the core issues the voters care about, like jobs, health care, housing, etc. They care about getting through their lives, not about these dog and pony shows. Other than the hard core, and they don't decide many elections b/c they don't ever vote different anyway.
Washington folks spend way too much time naval gazing. The voters tune it out to a large degree, and will here IMO.
It takes 2/3 vote of the senate to impeach, I don't see that happening.
Tester is a no vote on Kavenaugh. Strengthens his base, but many moderate Rs are like me, aghast at the public lynching of Cavenaugh, and that wont help Tester.
House can send the impeachment though, and that's what they would try to do if they won the House. Simple majority, if they have both they can drag that crap out as a spectacle even though he'd never be removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithKSR
Same as Clinton. The votes were never there, only reason to do it is to make a political scene, and it is myopic b/c the voters don't care.
Not sure I agree with what I bolded. People have their minds made up, and the ones that don’t are pissed. I wouldn’t say they are indifferent at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
The Clinton impeachment backfired in a big way. I suspect any impeachment attempts by the Dems would be disastrous in 2020.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
Politicians only hear their hard base. Far leftist will eat that up but normal people by and far will not. This BS with Kavaaugh is exactly what the GOP needed, and if he fails tonget confirmed, as the dems want, the Nov midterms are a disaster for them. The Republicans could not have asked for a better situation. It like the dems keep running Hillary...a gift that keeps givingQuote:
Originally Posted by KeithKSR
Couldn't agree more. And as someone who is personally moderate to left...its incredibly frustrating to see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
Its like being a Sac Kings fan (I am not). You just watch the decisions they make and genuinely believe that a guy sitting at a coffee shop working (me) could do a much better job making these decisions.
They live in a vacuum. All politicians really do.
Its why Trump won. He didn't live in that same vaccuum. He discovered the pulse of the people and ran with it.
If the Dems run with Biden in 2020 it will all happen again. He would have no chance of winning imo.
I believe, and it isnt an original thought, that the Democrats’ reliance on identity politics led directly to Trump. Not only has the left divided the public into tiny chunks of america defined solely by individual characteristics, but in the last few years it has enthusiastically and maliciously attacked white men, calling them toxic, and various types of women as well. Pro-life women, for example. Stay at home women.
And it has developed violent, immoral tactics.
A moderate male like me is being pushed to only vote red, partially out of self preservation.
Every time I see antifa, paid rioters and paid protestors burning buildings, smashing windows, shrieking in elevators, I am less inclined to vote blue. And, I see that a lot!
Republicans are the party of churchgoers, Joe Sixpack, Main Street and Wall Street. Democrats are the party of Pajama boy, Jennifer Yogamat, ivory tower faculty and entitled bureaucrats. I like beer.
I don’t understand how the Joe Manchin types stick with the Dems.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsky
IMO Manchin does it b/c it improves his value, esp. in DC. as a Republican he'd be a voice in a chorus, but as a Democrat in a deep red state who votes red and blue, he's a swing vote who must be courted by both sides, piling up money and political chips and campaign funds in the process.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithKSR
and the West Virginia party apparatus is pretty strong.
And Manchin lives up to form. Votes yes to cover his base, but only after the win was assured, so he can say he would have been confirmed anyway. Guy plays the fence well.