EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 606
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
screamingpalm
United States1527 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:27 screamingpalm wrote: Why do you say the governor's race should have been easy? Granted, McAuliffe is running against an extreme right wing candidate, but have you ever heard Bob McDonnell speak? :D I have never in my life heard a more right wing candidate for a major office, granted I might be missing a few deep red states but that's fine, but he is running in what essentially is a swing state and is running as far right as you possibly can and is not getting blown out because the democrat is a horrible candidate. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
screamingpalm
United States1527 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:30 Adreme wrote: I have never in my life heard a more right wing candidate for a major office, granted I might be missing a few deep red states but that's fine, but he is running in what essentially is a swing state and is running as far right as you possibly can and is not getting blown out because the democrat is a horrible candidate. Yes, but look at who their current elected governor is, I guess is my point.  Or in other words, VA has traditionally been a red state and started turning purple recently. Can't expect landslides either way. That the Dems are having the amount of success that they are currently, is already surprising enough. I imagined it would happen eventually. I grew up in the outer suburbs of DC and watched my little town with barely paved/gravel roads turn into part of the sprawling mega-metropolis of the rest of NoVA. It's partly ironic that the red states attracting businesses that avoid unions and treat their workers like shit eventually change demographics to reflect the people moving there. All depends now on how effective the GOP can be with their gerrymandering. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:30 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Fox News calling it for McCauliffe. I just saw the latest update and that makes sense. Its 3000 votes apart and there are no real red votes on the map but a ton of blue counties left to call so I would suspect its about to called on a ton of networks soon. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5002 Posts
Better luck next time! | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:45 Introvert wrote: Given the spending, star power, and more people from DC living in VA than before (all factors favoring the Dems), KC didn't do too badly. Better luck next time! Yeah if only he didn't believe contraception should be illegal and that women shouldn't have a say when it comes to wanting to divorce their husbands. Darn. | ||
|
Introvert
United States5002 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:47 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Yeah if only he didn't believe contraception should be illegal and that women shouldn't have a say when it comes to wanting to divorce their husbands. Darn. More talking points! But as to your first point, given Supreme Court precedence, he couldn't have done that if he wanted to. It was scare tactic. And despite these things (and the factors I mentioned) he didn't lose by that much. But maybe that just says more about the Democrat. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5002 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:52 farvacola wrote: No, it says things about Southern, regional, tribalistic conservatism causing a ruckus before its death knell finally sounds. I know, losing by a few % in a swing state with changing voter identities (due in decent part to new residents) while being heavily outspent (and lied about, as pointed out above) really show how the whole thing is dying. But I guess we see it differently. Only time will tell! | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:50 Introvert wrote: More talking points! But as to your first point, given Supreme Court precedence, he couldn't have done that if he wanted to. It was scare tactic. And despite these things (and the factors I mentioned) he didn't lose by that much. But maybe that just says more about the Democrat. Whether or not he can do something about it does not change the fact that him believing it does matter. If a candidate said he would be fine with seceding from the union despite that being impossible that would matter to me to just as every single republican candidate for president will probably come out against abortion in all circumstances despite the court saying he cant do that either. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5002 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:56 Adreme wrote: Whether or not he can do something about it does not change the fact that him believing it does matter. If a candidate said he would be fine with seceding from the union despite that being impossible that would matter to me to just as every single republican candidate for president will probably come out against abortion in all circumstances despite the court saying he cant do that either. No where did he support banning birth control either, just that some of the bills could, maybe, possibly, have led to some forms possibly being restricted, at some later point. Back in 2007. The fact that McAuliffe ran his entire race on that and divorce was good though. You'd think we hear something else besides that in these times. Guess not. Or maybe it was close due to all the potentially criminal activity McAuliffe (EDIT: or his associated firms) are being investigated for. Who knows. I mean, I admit to being disappointed, but not surprised. Maybe those things did KC in, but despite how stacked the later months were against KC, it wasn't a bad fight. You win some you lose some. Just my two cents, back to the calc hw. Final Edit: Whether or not MCA was being investigated personally does not change voter perception, I just mean it could have had an effect. I really don't know. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On November 06 2013 11:55 Introvert wrote: I know, losing by a few % in a swing state with changing voter identities (due in decent part to new residents) while being heavily outspent (and lied about, as pointed out above) really show how the whole thing is dying. But I guess we see it differently. Only time will tell! You misunderstood me; this is the ruckus, not the death knell. That'll be '14 and '16 in tandem. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
| ||
