|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Something interesting concerning early voting in Georgia: women are currently out-voting men by 11 points at 55.4% to 44.4% with the remaining .2% being labeled as unknown. Considering women tend to vote Democrat, this leads me to believe the polls with be off in Georgia and could even cause an upset in the Governor's race.
https://www.georgiavotes.com/
Also, in Texas, women are currently out-voting men by 6% at 53% to 47%. I don't think it'll be enough in Texas to defeat Abbott but I think Beto will outperform the polls like he did against Ted Cruz in the 2018 Senate race.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-elections/texas-results
|
On November 05 2022 11:36 StasisField wrote:Something interesting concerning early voting in Georgia: women are currently out-voting men by 11 points at 55.4% to 44.4% with the remaining .2% being labeled as unknown. Considering women tend to vote Democrat, this leads me to believe the polls with be off in Georgia and could even cause an upset in the Governor's race. https://www.georgiavotes.com/Also, in Texas, women are currently out-voting men by 6% at 53% to 47%. I don't think it'll be enough in Texas to defeat Abbott but I think Beto will outperform the polls like he did against Ted Cruz in the 2018 Senate race. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-elections/texas-results
Pretty sure that early voting isn't a reliable indicator of overall results.
Lots of hopium from all sides concerning this election. The only thing we can do is wait and see.
|
I really want to see what the voting demographics will look like. I'm thinking more 18-26 year-olds will vote this cycle than did in 2018, and definitely Dem, and I wouldn't be surprised if that gives Dems an unexpected boost
Just found this:
Actually, looking at the current figures from TargetSmart, it looks like at this point in 2018, 20% more people 18-29 had voted early. That's disappointing but not surprising
Other interesting tidbits: About 1 million more people overall have voted early than at this point in 2018 Demographics haven't changed much relating to race or gender, but those age 60+ now make up a much larger share of those that have voted early
|
Northern Ireland23792 Posts
On November 04 2022 16:52 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2022 16:44 Slydie wrote:On November 04 2022 02:33 plasmidghost wrote: Here in Flanders our far-right party Vlaams Belang is blacklisted from being in the Flemish parliament government. No other parties will form an alliance with them. Y'all have no idea how much I wish this could happen to at the very least individuals in the US Isn't this exactly what the Republicans did, already under Obamadid? Blanket refusing to collaborate with the Democrats and obstructing everything they tried to do for the sake of it. Far right and får left parties often grow when isolated, they thrive in a role where they can yell from the side how everyone is wrong, while not taking responsibility for the flaws their own solutions. It's fairly illuminating that we live at a time where voters see paralysing the government as "winning" and don't punish their representatives for it. As in, having a non-functioning, crippled government that cannot react to problems is a desirable outcome of the system. *Cries in Northern Ireland*
|
Northern Ireland23792 Posts
On November 04 2022 23:09 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2022 17:18 Laurens wrote:On November 04 2022 02:33 plasmidghost wrote: Here in Flanders our far-right party Vlaams Belang is blacklisted from being in the Flemish parliament government. No other parties will form an alliance with them. Y'all have no idea how much I wish this could happen to at the very least individuals in the US The 'cordon sanitaire' is an unofficial agreement that was made years ago, by the previous generation of party leaders. No party is obliged to uphold it, and they will gladly form a government with Vlaams Belang when it suits their agenda sufficiently. Until then, we will be forced to watch Vlaams Belang keep growing and growing. Second biggest party in 2019 with 18,5% of the votes, up from 5,9% in 2014. We're looking at easily 20+% in 2024. Because of the cordon, the other parties then have to enter these massive coalition governments that don't get anything done. Which in turn pisses more voters off, which gives more votes to Vlaams Belang. It's a cycle that is completely destroying politics. If you think you want that in the US, you are mistaken. Good lord I have a lot more to learn about our government and political environment I believe Belgium and my native land compete quite fiercely for the coveted ‘longest period without a functional government’ title.
Obviously this excludes actual failed states and what have you.
I’m sure our Belgian brothers and sisters can educate you, and I’d be interested to hear. Most (all) of our dysfunction stems from two main national identities being antagonistic, and I believe the Flemish/Wallonian craic shares some similarities
|
This has to be one of the most surprising polls I've seen at any point within the past two weeks. I'm shocked by both how well the Dems are doing and how much of this sample is still undecided
The other polls I've seen are pretty much in line with GOP gains lately. Still very curious to see how the Gen Z vote happens since most traditional models of polling do not contact them
|
Yeah, the polls from 538 and others are way off base. Expect a decent blue wave, (considering midterms post presidential win). GOP may win the house, but the Dems will maintain the senate and honestly do better than expected in the house.
|
On November 07 2022 11:25 Husyelt wrote: Yeah, the polls from 538 and others are way off base. Expect a decent blue wave, (considering midterms post presidential win). GOP may win the house, but the Dems will maintain the senate and honestly do better than expected in the house. On the contrary I think they're off base in the other direction. I expect a massive red wave.
|
Update on the early voting figures, taken from TargetSmart:
(all values are for national statistics) At this point in 2018, approx. 37m votes were cast. This election is now at 40m votes cast. Registered Dems make up 24.3% of the vote total, compared to 21.9% in 2018. Registered Repubs make up 17.9% of the vote total, compared to 18.9% in 2018. Unaffiliated voters make up 56.3% of the vote total, and 1.5% are other parties. Age turnout is down moderately for all brackets for ages 18-64. 65+ have a significantly increased vote total percentage. No significant changes in turnout by race compared to 2018. No significant changes in turnout by gender compared to 2018. 23.4% of the voters in this election did not vote in 2018.
|
On November 07 2022 21:27 plasmidghost wrote:Update on the early voting figures, taken from TargetSmart:(all values are for national statistics) At this point in 2018, approx. 37m votes were cast. This election is now at 40m votes cast. Registered Dems make up 24.3% of the vote total, compared to 21.9% in 2018. Registered Repubs make up 17.9% of the vote total, compared to 18.9% in 2018. Unaffiliated voters make up 56.3% of the vote total, and 1.5% are other parties. Age turnout is down moderately for all brackets for ages 18-64. 65+ have a significantly increased vote total percentage. No significant changes in turnout by race compared to 2018. No significant changes in turnout by gender compared to 2018. 23.4% of the voters in this election did not vote in 2018. Looking at the total number of votes cast is a misleading statistic. In the USA votes are cast for each race separately. Aggregating the votes across all states does not allow you to obtain the important information, which is how well the individual candidates are doing in the battleground races that decide the majority. For example it doesn't matter if 1 million more Californians vote. The result is still going to be the same.
|
At least folks are providing links and statistics to back up why they're feeling optimistic. "But they don't tell you everything." Human beings are very good at relaying information quickly, they're not omniscient. Yes, it could all just be an increase in turnout in California and be meaningless. If you have statistics to back that up, I'm listening.
|
On November 07 2022 23:45 gobbledydook wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2022 21:27 plasmidghost wrote:Update on the early voting figures, taken from TargetSmart:(all values are for national statistics) At this point in 2018, approx. 37m votes were cast. This election is now at 40m votes cast. Registered Dems make up 24.3% of the vote total, compared to 21.9% in 2018. Registered Repubs make up 17.9% of the vote total, compared to 18.9% in 2018. Unaffiliated voters make up 56.3% of the vote total, and 1.5% are other parties. Age turnout is down moderately for all brackets for ages 18-64. 65+ have a significantly increased vote total percentage. No significant changes in turnout by race compared to 2018. No significant changes in turnout by gender compared to 2018. 23.4% of the voters in this election did not vote in 2018. Looking at the total number of votes cast is a misleading statistic. In the USA votes are cast for each race separately. Aggregating the votes across all states does not allow you to obtain the important information, which is how well the individual candidates are doing in the battleground races that decide the majority. For example it doesn't matter if 1 million more Californians vote. The result is still going to be the same.
Sadly, that is very true. Total numbers do not matter. What matters is the very small amount of votes in contested races. Democrats always win the popular vote, but that doesn't matter due to the absurd FPTP system.
|
On November 08 2022 00:41 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2022 23:45 gobbledydook wrote:On November 07 2022 21:27 plasmidghost wrote:Update on the early voting figures, taken from TargetSmart:(all values are for national statistics) At this point in 2018, approx. 37m votes were cast. This election is now at 40m votes cast. Registered Dems make up 24.3% of the vote total, compared to 21.9% in 2018. Registered Repubs make up 17.9% of the vote total, compared to 18.9% in 2018. Unaffiliated voters make up 56.3% of the vote total, and 1.5% are other parties. Age turnout is down moderately for all brackets for ages 18-64. 65+ have a significantly increased vote total percentage. No significant changes in turnout by race compared to 2018. No significant changes in turnout by gender compared to 2018. 23.4% of the voters in this election did not vote in 2018. Looking at the total number of votes cast is a misleading statistic. In the USA votes are cast for each race separately. Aggregating the votes across all states does not allow you to obtain the important information, which is how well the individual candidates are doing in the battleground races that decide the majority. For example it doesn't matter if 1 million more Californians vote. The result is still going to be the same. Sadly, that is very true. Total numbers do not matter. What matters is the very small amount of votes in contested races. Democrats always win the popular vote, but that doesn't matter due to the absurd FPTP system. Due to some other 'quirks' Republicans are actually favored to win the popular vote this election. ~80% of 538's potential outcomes currently have Republicans winning the popular vote.
projects.fivethirtyeight.com
My magic 8 ball prediction for Democrats midterms is "Outlook not so good"
Expectations are pretty low though so overperforming should be easy enough (fruitless or not).
|
I want so badly to be optimistic about Dem chances but I simply can't convince myself that they're going to keep control of Congress after tomorrow
|
I think it says a lot about present day America that a party that attempted a literal insurrection, failed to seize power and then not only refused to condemn it but actually doubled down on it is about to be politically rewarded for doing so.
|
On November 08 2022 02:40 Gorsameth wrote: I think it says a lot about present day America that a party that attempted a literal insurrection, failed to seize power and then not only refused to condemn it but actually doubled down on it is about to be politically rewarded for doing so. Piss poor media literacy will do that. The fact that right wingers can spin that as the same problem in 2016 shows how dumbed down a big portion of the population is.
“Dems claimed he wasn’t president and Russia stole the election for years, and how bad was jan6? The only person who died was Ashlee.”
|
On November 04 2022 05:08 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2022 04:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 03 2022 23:09 Gorsameth wrote:On November 03 2022 22:47 pmh wrote:On November 03 2022 03:44 GreenHorizons wrote: I am curious what the Democrat supporter response is to the "Like please good faith give me some of the positive reasons to vote for a Democrat that has nothing to do with Republicans" question? Why would an answer or positive reason be needed? The republican platform should be more then enough reason by itself. If the most progressive segment of the left is very unhappy with the democratic party then they should break away and build their own party/movement. As long as they dont do that,the 2nd best option for them is to vote democratic. These elections i dont dare to call. Republicans are overwhelmingly favored to win the house (~95% on the betting sites). Uncertainty and variance is very high this cycle i think. It could be an overwhelming republican victory but i wont rule out the democrats outperforming the polls by a large margin either. Keeping a majority is probably out of the question though. The problem with the more progressive left breaking away is that it just means both parts of the Democratic party will not win elections, even many they would otherwise currently win, and Republicans would get to rule with control of all 3 branches with a super majority. Such is the nature, and problem, of a FPTP system. Whichever side breaks up consigns themselves to irrelevance. Democrats seem to be moving there themselves with the progressive left well under heel. Democrats never fully recovered from the 1000+ seats in government they lost under Obama and are now poised to lose both chambers while campaigning on the threat that Republicans are destroying democracy to win/keep them. So not only are they on the precipice of defeat, they've forecasted their own irrelevance. Is it your position that the Democrats should focus on their policy instead of attacking the Republicans to get more votes? While I appreciate the optimism of the position, has it not been shown time and time again that attack ads get more results at the polls? And wasn't stopping Trump the number one reason people stated they voted last general? When people do not have to vote you not only have to be their preferred party but you also have to motivate them to get to the polls. Stopping Trump and Pwning the libs are the current version of this. If it is a comparison of who does it more, it is clearly the Republicans, but asking the Dems to completely give up the attack is naïve at best given all the studies and market research done on what works in American elections given the system.
These feel like the wrong frames to me.
It's a totally different thing.
Over the last few decades the left completed it's march through the intuitions.
The right completed it's march through the court system.
You have the judiciary looking to overturn, essentially, all of positive law restoring natural law as the only kind of law. Then you have the left wing controlled institutions of cultural production.
I don't see how this divide comes back together. Seems impossible barring miracle (new energy source and decades of prosperity) or extreme crisis (massive depression, psudeo-collapse tier scenarios).
Why?
The two sides are fundamentally opposed. Responsibility across/over time and in time vs responsibility in-time(now). The former could restore to a rule of law based entity with classic liberalism and conservatism returning, but the in-time (now) orientation of the progressive left is incompatible with nature's feedback. It creates incentives that cause long term losses in cooperation because it doesn't align incentives in favor of cooperation and cultural production of responsibility, agency, and cooperation.
The only solution I can see is to split into many federations, very loosely these would be city federations and rural federations governed by there own preferences, which ought to be agreeable to all. Progressive left can govern as they want. Conservative right can govern as they want. Small government providing only for common defense and basic services.
I strongly think anything else leads to increasing polarization and eventually civil war type scenario.
But, if someone has a way that you can cross the responsibility now vs responsibility across time divide and "bring back" or reconcile the other side, I might change that view. I haven't thought of anything yet though.
|
|
On November 08 2022 06:14 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2022 05:08 JimmiC wrote:On November 04 2022 04:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 03 2022 23:09 Gorsameth wrote:On November 03 2022 22:47 pmh wrote:On November 03 2022 03:44 GreenHorizons wrote: I am curious what the Democrat supporter response is to the "Like please good faith give me some of the positive reasons to vote for a Democrat that has nothing to do with Republicans" question? Why would an answer or positive reason be needed? The republican platform should be more then enough reason by itself. If the most progressive segment of the left is very unhappy with the democratic party then they should break away and build their own party/movement. As long as they dont do that,the 2nd best option for them is to vote democratic. These elections i dont dare to call. Republicans are overwhelmingly favored to win the house (~95% on the betting sites). Uncertainty and variance is very high this cycle i think. It could be an overwhelming republican victory but i wont rule out the democrats outperforming the polls by a large margin either. Keeping a majority is probably out of the question though. The problem with the more progressive left breaking away is that it just means both parts of the Democratic party will not win elections, even many they would otherwise currently win, and Republicans would get to rule with control of all 3 branches with a super majority. Such is the nature, and problem, of a FPTP system. Whichever side breaks up consigns themselves to irrelevance. Democrats seem to be moving there themselves with the progressive left well under heel. Democrats never fully recovered from the 1000+ seats in government they lost under Obama and are now poised to lose both chambers while campaigning on the threat that Republicans are destroying democracy to win/keep them. So not only are they on the precipice of defeat, they've forecasted their own irrelevance. Is it your position that the Democrats should focus on their policy instead of attacking the Republicans to get more votes? While I appreciate the optimism of the position, has it not been shown time and time again that attack ads get more results at the polls? And wasn't stopping Trump the number one reason people stated they voted last general? When people do not have to vote you not only have to be their preferred party but you also have to motivate them to get to the polls. Stopping Trump and Pwning the libs are the current version of this. If it is a comparison of who does it more, it is clearly the Republicans, but asking the Dems to completely give up the attack is naïve at best given all the studies and market research done on what works in American elections given the system. These feel like the wrong frames to me. It's a totally different thing. Over the last few decades the left completed it's march through the intuitions. The right completed it's march through the court system. You have the judiciary looking to overturn, essentially, all of positive law restoring natural law as the only kind of law. Then you have the left wing controlled institutions of cultural production. I don't see how this divide comes back together. Seems impossible barring miracle (new energy source and decades of prosperity) or extreme crisis (massive depression, psudeo-collapse tier scenarios). Why? The two sides are fundamentally opposed. Responsibility across/over time and in time vs responsibility in-time(now). The former could restore to a rule of law based entity with classic liberalism and conservatism returning, but the in-time (now) orientation of the progressive left is incompatible with nature's feedback. It creates incentives that cause long term losses in cooperation because it doesn't align incentives in favor of cooperation and cultural production of responsibility, agency, and cooperation. The only solution I can see is to split into many federations, very loosely these would be city federations and rural federations governed by there own preferences, which ought to be agreeable to all. Progressive left can govern as they want. Conservative right can govern as they want. Small government providing only for common defense and basic services. I strongly think anything else leads to increasing polarization and eventually civil war type scenario. But, if someone has a way that you can cross the responsibility now vs responsibility across time divide and "bring back" or reconcile the other side, I might change that view. I haven't thought of anything yet though. I am an American communist and I can 100% ensure you that there is no institution in the US run by leftists. The most left-wing you'll get is like, Democratic Socialists that are barely centrist on a global scale. Any institution that would become far-left will be infiltrated by the FBI and dismantled and if someone poses a threat like Fred Hampton did, they will be executed. There is no leftist culture in the US. Anti-communist and anti-socialist propaganda and beliefs are present everywhere.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I’ve largely found “early counts of votes” to be a largely useless metric of anything real. Maybe under close analysis there might be a crumb of information on trends, but it’s mostly still noise.
Best to just wait until Tuesday night when we’ll have some real data.
|
|
|
|