| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
StasisField
United States1086 Posts
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 | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
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. | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
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 | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25258 Posts
On November 04 2022 16:52 EnDeR_ wrote: 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* | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25258 Posts
On November 04 2022 23:09 plasmidghost wrote: 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 | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
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 | ||
|
Husyelt
United States832 Posts
| ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2603 Posts
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. | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
(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. | ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2603 Posts
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. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11507 Posts
On November 07 2022 23:45 gobbledydook wrote: 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. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23221 Posts
On November 08 2022 00:41 Simberto wrote: 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). | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21668 Posts
| ||
|
Husyelt
United States832 Posts
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.” | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On November 04 2022 05:08 JimmiC wrote: 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. | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
https://eu.statesman.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/11/06/texas-2022-early-voting-turnout-lower-than-2018-early-voting-turnout/69619411007/ | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
On November 08 2022 06:14 L_Master wrote: 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. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Best to just wait until Tuesday night when we’ll have some real data. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
