• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Maxine Waters has flipped her wig

A legitimate third party is not going to form in America so long as we have single-member districts with first past the post voting.

That and the Electoral College. The EC makes it virtually impossible for a third party to ever win a presidential election. In 1912 Theodore Roosevelt's Progressives got nearly 28% of the national popular vote in a three-way race and finished second, but only won 88 electoral votes. In 1992 Ross Perot's Reform Party received 19% of the national popular vote, but didn't carry a single state and thus received no electoral votes. The EC is one of the main reasons that no serious, major third party has ever lasted more than a few election cycles.
 
Last edited:
the Republican Party started as a third party

Depends on the historical source, some say the Whigs were already dead by 1854 and the GOP was their replacement as the new major party, others do place the GOP (briefly) as a third party. Even if you consider the GOP as a third party, it would be the only one in US History to succeed and become one of the two major parties, and you can argue that it took the crisis over slavery, sectionalism, and the Civil War to do it. The Populists in the 1890s were absorbed into the Democrats, so in that sense I guess you could say they were a success to some extent. It's not as if people haven't been discussing a third party option for a long, long time, yet it never seems to happen. For a third party candidate to get even close to the 270 Electoral Vote majority would be a truly historic achievement.
 
Last edited:
Remind me

Which party was proslavery?

Which party made up most members of the KKK?

Someone please teach me

Okay this one is just trolling right given the number of times we’ve talked about not conflating ideology with party right?

And six House seats? How much do you want to bet on an over under of 6 seats Moonz?
 
I mentioned it on another thread but Cook Political Report has Democrats with a 24 seat lead in safe seats for both parties leaving a remaining 99 seats that are either a toss up or lean dem/gop. To only lose six seats the GOP would have to win 79 of those 99 toss up races.

I suppose that’s possible but it’s not likely.
 
I took a dump this morning that I respect more than moonz.
 
With odds that the democrats win back the house at 60 percent or so, the chances that they gain more than six is close to 95-100 percent.
 
Originally Posted by Wakeforest22890
With odds that the democrats win back the house at 60 percent or so, the chances that they gain more than six is close to 95-100 percent.


I think the Democrats will gain more than six seats, but one has to remember that the average gain in this situation (2 years after new party president) since WW2 has been 26 seats....so a gain of 6, 10 or even 15 should be considered a defeat for them, particularly if they also lose seats in the Senate which is much more likely than their chances of winning control of the House.

The wild card in this election now is the resignation of Justice Kennedy. That will serve to mitigate the Democrats' earlier "enthusiasm advantage" regarding turnout. As one article I read put it, "this is like throwing rocket fuel on the evangelical turnout"....basically making regaining Democratic control of the Senate a near impossibility. So the Democrats are between a rock & a hard place regarding the USSC. They will try to put off a vote until after the election, of course, but that will only further increase the evangelical vote in the critical Senate election states where Trump is extremely popular. If, on the other hand, they decide to roll the dice and hope to persuade Murkowski, Collins and maybe Flake or Corker to vote against conformation, that won't work, either. They would have to get 2 of those 4 to vote against....and hold all of the Democrats together. Even if they somehow got all 4 of those people to vote against conformation, though, it's problematical whether they could keep from losing 3 of their own to prevail. Democrats talk about persuading Murkowski & Collins....but they seem to have forgotten about Manchin, Donnelly, Heitkamp, McCaskill & Tester. Trump carried each of those five states by 19-42%. Each one of those five senators would be signing their own political death warrant if they voted against conformation. Maybe they could convince three of them to do it (assuming they could get all of the 4 Republicans, which is very unlikely)….but I seriously doubt it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Wakeforest22890
With odds that the democrats win back the house at 60 percent or so, the chances that they gain more than six is close to 95-100 percent.


I think the Democrats will gain more than six seats, but one has to remember that the average gain in this situation (2 years after new party president) since WW2 has been 26 seats....so a gain of 6, 10 or even 15 should be considered a defeat for them, particularly if they also lose seats in the Senate which is much more likely than their chances of winning control of the House.

The wild card in this election now is the resignation of Justice Kennedy. That will serve to mitigate the Democrats' earlier "enthusiasm advantage" regarding turnout. As one article I read put it, "this is like throwing rocket fuel on the evangelical turnout"....basically making regaining Democratic control of the Senate a near impossibility. So the Democrats are between a rock & a hard place regarding the USSC. They will try to put off a vote until after the election, of course, but that will only further increase the evangelical vote in the critical Senate election states where Trump is extremely popular. If, on the other hand, they decide to roll the dice and hope to persuade Murkowski, Collins and maybe Flake or Corker to vote against conformation, that won't work, either. They would have to get 2 of those 4 to vote against....and hold all of the Democrats together. Even if they somehow got all 4 of those people to vote against conformation, though, it's problematical whether they could keep from losing 3 of their own to prevail. Democrats talk about persuading Murkowski & Collins....but they seem to have forgotten about Manchin, Donnelly, Heitkamp, McCaskill & Tester. Trump carried each of those five states by 19-42%. Each one of those five senators would be signing their own political death warrant if they voted against conformation. Maybe they could convince three of them to do it (assuming they could get all of the 4 Republicans, which is very unlikely)….but I seriously doubt it.

Finally, "conformation" that our Swiss friend is BKF.
 
Originally Posted by Wakeforest22890
With odds that the democrats win back the house at 60 percent or so, the chances that they gain more than six is close to 95-100 percent.


I think the Democrats will gain more than six seats, but one has to remember that the average gain in this situation (2 years after new party president) since WW2 has been 26 seats....so a gain of 6, 10 or even 15 should be considered a defeat for them, particularly if they also lose seats in the Senate which is much more likely than their chances of winning control of the House.

The only number that should matter to Democrats is 25 seats. That wins back the House.

Similarly, since current political odds and projections have Democrats with approximately a 30% chance of winning back the Senate (a number I know you personally disagree with), I would be shocked if the likelihood that Democrats lose seats in the Senate is "much more likely" than their chances of winning control of the House.
 
 
Originally Posted by Wakeforest22890
With odds that the democrats win back the house at 60 percent or so, the chances that they gain more than six is close to 95-100 percent.


I think the Democrats will gain more than six seats, but one has to remember that the average gain in this situation (2 years after new party president) since WW2 has been 26 seats....so a gain of 6, 10 or even 15 should be considered a defeat for them, particularly if they also lose seats in the Senate which is much more likely than their chances of winning control of the House.

The wild card in this election now is the resignation of Justice Kennedy. That will serve to mitigate the Democrats' earlier "enthusiasm advantage" regarding turnout. As one article I read put it, "this is like throwing rocket fuel on the evangelical turnout"....basically making regaining Democratic control of the Senate a near impossibility. So the Democrats are between a rock & a hard place regarding the USSC. They will try to put off a vote until after the election, of course, but that will only further increase the evangelical vote in the critical Senate election states where Trump is extremely popular. If, on the other hand, they decide to roll the dice and hope to persuade Murkowski, Collins and maybe Flake or Corker to vote against conformation, that won't work, either. They would have to get 2 of those 4 to vote against....and hold all of the Democrats together. Even if they somehow got all 4 of those people to vote against conformation, though, it's problematical whether they could keep from losing 3 of their own to prevail. Democrats talk about persuading Murkowski & Collins....but they seem to have forgotten about Manchin, Donnelly, Heitkamp, McCaskill & Tester. Trump carried each of those five states by 19-42%. Each one of those five senators would be signing their own political death warrant if they voted against conformation. Maybe they could convince three of them to do it (assuming they could get all of the 4 Republicans, which is very unlikely)….but I seriously doubt it.

That is a lot of words, but you don’t even know what an average is so I’m not sure how much I should really pay attention.
 
Okay this one is just trolling right given the number of times we’ve talked about not conflating ideology with party right?

And six House seats? How much do you want to bet on an over under of 6 seats Moonz?

Yeah but it was always the Dems. Most of the snowflakes on the face book have no clue the KKK was a democrat institution
My fat fingers messed up. The pubs will have 6 seat advantage in the house after midterms


L
 
For the love of God you idiot get some new material
 
If you believe in projection, the amount of breath and depends jokes made by moon becomes depressing. Much in the same way that RJ’s prison rape jokes are.
 
California prosecutor under fire for offensive social media posts about Michelle Obama, Maxine Waters

Deputy District Attorney Michael Selyem, who joined the D.A.’s Office 12 years ago, targeted outspoken U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters, former first lady Michelle Obama, Mexican immigrants and the victim of a police shooting in Facebook and Instagram posts labeled by one critic as “hateful rhetoric.”

Of Waters, Selyem said: “Being a loud-mouthed c#nt in the ghetto you would think someone would have shot this bitch by now …”

Selyem apparently is an ardent supporter of President Donald Trump. Beneath a Facebook post offering free tickets to Trump’s presidential inauguration, Selyem wrote, “I love that all of you liberal f—–g p—–s are so filled with hate. Gonna be a long 8 years for you scumbags. choo choo trump”

I'm gonna need a thinkpiece on how this is going to impact Republicans in the midterm elections.
 
Back
Top