• 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!

'19 Special & '20 Congressional Election Thread

myDeaconmyhand said:
I would rather a progressive candidate lose to Mitch than McGrath lose to Mitch. Hopefully Booker will run again, and have name recognition on his side
Click to expand...

Big whoop. They both lose by 15-20 points. Still a waste of time, money and attention.

The good news is it's increasingly likely that we will get to 50 in the senate with pick-ups in CO, AZ, NC and ME in order of confidence. And MT and IA are possible.
 
Latest poll in SC shows a statistical tie between Harrison and Graham. Worth keeping an eye on but it is not one of the key races described above.
 
Been seeing a few anti-Harrison ads and they are super lame. Basically that Harrison loves him some Nancy and that he is being funded by those Hollywood Elite we all hate. Haven't seen anything pro-Graham.
 
BarcaDeac said:
Been seeing a few anti-Harrison ads and they are super lame. Basically that Harrison loves him some Nancy and that he is being funded by those Hollywood Elite we all hate. Haven't seen anything pro-Graham.
Click to expand...

That's the only strategy Republicans have.
 
PhDeac said:
Latest poll in SC shows a statistical tie between Harrison and Graham. Worth keeping an eye on but it is not one of the key races described above.
Click to expand...

So, is it ethical to use the Lady G "rumors" and the endemic homophobia in South Carolina's GOP voter base to kill enthusiasm for Graham's candidacy? I'd like to think we could beat him straight up (no pun intended) but in SC that is a tough task. I feel a bit shitty for even thinking about it, but at the same time I hate Graham and hope he loses and it is definitely a tactic that the GOP, and probably Graham himself, would use on his opponent if they could/had to.
 
No. It’s not ethical. I expect it to be in a Lincoln Project ad in early October.
 
PhDeac said:
Latest poll in SC shows a statistical tie between Harrison and Graham. Worth keeping an eye on but it is not one of the key races described above.
Click to expand...

Yeah, saw that too, but there was 13% undecided in that 1. I gotta think those undecideds break Graham and SC is still fools gold. Cook and Sabato still have that as likely Pub. Sabato now has NC, ME and IA as toss-ups and MT as a Pub lean. Cook is copping out and has everything from AZ to ME as a toss-up. I usually lean pessimistic, but at this point I'd be disappointed if we don't get at least 50. I'd set the o/u at either 50 or 50.5.
 
I agree on setting the o/u at 50.
 
cville deac said:
Yeah, saw that too, but there was 13% undecided in that 1. I gotta think those undecideds break Graham and SC is still fools gold. Cook and Sabato still have that as likely Pub. Sabato now has NC, ME and IA as toss-ups and MT as a Pub lean. Cook is copping out and has everything from AZ to ME as a toss-up. I usually lean pessimistic, but at this point I'd be disappointed if we don't get at least 50. I'd set the o/u at either 50 or 50.5.
Click to expand...

If Harrison wins that SC Senate seat, then the GOP will have suffered the worst, most brutal election day massacre in the history of elections.
 
birdman said:
So, is it ethical to use the Lady G "rumors" and the endemic homophobia in South Carolina's GOP voter base to kill enthusiasm for Graham's candidacy? I'd like to think we could beat him straight up (no pun intended) but in SC that is a tough task. I feel a bit shitty for even thinking about it, but at the same time I hate Graham and hope he loses and it is definitely a tactic that the GOP, and probably Graham himself, would use on his opponent if they could/had to.
Click to expand...

I think it would be ethical to use only to the extent you're pointing out hypocrisy on his part, i.e. being on the side of oppressing others while partaking in that activity himself. Kind of like the prosecutor using drugs.
 
If the roles were reversed, the GOP candidate would definitely undercover support a bunch of negative ads playing that up and then publicly decline to comment/“that’s none of my business, no problem with me” etc

Actually who am I kidding, in the trump GOP they’d just say it all out loud
 
wakelaw13 said:
I think it would be ethical to use only to the extent you're pointing out hypocrisy on his part, i.e. being on the side of oppressing others while partaking in that activity himself. Kind of like the prosecutor using drugs.
Click to expand...

So to stay in ethical territory you'd need solid proof that he is in fact a closeted gay man that frequents the services of male escorts while simultaneously advancing anti-gay, homophobic policies. You couldn't run a GOP superpac swiftboat style campaign that says, "There are rumors, he goes by Lady G and likes to get tied up..."
 
Yes, you would need some actual evidence, and the current rumors don't qualify. And I agree with 06 that the GOP would likely make use of the rumors. The question is whether it's ethical, and it's not at this point.
 
wakelaw13 said:
Yes, you would need some actual evidence, and the current rumors don't qualify. And I agree with 06 that the GOP would likely make use of the rumors. The question is whether it's ethical, and it's not at this point.
Click to expand...

It's not even speculative that the GOP would use the rumors. Even highly respected, Michelle Obama cough-drop sharing, former president George W Bush created rumors about John McCain having an illegitimate black child, and had the swift boat veterans for truth destroy John Kerry's campaign. GOP is rotten to the core.

Anyway, I agree that Dems shouldn't use that shit. Just always seems like Dems are bringing nun-chucks to a gun battle with the GOP and then smacking them selves in the face while trying to look real impressive to nonexistent swing voters.
 
birdman said:
Anyway, I agree that Dems shouldn't use that shit. Just always seems like Dems are bringing nun-chucks to a gun battle with the GOP and then smacking them selves in the face while trying to look real impressive to nonexistent swing voters.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. It's really desperate and gross when Dems play on homophobia to insult Republicans, and the "hypocritical" argument is a bullshit excuse.
 
 
sure it's inappropriate, to put it mildly, but the hypocrisy on the right can be infuriating. It also makes it tempting. To paraphrase chris rock, "they shouldn't do it... but I understand."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top