• 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!

Official 2014 Midterm Election Discussion Thread

jhmd2000 said:
They are legal, just not reliable. Recording data in a polling place would be illegal, and asking a self-selected group of people to give their opinion about their experience---and then calling it average of the entire country---is also unreliable.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Exhaustive list of sources of reliable data:

Dow Jones
Heritage Foundation
Newspaper box scores of high school football games in Mebane, NC
Anecdotes from white men in their 40s and 50s who voted for Bush twice
 
jhmd2000 said:
They are legal, just not reliable. Recording data in a polling place would be illegal, and asking a self-selected group of people to give their opinion about their experience---and then calling it average of the entire country---is also unreliable. But if you like the results, don't think too hard about it. Just stay persecuted. Feeling persecuted is kind of a plan, right?
Click to expand...

Ok. I admit it. I fell for it. Congrats to whoever thought up this alias. Very convincing.
 
TownieDeac said:
Exhaustive list of sources of reliable data:

Dow Jones
Heritage Foundation
Newspaper box scores of high school football games in Mebane, NC
Anecdotes from white men in their 40s and 50s who voted for Bush twice
Click to expand...

Old Testament measurements of time, ark size, etc.
 
TownieDeac said:
Exhaustive list of sources of reliable data:

Dow Jones
Heritage Foundation
Newspaper box scores of high school football games in Mebane, NC
Anecdotes from white men in their 40s and 50s who voted for Bush twice
Click to expand...

Fox News
The Blaze
Sometimes the Wall Street Journal
 
Real men don't use instruction manuals.
 
I agree with pretty much everything in this article. The Dems are counting up demographics and electoral votes and measuring the curtains for Hillary's forthcoming occupancy of the White House, but I'm telling you they've got to start running as Democrats and not as watered down Republicans who are afraid of their shadows if they want to win in 2016.
 
Deacon923 said:
I agree with pretty much everything in this article. The Dems are counting up demographics and electoral votes and measuring the curtains for Hillary's forthcoming occupancy of the White House, but I'm telling you they've got to start running as Democrats and not as watered down Republicans who are afraid of their shadows if they want to win in 2016.
Click to expand...

Because if there's one thing we've learned in the last 48 hours, it is that the American voter is enamored with progressive policies and clamoring for a sharp move left.
 
Dems need 28 electoral votes from something like 8 toss up states. Get movements going now in those states for the next two years and get the base mobilized.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Because if there's one thing we've learned in the last 48 hours, it is that the American voters who believed they had something to vote for are enamored with progressive policies and clamoring for a sharp move left.
Click to expand...

Fixed. Typical jhmd ignores the majority of Americans who didn't vote.
 
GOP is probably like 170 off the top of my head. On the phone so I don't have any numbers in front of me but I think it still holds that if the Dems hold the same states they did that have gone blue over the last six elections in a row, they can take pennsylvania Colorado and Iowa and be over 270 without winning North Carolina Florida Ohio or Virginia.
 
TexasHammer said:
How many guaranteed electoral votes do you think the Republicans have?
Click to expand...

Here's Politfact shows as states that gone for one party in each of the past six elections.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...-will-paints-dire-electoral-picture-gop-says/

It favors Dems 242-102.

If Hilary wins just those states and FL, the election is over. If she wins the banked ones OH, NV and either NM or CO, it's over.

What it shows this shows is there are many ways for the Dems to win in 2016, but it will take a huge sweep to give the GOP the WH.
 
Last edited:
Good find RJ that's where I got the 242 number from a couple days ago but couldn't remember specifically what the GOP was from the same list.
 
Deacon923 said:
I agree with pretty much everything in this article. The Dems are counting up demographics and electoral votes and measuring the curtains for Hillary's forthcoming occupancy of the White House, but I'm telling you they've got to start running as Democrats and not as watered down Republicans who are afraid of their shadows if they want to win in 2016.
Click to expand...

Democrats have been watered down Republicans since the 90s.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Their enthusiasm and zeal for progressive policies was palpable, wasn't it?
Click to expand...

Except they didn't run as progressives. They ran as "I'm totes not Obama!" and that was a stupid, stupid strategy. Defense doesn't win in politics. You have to go on the offensive and stay on the offensive.


Democrats lost because they were pussies.
 
deacvision7 said:
Except they didn't run as progressives. They ran as "I'm totes not Obama!" and that was a stupid, stupid strategy. Defense doesn't win in politics. You have to go on the offensive and stay on the offensive.


Democrats lost because they were pussies.
Click to expand...

They should have rammed through their agenda when they had 60 votes in the senate back in 2009.
 
This is in some ways the Democratic version of the pubs arguing that Romney lost because he was not conservative enough, but I think there are some important distinctions. It's about the base. The pub base came out for Romney to view against Obama if nothing else. The dem base doesn't work the same way. They need more of a reason to turn out than the olds who will always turn out and vote R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top