US Midterm Election 2018 Megathread- It's Kavanaugh

[Vassenor]

And yet there is no explicit reference to only applying to slavery in the amendment.

Nope, but that was its purpose. If you want to go by just the text, you would lose a lot of latitude on interpreting "protection"

And there I was thinking the constitution could only be applied to things explicitly mentioned in the text.

[The Parkus Empire]

This invalidates Texas v. White then, which says they never left the union

It says they never legally left, but a lot of them weren't formally readmitted yet. Some of them weren't readmitted until 1870.

Meaning the ruling was bogus.

[Fahran]

I'd be keen to see if the numbers backed that up. I know Trump did better among minorities than Romney but it wasn't anything I'd call a swathe.

There have been a number of methodological problems with polling statistics in recent years. For example, many claims regarding Trump's support in the black community are driven by a comparison of exit polls and more general polls conducted via online interview. It's possible that Trump always enjoyed such a high level of support among the black community (17-20%), but not among black voters (6-8%). Recent polls have showed declining support over the past few months (14% since the "shit hole" remarks).

Source.

We also have a couple polls suggesting that primarily black neighborhoods became less blue in 2016 compared to 2012. If the trend continues unabated, we could observe a return to levels of black support for particular GOP candidates comparable to George H. W. Bush's presidency. It'll be a slow process given that Democrats have dominated with this demographic since Roosevelt.

Source.

I'm still trying to locate the poll that asserted that Republican candidates tend to more closely mirror the religiosity of minority voters than Democrats. One startling example of this is that George W. Bush won approximately seventy percent of the Muslim votes in 2000. It's been the racial animus and the perception that Republicans are bigots that has harmed them with these demographics. Race and religion are key factors in determining how a person votes according to the statistics. What happen if race is taken out of the equation as a differentiating factor between the parties given everything I've mentioned?

[The Parkus Empire]

Nope, but that was its purpose. If you want to go by just the text, you would lose a lot of latitude on interpreting "protection"

And there I was thinking the constitution could only be applied to things explicitly mentioned in the text.

It was written with the idea of the purpose of the law determining its meaning. You could go by strictly letter of the law, but this would limit the meaning even further.

[Morgantown West Virginia]

https://www.axios.com/poll-democrats-20 ... d9dd7.html

A poll update right there that I refuse to type out

[Shrillland]

It says they never legally left, but a lot of them weren't formally readmitted yet. Some of them weren't readmitted until 1870.

Meaning the ruling was bogus.

The ruling was not bogus. It was used to say that the act of secession was illegal and, therefore, any bonds that the CSA sold in Texas couldn't be redeemed by the Treasury. It did not invalidate the military districts of reconstruction nor did it nullify the conditions placed on the occupied states by the Reconstruction Acts 1867 and 1868 concerning the return to full representation in the federal government, which was basically what re-admission meant.

[Salandriagado]

“The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
—John Adams

These are both true. The (Federal) government was founded as a secular one. But presuming it was over a religious people. As multiple Founding Fathers have said. And, as Adams said, it is not adequate for a nonreligious people.

Well, time for a constitutional convention to scrap it and start again, then, because that's the state of reality.

[Shrillland]

In short, the poll basically says what we already knew: Our chances of taking the Senate are about the same as those of Chi-Chi's suddenly rising like a phoenix and opening restaurants again; practically nonexistent.

Anyway, we have another election in a week, so here's my take on it.

Alabama Take Two: Just one runoff, but it's seen as an important one. In AL-2(Mongomery-Dothan), incumbent Congresswoman Martha Roby is fighting for her political life after managing to scrape through to next week's runoff in a GOP primary season where the biggest crime is disloyalty to Trump. That water, however, seems to have gone under the bridge since Trump tweeted is support for Roby on June 22, so I think that the race will go to her after all, and that she'll easily beat Tabitha Isner in November.

[Telconi]

These are both true. The (Federal) government was founded as a secular one. But presuming it was over a religious people. As multiple Founding Fathers have said. And, as Adams said, it is not adequate for a nonreligious people.

Well, time for a constitutional convention to scrap it and start again, then, because that's the state of reality.

Implying it would start again.

[United City States of Oceania]

In short, the poll basically says what we already knew: Our chances of taking the Senate are about the same as those of Chi-Chi's suddenly rising like a phoenix and opening restaurants again; practically nonexistent.

Anyway, we have another election in a week, so here's my take on it.

Alabama Take Two: Just one runoff, but it's seen as an important one. In AL-2(Mongomery-Dothan), incumbent Congresswoman Martha Roby is fighting for her political life after managing to scrape through to next week's runoff in a GOP primary season where the biggest crime is disloyalty to Trump. That water, however, seems to have gone under the bridge since Trump tweeted is support for Roby on June 22, so I think that the race will go to her after all, and that she'll easily beat Tabitha Isner in November.

The only way I see us taking the senate is if we somehow get more turnout than the republicans over the Supreme Court issue, which is highly unlikely if you look at the issue historically.

[Shrillland]

In short, the poll basically says what we already knew: Our chances of taking the Senate are about the same as those of Chi-Chi's suddenly rising like a phoenix and opening restaurants again; practically nonexistent.

Anyway, we have another election in a week, so here's my take on it.

Alabama Take Two: Just one runoff, but it's seen as an important one. In AL-2(Mongomery-Dothan), incumbent Congresswoman Martha Roby is fighting for her political life after managing to scrape through to next week's runoff in a GOP primary season where the biggest crime is disloyalty to Trump. That water, however, seems to have gone under the bridge since Trump tweeted is support for Roby on June 22, so I think that the race will go to her after all, and that she'll easily beat Tabitha Isner in November.

The only way I see us taking the senate is if we somehow get more turnout than the republicans over the Supreme Court issue, which is highly unlikely if you look at the issue historically.

We could get turnout but not where it would matter.

[The South Falls]

In short, the poll basically says what we already knew: Our chances of taking the Senate are about the same as those of Chi-Chi's suddenly rising like a phoenix and opening restaurants again; practically nonexistent.

Anyway, we have another election in a week, so here's my take on it.

Alabama Take Two: Just one runoff, but it's seen as an important one. In AL-2(Mongomery-Dothan), incumbent Congresswoman Martha Roby is fighting for her political life after managing to scrape through to next week's runoff in a GOP primary season where the biggest crime is disloyalty to Trump. That water, however, seems to have gone under the bridge since Trump tweeted is support for Roby on June 22, so I think that the race will go to her after all, and that she'll easily beat Tabitha Isner in November.

The number of red states that have Senate races is a little sad for Democrats. But, Tabitha Isner doesn't stand a chance. It's Alabama. Jones only won because Roy Moore was a suspected child rapist.

[Oldenfranck]

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/judge-brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-pick-nominee-trump-announcement-pick-today-2018-07-09-live/



Even more of a reason why I will be voting for Lou Barletta in November for the Senate.

>pinko coping with the increasing irrelevance of his politics

Good thing Barletta will probably get crushed anyways. Unless you think that Pennsylvania has become Pennsyltucky after Trump's enormous 0.7% dominating plurality win of the state has transformed it into the red wall.

[The Parkus Empire]

Meaning the ruling was bogus.

The ruling was not bogus. It was used to say that the act of secession was illegal and, therefore, any bonds that the CSA sold in Texas couldn't be redeemed by the Treasury. It did not invalidate the military districts of reconstruction nor did it nullify the conditions placed on the occupied states by the Reconstruction Acts 1867 and 1868 concerning the return to full representation in the federal government, which was basically what re-admission meant.

It was bogus to say they never left the union if they had to be readmitted into it

[The Parkus Empire]

These are both true. The (Federal) government was founded as a secular one. But presuming it was over a religious people. As multiple Founding Fathers have said. And, as Adams said, it is not adequate for a nonreligious people.

Well, time for a constitutional convention to scrap it and start again, then, because that's the state of reality.

Sounds good to me!

[Freezic Vast]

>pinko coping with the increasing irrelevance of his politics

Good thing Barletta will probably get crushed anyways. Unless you think that Pennsylvania has become Pennsyltucky after Trump's enormous 0.7% dominating plurality win of the state has transformed it into the red wall.

Despite Republicans have had great success locally in the state, to the point where the state Senate has not flipped to the Dems since 1993, and that they still have control over both houses. Maybe if the PA GOP actually tried to emulate more of that success statewide they could win and I believe they can.

[Oldenfranck]

Good thing Barletta will probably get crushed anyways. Unless you think that Pennsylvania has become Pennsyltucky after Trump's enormous 0.7% dominating plurality win of the state has transformed it into the red wall.

Despite Republicans have had great success locally in the state, to the point where the state Senate has not flipped to the Dems since 1993, and that they still have control over both houses. Maybe if the PA GOP actually tried to emulate more of that success statewide they could win and I believe they can.

Ofc they can and have, but it has not become a solid red state because of Trump, and it sure as h&ll will not be electing Wagner and Barletta this fall.

[Valrifell]

The ruling was not bogus. It was used to say that the act of secession was illegal and, therefore, any bonds that the CSA sold in Texas couldn't be redeemed by the Treasury. It did not invalidate the military districts of reconstruction nor did it nullify the conditions placed on the occupied states by the Reconstruction Acts 1867 and 1868 concerning the return to full representation in the federal government, which was basically what re-admission meant.

It was bogus to say they never left the union if they had to be readmitted into it

Are you implying that the aftermath and legality of the Civil War was complicated and uncertain for decades after its closure?!

Whaaaaat? I thought it was so simple!

[Freezic Vast]

Despite Republicans have had great success locally in the state, to the point where the state Senate has not flipped to the Dems since 1993, and that they still have control over both houses. Maybe if the PA GOP actually tried to emulate more of that success statewide they could win and I believe they can.

Ofc they can and have, but it has not become a solid red state because of Trump, and it sure as h&ll will not be electing Wagner and Barletta this fall.

Never said it was, and I hope your wrong so you can eat your words.

[Oldenfranck]

Ofc they can and have, but it has not become a solid red state because of Trump, and it sure as h&ll will not be electing Wagner and Barletta this fall.

Never said it was, and I hope your wrong so you can eat your words.

You hope, we see.

[Mr Conservative]

In short, the poll basically says what we already knew: Our chances of taking the Senate are about the same as those of Chi-Chi's suddenly rising like a phoenix and opening restaurants again; practically nonexistent.

Anyway, we have another election in a week, so here's my take on it.

Alabama Take Two: Just one runoff, but it's seen as an important one. In AL-2(Mongomery-Dothan), incumbent Congresswoman Martha Roby is fighting for her political life after managing to scrape through to next week's runoff in a GOP primary season where the biggest crime is disloyalty to Trump. That water, however, seems to have gone under the bridge since Trump tweeted is support for Roby on June 22, so I think that the race will go to her after all, and that she'll easily beat Tabitha Isner in November.

The number of red states that have Senate races is a little sad for Democrats. But, Tabitha Isner doesn't stand a chance. It's Alabama. Jones only won because Roy Moore was a suspected child rapist.

It's kind of just par for the course. Next cycle (2020) there's probably going to be 21 Republicans up for re-election in the Senate but the only seats the only seats that are in troublesome states are Susan Collins in ME and Cory Gardner in CO. Beyond that it's the same long shot opportunities for pickups like Perdue in GA, Cornyn in TX, and Joni Ernst in IA. There's just not a whole lot of spots on the map to pick off Republicans because there's so many deep red states. Plus the Dems have to try to defend the seat they just won in Alabama. The potential for gained seats in 2020 is also pretty narrow, though at least the Dems will have far fewer to play defense on.

[Shrillland]

The number of red states that have Senate races is a little sad for Democrats. But, Tabitha Isner doesn't stand a chance. It's Alabama. Jones only won because Roy Moore was a suspected child rapist.

It's kind of just par for the course. Next cycle (2020) there's probably going to be 21 Republicans up for re-election in the Senate but the only seats the only seats that are in troublesome states are Susan Collins in ME and Cory Gardner in CO. Beyond that it's the same long shot opportunities for pickups like Perdue in GA, Cornyn in TX, and Joni Ernst in IA. There's just not a whole lot of spots on the map to pick off Republicans because there's so many deep red states. Plus the Dems have to try to defend the seat they just won in Alabama. The potential for gained seats in 2020 is also pretty narrow, though at least the Dems will have far fewer to play defense on.

Ernst isn't exactly a long shot because she's in IA, she's a long shot because she's a popular figure in a purple state. I can see Gardner losing but not Susan Collins. At any rate, that's still two years off.

[Seangoli]

In short, the poll basically says what we already knew: Our chances of taking the Senate are about the same as those of Chi-Chi's suddenly rising like a phoenix and opening restaurants again; practically nonexistent.

Anyway, we have another election in a week, so here's my take on it.

Alabama Take Two: Just one runoff, but it's seen as an important one. In AL-2(Mongomery-Dothan), incumbent Congresswoman Martha Roby is fighting for her political life after managing to scrape through to next week's runoff in a GOP primary season where the biggest crime is disloyalty to Trump. That water, however, seems to have gone under the bridge since Trump tweeted is support for Roby on June 22, so I think that the race will go to her after all, and that she'll easily beat Tabitha Isner in November.

The number of red states that have Senate races is a little sad for Democrats. But, Tabitha Isner doesn't stand a chance. It's Alabama. Jones only won because Roy Moore was a suspected child rapist.

Alabama was impirtant for exactly 3 reasons:

First, it indicated that Trumps sway among Republicans isn't total. Not even he could polish the turd enough to get Republicans to vote for Moore. That is an intriguing line of thought, and somewhat promising for Democrats.

Second, amd more importantly, it indicated that it is possible to get Democrats out in numbers similar to the General election. The narrative that they will never show up in off elections simply isn't true. Gramted it took a lot of effort, but its possible to get them out.

Third, it put the Senate in play at least technically, if not realistically. Prior to Jones, there was just no way at all for the Dems to pick up the Senate. While it ia still highly unlikely they can pick up a slim majority, without Jones it was a comolete impossibility. I doubt this will matter in November, but it at least leaves an outside chance.

Now, anybody believing it was the beginning of a blue wave were and are delusional. It represents no such thing. It does have implications, though minor.

[Mr Conservative]

It's kind of just par for the course. Next cycle (2020) there's probably going to be 21 Republicans up for re-election in the Senate but the only seats the only seats that are in troublesome states are Susan Collins in ME and Cory Gardner in CO. Beyond that it's the same long shot opportunities for pickups like Perdue in GA, Cornyn in TX, and Joni Ernst in IA. There's just not a whole lot of spots on the map to pick off Republicans because there's so many deep red states. Plus the Dems have to try to defend the seat they just won in Alabama. The potential for gained seats in 2020 is also pretty narrow, though at least the Dems will have far fewer to play defense on.

Ernst isn't exactly a long shot because she's in IA, she's a long shot because she's a popular figure in a purple state. I can see Gardner losing but not Susan Collins. At any rate, that's still two years off.

Iowa is about as purple as Virginia. Both are actually getting pretty far out of reach for the other party.

At any rate while it is two years off, I see a lot of people dismissing the fact the Dems are going to have trouble taking the Senate back because this map is chalk full of so many naturally red states. But when you look forward that's really not a valid excuse if they want to take back the Senate. They have to figure out how to win in red states because there's a crap ton of them. If you look back at the 111th congress their majority was not based on running the board in purple states. It was based on far more Democrats elected in deep red states.

[Oldenfranck]

What do yall's senate guesses look like as of now? Obviously mine has changed and will continue to change, but here are my guesses so far.

AZ- Sinema wins 51-47

CA- Both are dems so really does not matter but my guess is 68-32 Feinstein beats De Leon

CT- Murphy wins 57-41

DE- Carper wins 63-35

Fl- Nelson wins 50-49

HI- Hirono wins 67-30

IN- Braun wins 51-48

ME- King wins 55-34-11

MD- Cardin wins 61-37

MA- Warren wins 58-40

MI- Stabenow wins 55-43

MN reg- Klobuchar wins 59-37

MN special: Smith wins 53-44

MS reg- Wicker wins 59-40

MS special: Hyde-Smith wins 57-43

MO- McCaskill wins 50-48

MT- Tester wins 51-45

NE- Fischer wins 58-40

NV- Rosen wins 49-46

NJ- Menendez wins 53-42

NM- Heinrich wins 54-40

NY- GIllibrand wins 65-33

ND- Cramer wins 53-45

OH- Brown wins 53-45

PA- Casey wins 54-44

RI- Whitehouse wins 61-36

TN- Blackburn wins 52-46

TX- Cruz wins 53-45

UT- Romney wins 72-24

VT- Bernie wins 73-24

VA- Kaine wins 57-40

WA- Cantwell wins 59-39

WV- Manchin wins 52-46 without big Don and 49-41-10 with big Don

WI- Baldwin wins 53-45

WY- Barasso wins 71-27