Charlie Baker is the last respectable Republican anywhere, and he left his 2016 and 2020 ballots blank. A slightly disappointing but safe decision in MA.
Charlie Baker is the last respectable Republican anywhere, and he left his 2016 and 2020 ballots blank. A slightly disappointing but safe decision in MA.Well now you guys are just being redundant.
But seriously, how many prominent Republicans didn't vote for Trump in either general election AND admitted that? I realize I'm setting the bar super low*, but that puts Hogan in rare air. I'm not saying he deserves to run well in Maryland; just that on the shittiness scale, he's not overflowing diapers.
* with Repugs, that's the only way they ever clear the bar
I never implied people are moving to rural areas. This is all in your head, just like your weird totally only based on feelings projections, for which you refuse to provide any data for.What parts of Texas are getting an increase in population making it closer and closer in elections? The rural areas?
Never mind, you're so set in making what I said about feelings while ignoring the fact that cities and megaregions are pulling in population that you'll ignore objective reality unless I provide you evidence that has been notarized, when census data going back to the 1700 exists and is available.
How about Ohio? Is it becoming closer and closer each over the last decade? How about Florida?
Ok then.
You're only looking at 1 state.
There are 49 other states. So Texas becomes bluer as people move to cities/megaregions of Texas.
It's already happening in Atlanta, that has nothing to do with how the Senate is going to look in 2044-2054 when those cities and megaregions have tens of millions of people while every state that doesn't have large cities or megaregions are going to become even redder.
Are there going to be 30+ states with enough cities to give the Democratic Party 60 Senators? Can you name those 30 states? Right now the Democratic Party is competitive in about 20-23.
Yes, keep repeating the "feelings" thing in a thread that is about people's feelings about the Senate makeup.I never implied people are moving to rural areas. This is all in your head, just like your weird totally only based on feelings projections, for which you refuse to provide any data for.
You have no data just feelings. You do realize other states are turning more purple to more blue btw, not just Texas. If you have data to predict inter us migration patterns for the next three decades, by all means, feel free to post literally anything at all.
I never implied people are moving to rural areas. This is all in your head, just like your weird totally only based on feelings projections, for which you refuse to provide any data for.
You have no data just feelings. You do realize other states are turning more purple to more blue btw, not just Texas. If you have data to predict inter us migration patterns for the next three decades, by all means, feel free to post literally anything at all.
It can't imagine that the difference between 5 million people per sq mi when Queens has 22 M/sq mile as it is would make for a rational reason to move. But who knowsMigration pattern from Queens is to move to Long Island because it has "better schools" for the kids. Everyone irrespective of income/ race/ place of birth seems to repeat the same thing.
Apparently NYC is the hood and Long Island is "upper class".
Your numbers don’t even pass the smell test and in fact are off by a factor of over 1000.It can't imagine that the difference between 5 million people per sq mi when Queens has 22 M/sq mile as it is would make for a rational reason to move. But who knows
They did pass the blindness test: The population density of NYC (27,013 people per square mile) dwarfs most other metropolitan areas of the United States.Your numbers don’t even pass the smell test and in fact are off by a factor of over 1000.
Thanks for explaing where you are coming from, but for what you think will happen, it would require those big regional cities, and state seats that represent those big cities, to flip from blue to red. The rural states/seates you speak of, are already red, so the population shift to regional cities won't change the outcome without those seats flipping to red also.Hold on.
First off, in a thread about retaining the Senate, I said 50-50 is likely, and I meant to say 52R-48D but I tried to use parallel ratios and mixed up the letters. Which I corrected. I can see the Senate being 48-52 either way. Who knows? No one until the votes are counted.
So, this entire thread is "feelings".
Second, you bolded me saying: "The more concerning thing is that as the population shifts from rural areas to regional cities"
This is happening now, and it's always been happening. You can look at census data throughout US history to see regional cities literally attracting people from rural areas to regional centers where there are jobs and opportunities that just don't exist in rural areas.
As regional cities grow, attracting more open-minded liberal-esque people, rural states are going to become more red. And as we all know, no matter how small of a population North Dakota has, they get 2 Senators. And no matter how large of a population California has, they get 2 Senators.
I didn't predict a massive population shift. I'm talking about the ongoing population growth of regional cities/megaregions over 20-30 years.
In the future, 20-30 years from now, the House will be one thing, while the Senate will be another. Unless the Senate is apportioned by population, I highly doubt that traditional conservatives won't have a solid majority, if not super majority. At least with 50 states. Adding states would change that, which is why Republicans are so against it and liberals are relatively behind it.
Again, unless you think that regional cities and megaregions are going to start dispersing liberal voters into rural areas. I think that's a far more unlikely scenario.
What parts of Texas are getting an increase in population making it closer and closer in elections? The rural areas?
Never mind, you're so set in making what I said about feelings while ignoring the fact that cities and megaregions are pulling in population that you'll ignore objective reality unless I provide you evidence that has been notarized, when census data going back to the 1700 exists and is available.
How about Ohio? Is it becoming closer and closer each over the last decade? How about Florida?
Ok then.
You're only looking at 1 state.
There are 49 other states. So Texas becomes bluer as people move to cities/megaregions of Texas.
It's already happening in Atlanta, that has nothing to do with how the Senate is going to look in 2044-2054 when those cities and megaregions have tens of millions of people while every state that doesn't have large cities or megaregions are going to become even redder.
Are there going to be 30+ states with enough cities to give the Democratic Party 60 Senators? Can you name those 30 states? Right now the Democratic Party is competitive in about 20-23.
Although Harris winning should bode well down ballot, I don't think there's anything she can do or say now that helps Sens. Jon Tester and Sherrod Brown in the fights of their lives.Harris making lots of promises but not doing a good enough job reminding voters she needs the Senate
If Dems lose the Senate nothing will get passed and voters will be pissed yet again saying nothing ever changes and a red wave will hit in 2026
Might as well give the civics lesson that apparently most people in this country never had, or just got a C-.Harris making lots of promises but not doing a good enough job reminding voters she needs the Senate
If Dems lose the Senate nothing will get passed and voters will be pissed yet again saying nothing ever changes and a red wave will hit in 2026
Although Harris winning should bode well down ballot, I don't think there's anything she can do or say now that helps Sens. Jon Tester and Sherrod Brown in the fights of their lives.
We just have an incredibly difficult Senate map to get to 50, and it'll be this way as long as voters keep reelecting the same dirtbags like Moscow Mitch, Chuck Grassley, and even someone like Susan Collins.
The polls, as limited as they may be, suggest otherwise. NV and MD are currently both holds.I'm not worried about Brown in OH. He's always run better than he should because he's more moderate. Plus, his opponent is a walking shit-show.
Tester's opponent has also been kicking himself in the dick for a few weeks now.
I'd be more concerned about NV and MD.
yeah, we noticed.I know almost nothing about NY
And yet, here you are, needing to ridicule someone so abject of knowledge he admits to knowing little about NYC. What magnificent self respect you must have to have such a need as to present yourself superior to such an ignorant person. You noticed something all right, but not the point of my confession. I was saying to you that I don't look down on you for where you live and specifically to you because you have a bad case of lack of self respect.yeah, we noticed.
The polls, as limited as they may be, suggest otherwise. NV and MD are currently both holds.
In OH, Sherrod Brown has always been strong and you're right he's got a favorable match-up.
Down in all recent polls, Tester is a small underdog at this point.
PA must feel like the center of the universe. Not only for the Presidential election, but the Senate contest is within 3 points.
I think what you're saying is that you have (reasonable) concerns, even if the data does not back any of that up right now.I'm not a huge fan of senate polls. Especially in races like MT/OH where they've both faced the same thing for several cycles and their incumbency ends up winning out over a shitty GQP candidate.
NV is on my list because of 2 things, sliding support in key demographics and the whole "no taxes on tips" bit. It's always close and those could make a difference.
MD is purely a name recognition thing. Hogan against a relative unknown scares me.
Plus the pissed off women quotient. Dobbs decision will have a major effect.I think some swing state senate races could be carried to a win simply due to voter turnout for Kamala/Tim