(11-19-2018 12:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 10:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  2018 - Dems 61m, GOP 50m

I'm sure california's senate race of democrat vs. democrat had nothing to do with that.

You still can not vote if you don't like either candidate. But seriously, how many races in California didn't have a Republican? CA-06 (Trump got 24 percent here), CA-13 (Trump got 6 percent - no, I'm not leaving off a digit - here). CA-20 (Trump got 23 percent), CA-27 (Trump got 28 percent). CA-34 (Trump got 10 percent), CA-40 (Trump got 12 percent). And CA-44 (Trump got 12 percent.

In CA-08, there were 2 REPUBLICANS (Clinton got 40 percent there)

So lets just add it all up, assuming that the Republicans got every vote that went to Trump in 2018 (which is highly generous to you guys), and subtracting the CA-08 for the Clinton voters, you get...52 percent of a California CD vote. So the net impact of all the jungle primaries would be to add perhaps 100k to the GOP vote total. In an election of 110 million voters, that's not much, but I'll add a .1 to the GOP total if you'd like.

BTW, the Dems and GOP didn't field candidates in a number of House elections this cycle (or as in California, several of them couldn't beat the Green or Libertarian candidates). But most of these candidates were in hopeless districts where the number of votes they would have received would be small, and might have been offset by greater vote totals for the incumbent party as those incumbents used their money to drive GOTV in their districts.

There were many states that didn't have a Senate race, but did have a Governor's race. Not sure why a California Republican would not vote because there was no Senate candidate to vote for, while a Georgia Republican would.

----

Either way, Pelosi is looking likely to be speaker. There's really little appetite on our side for infighting.

(11-19-2018 06:30 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 10:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  2018 - Dems 61m, GOP 50m

I'm sure california's senate race of democrat vs. democrat had nothing to do with that.

You still can not vote if you don't like either candidate. But seriously, how many races in California didn't have a Republican? CA-06 (Trump got 24 percent here), CA-13 (Trump got 6 percent - no, I'm not leaving off a digit - here). CA-20 (Trump got 23 percent), CA-27 (Trump got 28 percent). CA-34 (Trump got 10 percent), CA-40 (Trump got 12 percent). And CA-44 (Trump got 12 percent.

In CA-08, there were 2 REPUBLICANS (Clinton got 40 percent there)

So lets just add it all up, assuming that the Republicans got every vote that went to Trump in 2018 (which is highly generous to you guys), and subtracting the CA-08 for the Clinton voters, you get...52 percent of a California CD vote. So the net impact of all the jungle primaries would be to add perhaps 100k to the GOP vote total. In an election of 110 million voters, that's not much, but I'll add a .1 to the GOP total if you'd like.

BTW, the Dems and GOP didn't field candidates in a number of House elections this cycle (or as in California, several of them couldn't beat the Green or Libertarian candidates). But most of these candidates were in hopeless districts where the number of votes they would have received would be small, and might have been offset by greater vote totals for the incumbent party as those incumbents used their money to drive GOTV in their districts.

There were many states that didn't have a Senate race, but did have a Governor's race. Not sure why a California Republican would not vote because there was no Senate candidate to vote for, while a Georgia Republican would.

----

Either way, Pelosi is looking likely to be speaker. There's really little appetite on our side for infighting.

True. Hillary wants the nomination. Cheat to help her. Sanders doesn't complain. Bill Clinton a rapist who takes advantage of a young intern-no problem. DNC chairman a wife beater-believe the man. NJ Senator corrupt as they come-stand behind him.

(11-19-2018 08:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 06:30 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 10:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  2018 - Dems 61m, GOP 50m

I'm sure california's senate race of democrat vs. democrat had nothing to do with that.

You still can not vote if you don't like either candidate. But seriously, how many races in California didn't have a Republican? CA-06 (Trump got 24 percent here), CA-13 (Trump got 6 percent - no, I'm not leaving off a digit - here). CA-20 (Trump got 23 percent), CA-27 (Trump got 28 percent). CA-34 (Trump got 10 percent), CA-40 (Trump got 12 percent). And CA-44 (Trump got 12 percent.

In CA-08, there were 2 REPUBLICANS (Clinton got 40 percent there)

So lets just add it all up, assuming that the Republicans got every vote that went to Trump in 2018 (which is highly generous to you guys), and subtracting the CA-08 for the Clinton voters, you get...52 percent of a California CD vote. So the net impact of all the jungle primaries would be to add perhaps 100k to the GOP vote total. In an election of 110 million voters, that's not much, but I'll add a .1 to the GOP total if you'd like.

BTW, the Dems and GOP didn't field candidates in a number of House elections this cycle (or as in California, several of them couldn't beat the Green or Libertarian candidates). But most of these candidates were in hopeless districts where the number of votes they would have received would be small, and might have been offset by greater vote totals for the incumbent party as those incumbents used their money to drive GOTV in their districts.

There were many states that didn't have a Senate race, but did have a Governor's race. Not sure why a California Republican would not vote because there was no Senate candidate to vote for, while a Georgia Republican would.

----

Either way, Pelosi is looking likely to be speaker. There's really little appetite on our side for infighting.

True. Hillary wants the nomination. Cheat to help her. Sanders doesn't complain. Bill Clinton a rapist who takes advantage of a young intern-no problem. DNC chairman a wife beater-believe the man. NJ Senator corrupt as they come-stand behind him.

LOL. Sounds like someone wants to rerun 2016. You guys have shown your playbook. Good luck with that. We gain 10 million voters over 2018 and we win. You gain 20 million and you win. Its on.

I think it would be glorious to behold for Ms. Peloki to win the Speaker. Let the infighting begin! Intra-House DEM infighting that is...

(11-19-2018 09:51 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

"Appears" = trolling. His Orangeness will get her the GOP votes if she needs them to get to 218 for the Speaker.

(11-19-2018 08:21 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 06:30 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 10:34 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  2018 - Dems 61m, GOP 50m

I'm sure california's senate race of democrat vs. democrat had nothing to do with that.

You still can not vote if you don't like either candidate. But seriously, how many races in California didn't have a Republican? CA-06 (Trump got 24 percent here), CA-13 (Trump got 6 percent - no, I'm not leaving off a digit - here). CA-20 (Trump got 23 percent), CA-27 (Trump got 28 percent). CA-34 (Trump got 10 percent), CA-40 (Trump got 12 percent). And CA-44 (Trump got 12 percent.

In CA-08, there were 2 REPUBLICANS (Clinton got 40 percent there)

So lets just add it all up, assuming that the Republicans got every vote that went to Trump in 2018 (which is highly generous to you guys), and subtracting the CA-08 for the Clinton voters, you get...52 percent of a California CD vote. So the net impact of all the jungle primaries would be to add perhaps 100k to the GOP vote total. In an election of 110 million voters, that's not much, but I'll add a .1 to the GOP total if you'd like.

BTW, the Dems and GOP didn't field candidates in a number of House elections this cycle (or as in California, several of them couldn't beat the Green or Libertarian candidates). But most of these candidates were in hopeless districts where the number of votes they would have received would be small, and might have been offset by greater vote totals for the incumbent party as those incumbents used their money to drive GOTV in their districts.

There were many states that didn't have a Senate race, but did have a Governor's race. Not sure why a California Republican would not vote because there was no Senate candidate to vote for, while a Georgia Republican would.

----

Either way, Pelosi is looking likely to be speaker. There's really little appetite on our side for infighting.

True. Hillary wants the nomination. Cheat to help her. Sanders doesn't complain. Bill Clinton a rapist who takes advantage of a young intern-no problem. DNC chairman a wife beater-believe the man. NJ Senator corrupt as they come-stand behind him.

LOL. Sounds like someone wants to rerun 2016. You guys have shown your playbook. Good luck with that. We gain 10 million voters over 2018 and we win. You gain 20 million and you win. Its on.

We gained seats in the Senate. We won most of the governor's races, including in 3 of the bluest states in the country. 2020 is going to be just like 2000, 2004, 2012 and 2016. Very dependent on a few states. In 2016 the Democrats poured a bunch of money into Texas and Georgia, almost none into Michigan and Wisconsin. Continue your delusions.

(11-19-2018 10:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:21 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 08:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 06:30 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:33 PM)Kronke Wrote:  I'm sure california's senate race of democrat vs. democrat had nothing to do with that.

You still can not vote if you don't like either candidate. But seriously, how many races in California didn't have a Republican? CA-06 (Trump got 24 percent here), CA-13 (Trump got 6 percent - no, I'm not leaving off a digit - here). CA-20 (Trump got 23 percent), CA-27 (Trump got 28 percent). CA-34 (Trump got 10 percent), CA-40 (Trump got 12 percent). And CA-44 (Trump got 12 percent.

In CA-08, there were 2 REPUBLICANS (Clinton got 40 percent there)

So lets just add it all up, assuming that the Republicans got every vote that went to Trump in 2018 (which is highly generous to you guys), and subtracting the CA-08 for the Clinton voters, you get...52 percent of a California CD vote. So the net impact of all the jungle primaries would be to add perhaps 100k to the GOP vote total. In an election of 110 million voters, that's not much, but I'll add a .1 to the GOP total if you'd like.

BTW, the Dems and GOP didn't field candidates in a number of House elections this cycle (or as in California, several of them couldn't beat the Green or Libertarian candidates). But most of these candidates were in hopeless districts where the number of votes they would have received would be small, and might have been offset by greater vote totals for the incumbent party as those incumbents used their money to drive GOTV in their districts.

There were many states that didn't have a Senate race, but did have a Governor's race. Not sure why a California Republican would not vote because there was no Senate candidate to vote for, while a Georgia Republican would.

----

Either way, Pelosi is looking likely to be speaker. There's really little appetite on our side for infighting.

True. Hillary wants the nomination. Cheat to help her. Sanders doesn't complain. Bill Clinton a rapist who takes advantage of a young intern-no problem. DNC chairman a wife beater-believe the man. NJ Senator corrupt as they come-stand behind him.

LOL. Sounds like someone wants to rerun 2016. You guys have shown your playbook. Good luck with that. We gain 10 million voters over 2018 and we win. You gain 20 million and you win. Its on.

We gained seats in the Senate. We won most of the governor's races, including in 3 of the bluest states in the country. 2020 is going to be just like 2000, 2004, 2012 and 2016. Very dependent on a few states. In 2016 the Democrats poured a bunch of money into Texas and Georgia, almost none into Michigan and Wisconsin. Continue your delusions.

Ok, we will have to stay tuned on this one.

https://www.csnbbs.com/thread-863366.html Wisconsin
https://www.csnbbs.com/thread-863349.html Michigan

Fudge melts under pressure - says she won't oppose Pelosi.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/...index.html

(11-20-2018 07:37 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Fudge melts under pressure - says she won't oppose Pelosi

LOL

You never know when being a character-reference for a known wife-beater and future wife-killer will come back to haunt you. Speaker Pelosi: SHE’S BACK!

I really hope she is speaker. She is such a idiot that she damages the Democrat party with every ill timed and foolish thing she says. She is the best thing the GOP has going for it. Let her speak. Please let her speak.

"Nancy, think on the votes I can get you for Speaker while I put you on hold for a moment. I need to take this call from Russian Ambassador Antonov, ok?"