Politer Politics

[snow_wizard]

20 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

In terms of who won, the CNN instant poll had Vance 51% and Walz 49%.  Poll had a little larger Dem sampling.  

Both candidates' favorability ratings spiked quite a bit after the debate.  Vance net favorability went from being way, way underwater (-22) to only slightly under at -3.

No doubt Vance gained some ground tonight.  Very exciting to see a CNN poll showing Vance won.

[SilverFallsAndrew]

Ha 

[snow_wizard]

1 minute ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

Ha 

Let the memes begin!

[TT-SEA]

4 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

Let the memes begin!

Unfortunately it goes the other way for Trump.  His VP pick is far superior to him. 

[Chewbacca Defense]

17 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

The president up big in Montana. 

And water is wet.

[Slushy Inch]

20 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

The president up big in Montana. 

Biden is no longer running…

[BLI snowman]

22 minutes ago, Hoosier said:

Yeah, I kept waiting for Walz to give an answer to that question about when he was in China.  Waiting and waiting, and then the ultimate response pretty much sucked.

Vance's answer on 2020 was perhaps his weakest moment.  Not surprised that he handled it the way he did, but it didn't play well.  Happened like 85 minutes into the debate, but it may be the thing most likely to live on for a while in a debate that was pretty unremarkable overall.

Yeah, Vance is obviously under strict marching orders to not acknowledge the legitimacy of the 2020 election. Kind of a catch-22 for him, because doing so would undermine his boss and also open up the floodgates to a sea of grilling that they wouldn't see the end of.

Given that, I thought his answer was okay but his pivot on that to censorship was a little clumsy and forced. He would have been better off with keeping things a little more on topic and pivoting to voter ID laws to protect election integrity instead, especially since that's a weak point for the Dems and something Harris/Walz don't support despite the majority of Americans disagreeing. 

Edited October 2 by BLI snowman

[SilverFallsAndrew]

Well… 

[Slushy Inch]

1 minute ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

Well… 

Congratulations you got us

[snow_wizard]

4 minutes ago, BLI snowman said:

Yeah, Vance is obviously under strict marching orders to not acknowledge the legitimacy of the 2020 election. Kind of a catch-22 for him, because doing so would undermine his boss and also open up the floodgates to a sea of grilling that they wouldn't see the end of.

Given that, I thought his answer was okay but his pivot on that to censorship was a little clumsy and forced. He would have been better off with keeping things a little more on topic and pivoting to voter ID laws to protect election integrity instead, especially since that's a weak point for the Dems and something Harris/Walz don't support despite the majority of Americans disagreeing. 

Yes indeed.

[Slushy Inch]

I wonder what will happen when a real lefty gets nominated for president. In the dem primary a Public option for healthcare was the moderate position and Medicare for all was the progressive position, now it’s just defending Obamacare.

[SilverFallsAndrew]

7 minutes ago, Slushy Inch said:

I wonder what will happen when a real lefty gets nominated for president. In the dem primary a Public option for healthcare was the moderate position and Medicare for all was the progressive position, now it’s just defending Obamacare.

No offense but are you drunk today?

[Slushy Inch]

7 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

No offense but are you drunk today?

No. You guys probably think Kamala is a radical, I think she is a centrist. What I said about the dem primary was true. I drink pretty rarely, only on special occasions.

[snow_wizard]

25 minutes ago, Slushy Inch said:

No. You guys probably think Kamala is a radical, I think she is a centrist. What I said about the dem primary was true. I drink pretty rarely, only on special occasions.

How do you explain Kamala's radical voting record in the Senate then?  Further left than Bernie....

[Slushy Inch]

1 minute ago, snow_wizard said:

How do you explain Kamala's radical voting record in the Senate then?  Further left than Bernie....

People say that but on what exactly?

[snow_wizard]

3 minutes ago, Slushy Inch said:

People say that but on what exactly?

It was on all of the bills she voted on.  Furthest left of any Senator.

[Minny_Weather]

4 hours ago, snow_wizard said:

It was on all of the bills she voted on.  Furthest left of any Senator.

Yeah, I'm not sure how anyone can say that Kamala is a centrist with a straight face lmao. There are a handful of centrists in the Senate, 2-3 from each party roughly, and Kamala was never close to being one of them.

[SilverFallsAndrew]

I’m surprised at the media narrative about the debate this morning. I didn’t think Walz bombed, but that seems to be the consensus. 

[TT-SEA]

18 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

I’m surprised at the media narrative about the debate this morning. I didn’t think Walz bombed, but that seems to be the consensus. 

A draw is boring news... they have to make up some news for clicks.

[SnarkyGoblin]

24 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

I’m surprised at the media narrative about the debate this morning. I didn’t think Walz bombed, but that seems to be the consensus. 

You're surprised that Breitbart thinks Walz bombed?

[SilverFallsAndrew]

25 minutes ago, SnarkyGoblin said:

You're surprised that Breitbart thinks Walz bombed?

I’m obviously talking about left wing outlets  that make up 99.9% of the media landscape.

[SilverFallsAndrew]

This has been a pretty solid week for the president when it comes to polling. I had predicted any debate bounce Kamala enjoyed would begin fading this week. 

[SilverFallsAndrew]

Breitbart was a little over the top.

[SnarkyGoblin]

15 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

I’m obviously talking about left wing outlets  that make up 99.9% of the media landscape.

lol.  delusional. 

It would be nice for you to post the multiple articles you are referencing where they say Walz bombed. 

[Groundhog]

Yup

[SilverFallsAndrew]

I have to report some encouraging polls for americas enemy within. Cook political report polls show VP Harris with 1-2% leads in 5 of 7 critical swing states. Other words within the margin of error of all the other polls, but of course we like to see the president on top. 

[SilverFallsAndrew]

The key rust belt senate races are really tightening. If the president wins I bet they pick up a couple of those seats.

[SilverFallsAndrew]

The nations attention is now gravitating back to Butler, PA. Big rally coming up Saturday. 

[Slushy Inch]

8 hours ago, snow_wizard said:

It was on all of the bills she voted on.  Furthest left of any Senator.

Ok what crazy stuff did she vote yes on? Any example? And why is the stuff not in her policy proposals? She’s either a coward or a liar. I’m talking about someone running who doesn’t hide from progressive policies, Bernie wouldn’t go moderate for the general election. Someone who doesn’t moderate is what I want to see. 

[hawkstwelve]

1 hour ago, Slushy Inch said:

Ok what crazy stuff did she vote yes on? Any example? And why is the stuff not in her policy proposals? She’s either a coward or a liar. I’m talking about someone running who doesn’t hide from progressive policies, Bernie wouldn’t go moderate for the general election. Someone who doesn’t moderate is what I want to see. 

Politicians moderate in a general election for a reason. Thankfully, the majority of this country lies somewhere in the middle of both parties instead of with the ever-vocal extremes. In order to win, you need moderates from both parties and Independents, who also generally align in the middle. Politicians recognize that and adjust accordingly following the primaries, where instead they pander to those extremes because that's usually who shows up during primary season. Bernie has as much of a chance of winning a general as MTG does - which is zero - because neither of them are moderate or even pretend to be (like Kamala is doing). Politics 101 here.

As for Kamala's voting record, this is not some right wing conspiracy as you are alluding to and a quick Google would show that to be true. Here's an excerpt from an article from The Hill:

Quote

The Voteview project (now based at UCLA) has, since the 1980s, employed the roll-call votes cast in Congress to locate all senators and representatives on a liberal-conservative ideological map. These data and methods have been utilized by academics in thousands of peer-reviewed books, book chapters and journal articles. Although no method is perfect, there is a general consensus within the academic community that the NOMINATE methodology employed by the Voteview project and its close cousins represent the gold standard.

The Voteview data can be used to study the Senate in two principal ways. The first method analyzes each two-year congressional period separately and provides a unique ideological location for every senator for each biennium, allowing for the comparison of senators who served during that Congress, but not for the comparison of senators across Congresses. The second method analyzes the congressional periods together and provides a single ideological location for a senator based on the entirety of their voting record while in that office, thereby allowing for the comparison of senators across Congresses.

In the 115th Congress (2017-2019), 48 Democrats served in the Senate and cast a sufficient number of votes for reliable analysis. Of those 48, Harris had the third-most liberal voting record, after Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.).

In the 116th Congress (2019-2020), 45 Democrats served in the Senate and cast a sufficient number of votes for reliable analysis. Of those 45, Harris had the second-most liberal voting record after Warren.

Since the turn of the century, there have been 11 complete Congresses (107th through 117th), with only five months remaining in the 118th. During this period, there were 109 different Democrats who served in the Senate and cast a sufficient number of roll call votes for a reliable analysis of their ideological position.

Of these 109 Democrats, Harris has the second-most liberal voting record. This makes her slightly less liberal than Warren, but more liberal than all of the remaining 107 Democrats, and significantly more liberal than all but a handful.

 

That discusses just a couple methods used to prove she is among the most liberal Senators this country has seen over the past couple decades. GovTrack, a non-partisan organization that tracks bills in Congress, also came to this same conclusion in 2019. This isn't just accounting for her up/down voting record but also includes legislation that she sponsored or co-sponsored, among those being 'Medicare for All' and 'The Green New Deal'. I don't think anyone would claim those were moderate bills. If you need further proof of specific votes, I would suggest researching her Senate voting record for yourself instead of relying on other people to do the work for you. You might be surprised at what you learn. 

[Hoosier]

3 hours ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

I’m surprised at the media narrative about the debate this morning. I didn’t think Walz bombed, but that seems to be the consensus. 

I think there might be a disconnect between the talking heads and the viewers at home.  Walz missed some opportunities, which would be more noticeable to the talking heads compared to the average voter since they are very in tune with this stuff.  Maybe the expectations were higher for Walz after the Harris-Trump debate.  Vance isn't Trump though, so nobody should've been expecting a Trump type of performance out of him.  

[SilverFallsAndrew]

1 minute ago, Hoosier said:

I think there might be a disconnect between the talking heads and the viewers at home.  Walz missed some opportunities, which would be more noticeable to the talking heads compared to the average voter since they are very in tune with this stuff.  Maybe the expectations were higher for Walz after the Harris-Trump debate.  Vance isn't Trump though, so nobody should've been expecting a Trump type of performance out of him.  

Yeah it was pretty much 50/50 in most polling with maybe a slight edge for Vance. 

[SilverFallsAndrew]

Oh weird. I guess it’s an embarrassing nervous tic. 

Edited October 2 by SilverFallsAndrew

[snow_wizard]

4 hours ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

I’m surprised at the media narrative about the debate this morning. I didn’t think Walz bombed, but that seems to be the consensus. 

I've heard there are people who listened to the debate on the radio and thought Walz did ok, but then they watched it and went OMG at how bad the optics were for him.  The snapshots as Dan Bongino calls them are horrible for Walz.  On the other Vance looked really good and Presidential.  

[snow_wizard]

4 minutes ago, SilverFallsAndrew said:

Oh weird. 

IMG_0537.MOV

Yikes! 

[snow_wizard]

538 has Harris +0.6 in PA now.  Her lead has become razor thin.  In 2020 Biden was way ahead at this time.

[TT-SEA]

9 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

538 has Harris +0.6 in PA now.  Her lead has become razor thin.  In 2020 Biden was way ahead at this time.

Really hope they over-corrected for the errors of 2016 and 2020!

[SilverFallsAndrew]

I guess Harris went on a podcast to talk about Doritos while people in NC now realize federal help isn’t coming. 

[Hoosier]

11 minutes ago, snow_wizard said:

538 has Harris +0.6 in PA now.  Her lead has become razor thin.  In 2020 Biden was way ahead at this time.

The RCP average is literally a dead tie at 48.2 to 48.2.  Wow

[Hoosier]

Biden says he does not support a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.  

Will Israel listen?