What states are moving further left or right in the US

[iiandyiiii]

@adaher

What Steny Hoyer should be asking is why Democratic House candidates underperformed Senate candidates and Obama so badly.

I just emailed Congressman Hoyer: “This guy on the internet who is almost always wrong with his predictions thinks you should ask ‘why Democratic House candidates underperformed Senate candidates and Obama so badly’”.

I’m sure he’ll treat it with the seriousness it deserves.

[pkbites]

@BobLibDem

He’s misreading the results of the recall election

You’ve posted similar to this multiple times and refuse to articulate your point.

Unions in fact do hate Walkers guts, especially state employee unions. But the other fact is more votes were cast in the recall than were cast in the original gubernatorial election, and Walker received more votes than the first time, winning by a higher percentage, against the same opponent.

What exactly is there to misread?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@adaher

Plus it’s a useless talking point. Majorities don’t change hands based on a 1 percentage point win.

Why shouldn’t they? Every House seat is up for grabs in every election.

[Inner_Stickler]

@Bricker

I have a funny feeling that the new thread I start in November to remind readership of this set of predictions will be called “unseemly,” because I’m gloating. Right? The general reaction of the membership will be embarrassed throat-clearing and a desire to quickly change the subject.

And it will be just as unseemly if Walker loses and Boblibdem starts a thread to remind you.

Poor behavior garners poor reactions. I’m not sure why you think this is revelatory.

[BrainGlutton]

@adaher

Majorities don’t change hands based on a 1 percentage point win.

That is how it happened in 1994.

[BrainGlutton]

@Bricker

I have a funny feeling that the new thread I start in November to remind readership of this set of predictions will be called “unseemly,” because I’m gloating. Right?

[shrug] So don’t do it. Problem solved.

[BobLibDem]

@pkbites

You’ve posted similar to this multiple times and refuse to articulate your point.

Unions in fact do hate Walkers guts, especially state employee unions. But the other fact is more votes were cast in the recall than were cast in the original gubernatorial election, and Walker received more votes than the first time, winning by a higher percentage, against the same opponent.

What exactly is there to misread?

Here’s the poop- many Wisconsites disapproved of Walker’s treatment of public employee unions and his conduct in general. But they did not believe that such things rose to the level of being worthy of a recall. So they voted against the recall and not necessarily for Walker. I believe Walker misread this as being vindication of his policies, it is far from the case.

Also, bear in mind that for special elections, Republican voters tend to have greater turnout than Democrats. Now he’s up in a regular election, so let’s see what happens.

[Chronos]

Some of that vote was from people who don’t like recalling politicians mid-term, period, and do not reflect their opinion of Walker himself. If Walker and his team don’t take that into account, then they’re misreading it.

[pkbites]

@BobLibDem

Here’s the poop- many Wisconsites disapproved of Walker’s treatment of public employee unions and his conduct in general. But they did not believe that such things rose to the level of being worthy of a recall. So they voted against the recall and not necessarily for Walker. I believe Walker misread this as being vindication of his policies, it is far from the case.

@Chronos

Some of that vote was from people who don’t like recalling politicians mid-term, period, and do not reflect their opinion of Walker himself. If Walker and his team don’t take that into account, then they’re misreading it.

What part of your colons are you guys pulling these “facts” from?

[BobLibDem]

@pkbites

What part of your colons are you guys pulling these “facts” from?

As I recall, that’s what the pollsters were saying in the wake of the recall election.

[pkbites]

@BobLibDem

As I recall, that’s what the pollsters were saying in the wake of the recall election.

Then cite it.

[BobLibDem]

Here is a pretty good summation of what happened in the recall.

Money: As of Monday, more than $63 million has been spent on the recall fight with Walker and his conservative allies vastly outspending Barrett and other Democratic-aligned groups.

Walker himself had raised in excess of $30 million for the recall campaign while Barrett collected just under $4 million.

Being outspent 10-1 (or worse) is never a recipe for success in a race. Democrats cried foul over Walker’s exploitation of a loophole that allowed him to collect unlimited contributions prior to the official announcement of the recall in late March. Of course, Democrats also pushed the recall and Walker played by the rules of the game — making what he did strategically smart rather than underhandedly nefarious.

• 2010: There was considerable internal discussion and disagreement between Washington and Wisconsin Democrats (and organized labor) about whether to push for a recall election this summer or wait until 2014 for a chance to unseat Walker. (Washington Democrats broadly favored the latter option, Wisconsin Democrats and labor the former).

As the recall played out, two things became clear: 1) There were almost no one undecided in the race and 2) those few souls who were undecided tended to resist the recall effort on the grounds that Walker had just been elected in 2010.

[BobLibDem]

@pkbites

Then cite it.

Okily-dokily.

The biggest challenge to the Barrett campaign may have been the nature of the recall itself. On the exit poll, just 27 percent of the voters judged recall elections appropriate for any reason, but 60 percent said they are appropriate only for official misconduct and 10 percent said recalls are never appropriate. Walker won those in the middle category by more than a two-to-one margin.

[Reginald_Hobbes]

So we have a group of voters who,
(1) believe recalls should only be used for cases of misconduct, and
(2) voted for Walker in the recall.

What we need is the data that shows how many times (1) caused (2), as opposed to people who would’ve supported Walker regardless.

[pkbites]

@BobLibDem

Okily-dokily.

Your cite doesn’t really prove much of anything. It certainly doesn’t prove your contention that “the majority of people disapprove of Scott Walker but disapprove of the manner to remove Walker even more so they voted for a candidate they disapprove of.”

C’mon, BobLibDem, that is a freaking ridiculous premise.

2 elections in 2 years. Same 2 candidates. Bottom line is, a majority of voters decided Scott Walker is a better choice for Governor than Tom Barrett.

[marshmallow]

@iiandyiiii

LOL if you think that any group in the US is moving in an anti-gay marriage direction. In 30 years no one will care because (nearly) everyone will accept gay marriage.

@adaher

Which will cause Democrats to have to manufacture new issues to keep the divisions up.

Are you saying gay marriage was a manufactured issue? What other issues do you think the Dems made up to split off votes from Pubs? I have some ideas, but I’m curious to see what you think.

[adaher]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Why shouldn’t they? Every House seat is up for grabs in every election.

Ask nate Silver why it’s so. My own guess would be that if you win by 1 point you’re losing nearly as many seats as you gain. The Democrats have actually won by more than they did in 2012 and gained more seats in the past. They actually did pretty well, historically, given their percentage of the popular vote.

[adaher]

@BrainGlutton

That is how it happened in 1994.

No it didn’t:

1994 United States House of Representatives elections

Republicans won by almost 7 points.

I think you’re confusing the pre polling with the results. Pre-election polls showed about a 1 point GOP lead, but the generic ballot is off by an average of 3 points. The GOP usually outperforms the generic ballot polls by 3 points.

[adaher]

@marshmallow

Are you saying gay marriage was a manufactured issue? What other issues do you think the Dems made up to split off votes from Pubs? I have some ideas, but I’m curious to see what you think.

No, I’m saying that once an issue is settled, Democrats will manufacture new issues. For example, both parties agree on women’s equality, so Democrats constantly seek new ways to help women, from the Violence Against Women Act to the umpteenth equal pay act they are trying to pass.

They know that Republicans will have valid reasons for opposing these bills, and if they get “yes” for an answer, they just make sure to add more stuff into the bills that the Republicans can’t accept. For example, the Violence Against Women Act passed pretty easily, so when it came up for renewal, Democrats made sure they’d get the issue by putting new things in that Republicans couldn’t accept.

[BrainGlutton]

@adaher

No, I’m saying that once an issue is settled, Democrats will manufacture new issues. For example, both parties agree on women’s equality, so Democrats constantly seek new ways to help women, from the Violence Against Women Act to the umpteenth equal pay act they are trying to pass.

But, that is not “manufacturing new issues.” The issues exist before Dems decide to try to do anything about them. Equal pay is an issue simply because pay is unequal now.