Uncle Milty wrote:New 538 forecast gives republicans a 78% chance of keeping the Senate. 10% increase from a week ago.

Now that Kav has been confirmed I anticipate that percentage will drop precipitously by the end of the month. The GOP would have been wise to drag the vote out until a week before election day. I guess the realities of campaigning precluded them from doing so.

Fingers crossed!

CBSNews Polls:

Arizona
Sinema (D) - 47%
McSally (R) - 44%

New Jersey
Menendez - 49%
Hugin - 39%

Tennessee
Blackburn (R) - 50%
Bredesen - 42%

Texas
Cruz (R) - 50%
O'Rourke (D) - 45%

So Moz, has there been any polling in your race? What's the scuttlebutt?

slugsrbad wrote:CBSNews Polls:

Arizona
Sinema (D) - 47%
McSally (R) - 44%

New Jersey
Menendez - 49%
Hugin - 39%

Tennessee
Blackburn (R) - 50%
Bredesen - 42%

Texas
Cruz (R) - 50%
O'Rourke (D) - 45%

If ND is gone, Dems need one of Bredesen or Beto to win to have any path to 51 votes.

I know I say it every time it comes up, but I really can’t stand Blackburns. Or people think that politicians play some kind a high-level chess and then default to triple jump checkers, but this woman plays TicTacToe and has the second move. When she came to our office (old job) she was so freaking clumsy and so transparent about what she wanted that we had to walk away from it. If anyone was her mentor she certainly learned from the worst.

When I read it back quick I realize what that looks like. She was not looking for a kickback or something that is reportedly unethical, but she was looking at walking right to the front of the line for any and every advantage that could possibly be given including wanting us to be part of her press arm for that activity, and I guess with the guy who’s a lobbyist there was some discussion about a PAC.

jerseyhoya wrote:

slugsrbad wrote:CBSNews Polls:

Arizona
Sinema (D) - 47%
McSally (R) - 44%

New Jersey
Menendez - 49%
Hugin - 39%

Tennessee
Blackburn (R) - 50%
Bredesen - 42%

Texas
Cruz (R) - 50%
O'Rourke (D) - 45%

If ND is gone, Dems need one of Bredesen or Beto to win to have any path to 51 votes.

Yup and to win the close races in other red states. It was always going to be an uphill climb, but that Tennessee poll is a bit depressing. Harry Enten has said that none of the polls where Bredesen was leading previously has shown down yet which helps a bit.

Tennessee very concerning. Ain't over yet though.

Texas and Tennessee are both close enough where a lot depends on how good the likely voter models are. I'm not sure if it is still the case, but CBS used to be the gold standard of network polls.

It’s amazing how vile and openly antagonistic the R party can be and yet the Dems are struggling to take back Congress. Not sure if that is an indictment on the D leadership or the American people.

they will probably win by 8% and it'll be a tight squeeze due to how our system is set up

Dems are really not good at this politics thing.

thephan wrote:Dems are really not good at this politics thing.

Few truer words have been "spoken".

well gerrymandering and voter suppression has something to do with it. The Senate just isn't set up well for them this cycle. 8% is a big lead, just not enough given the current situation.

also, the nation is pretty tribal at the moment. I don't really think that's the dems fault too much. Maybe they could push back more than they have, trying more to win and not caring about being the adult in the room, but then there ceases to be a difference between the parties and the R's really win. These people want chaos.

Yep, one of Tenn or Texas or less likely North Dakota will be required to break a 50-50 tie. AZ, Nev, Montana, Missouri, and Indiana are all polling light blue.

Heitkamp could have voted Kavanaugh, given that her vote was not a tipping point vote. Interesting that she voted no on Kavanaugh.

279% increase in RNC donations.

It is going to be interesting.

Which side is NOW more energized to go to the polls?

It is a relative issue. If both sides are energized, the actions of the true independents rise in importance.

My thinking lately has been about a structural problem with representation. As MB points out gerrymandering has something to do with it because the will of the people is not accurately represented. It’s a similar problem to PA where the rural areas are disproportionately represented. At issue however is the protections put in place so CA and NY do not become the arbitrary deciders for everything. It’s a feature, not a flaw but the endgame is for the people by some people.

Is the only way out is wider appear of a more moderate agenda?

Uncle Milty wrote:Pro-Life liberals?

I have been bashed for stating this in the past, but I believe that Dems being uniformly pro-choice is hurting them more than helping them.

Then again, it is so ingrained with single issue voters that (D) = baby killer that I don't believe tweaking the platform on that matter would do any good at this point.

06hawkalum wrote:

Uncle Milty wrote:Pro-Life liberals?

I have been bashed for stating this in the past, but I believe that Dems being uniformly pro-choice is hurting them more than helping them.

Then again, it is so ingrained with single issue voters that (D) = baby killer that I don't believe tweaking the platform on that matter would do any good at this point.

They should draw straws to see who must switch to Pro-Life.

No need to draw straws:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ife-219154

wow, some anti abortion democrats think they're what the party needs? Weird!