jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

Probably can do more good for the party as part of the presidential ticket.

I think she would be the strongest running mate for Biden, should he secure the nomination.

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

If she's not interested in running for the full term seat up, I don't think the one where you have to run again two years later would be more enticing.

06hawkalum wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

Probably can do more good for the party as part of the presidential ticket.

I think she would be the strongest running mate for Biden, should he secure the nomination.

On the long list of things I don't get is Stacey Abrams. She was a state legislator for 10 years, lost a race for governor in a state that's becoming more politically competitive in a blue wave year, and is supposed to be a leading contender for VP? Especially on a ticket with a guy in his late 70s so the chances that the VP needs to become President is really in play.

If people think Biden needs to balance his ticket with a minority female politician, Kamala Harris is right there in the presidential race. Also in the Senate you've got Tammy Duckworth who has a pretty incredible personal story. There are people out there with normal presidential credentials.

jerseyhoya wrote:

06hawkalum wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

Probably can do more good for the party as part of the presidential ticket.

I think she would be the strongest running mate for Biden, should he secure the nomination.

Also in the Senate you've got Tammy Duckworth who has a pretty incredible personal story. There are people out there with normal presidential credentials.

I'll tell you one thing she doesn't have... legs!

I've gone too far

jerseyhoya wrote:

06hawkalum wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

Probably can do more good for the party as part of the presidential ticket.

I think she would be the strongest running mate for Biden, should he secure the nomination.

On the long list of things I don't get is Stacey Abrams. She was a state legislator for 10 years, lost a race for governor in a state that's becoming more politically competitive in a blue wave year, and is supposed to be a leading contender for VP? Especially on a ticket with a guy in his late 70s so the chances that the VP needs to become President is really in play.

If people think Biden needs to balance his ticket with a minority female politician, Kamala Harris is right there in the presidential race. Also in the Senate you've got Tammy Duckworth who has a pretty incredible personal story. There are people out there with normal presidential credentials.

I think if you look at the Obama coalition a reasonable inference to draw is that a person of color is more likely to win a national election as a Democrat, because of the enthusiasm factor among non-whites and the extra votes that means from otherwise non-voters, than a white person, particularly a white dude.

Granted we are talking about the VP position here but the idea is that a very significant portion of a winning D coalition is minorities, and the party would be wise to give them something to be excited about - particularly if it nominates a pretty vanilla white guy in Biden, whose street cred, to the extent he has any, is almost entirely owed to the fact that he served as faithful VP to Obama.

Parliament was suspended by Boris and was approved by the Queen. Gotta love two doofuses in unelected positions suspending the democratic party of their government.

Does the Queen just rubber stamp whatever the PM wants? Stupid country. They don't even have a real constitution!

She's a queen; she didn't exactly apply for the role or have any requirements to take the job.

It continues to amaze me the UK continues to allow the royals to control their government.

JUburton wrote:Does the Queen just rubber stamp whatever the PM wants? Stupid country. They don't even have a real constitution!

Yes, the monarch has been rubber-stamping their PMs' decisions for over a century. The British monarch is purely a figurehead at this point.

pacino wrote:She's a queen; she didn't exactly apply for the role or have any requirements to take the job.

It continues to amaze me the UK continues to allow the royals to control their government.

I know, what I'm saying is that the PM, while not directly elected, is at least party to a democratic process. So if he/she wants to do something that required royal approval, do they just generally rubber stamp it because it's the elected government's wish?

OK yes, answered above. It would be nice if articles included a line as such as to not make it seem like the queen actually makes a decision.

What are the implications of this? Can Boris just do whatever he wants without it having to be approved in Parliament?

Now we are going to see who is really boss:

Trump says "FOX News Isn't Working for Us Anymore"

jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Johnny Isakson is resigning at the end of the year due to health issues, so Georgia is going to have two Senate seats on the ballot next November

and Abrams probably not running for either. smh.

If she's not interested in running for the full term seat up, I don't think the one where you have to run again two years later would be more enticing.

oh for sure. already said she isnt too.

two senate races and presidential electoral votes up for grabs. should be a fun one. hopefully everyone's votes count this time around.

pacino wrote:She's a queen; she didn't exactly apply for the role or have any requirements to take the job.

It continues to amaze me the UK continues to allow the royals to control their government.

and they probably have similar amazement with our supreme court.

azrider wrote:

pacino wrote:She's a queen; she didn't exactly apply for the role or have any requirements to take the job.

It continues to amaze me the UK continues to allow the royals to control their government.

and they probably have similar amazement with our supreme court.

Not to mention guns.

JFLNYC wrote:

azrider wrote:

pacino wrote:She's a queen; she didn't exactly apply for the role or have any requirements to take the job.

It continues to amaze me the UK continues to allow the royals to control their government.

and they probably have similar amazement with our supreme court.

Not to mention guns.

We're all a bunch of fucking idiots.

If you're going to have a constitutional monarchy, you should at least let it do things like bail you out of the political idiocy that has led to this point. I guess they just don't make them like Juan Carlos I of Spain anymore. Or I suppose Hirohito.

Tammy Duckworth is a powerhouse. If he being elevated to a national position would not imperil the representation of her constituents, then anyone running for president should be all in IMHO. Then again, she might just take over from the VP chair.

jerseyhoya wrote:Monmouth put out a statement calling their own poll an outlier, but solid from Murray on the transparency, solidifying my opinion they're the best public polling outfit going (non NYT Upshot division).

Probably would have been helpful to note that generally, 1 out of 20 polls is an outlier.