Murkowski softening on SC stance since her position on things does not matter (and I’m sure there were some threats from Mitch and the administration).

Iowa - Biden +3. Greenfield +2

LFG

Mark Warnrer’s Campaign has been running ads that are more like PSAs. I guess his opposition is such a nonstarter that he’s not even really running campaign ads. I was actually floored when I found a debate on NBC with his competitor. I guess I was especially surprised because the moderators included Chuck Todd, but that makes sense because the NBC affiliate in DC is owned by the parent company, and what was Chuck doing on Wednesday night anyway.

I honestly couldn’t make it through the opening remarks since the guy running against Warner restating his positions on things that immediately fell into the flip-flop attack. I really wasn’t learning anything about the guy except that he is taking the old-school mad dog attack approach to politics.

I previously got something stuck on my door about him except that he went on and on about how he’s an outsider, after retiring from the military, where he worked with the Bush administration, and also where he got his masters degree and PhD in public administration. Sounds like a guy has been auditioning for the part for a long time really.

Warner’s lead is 52% to 39% with a 3.2% margin of error.

Monkeyboy wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

Squire wrote:Trump won 2016 by obliterating Hillary in one demographic (non college educated white voters (64-28). That demographic made up 45% of the electorate in 2016 and has shrunk to 41% in 2020. Also, I am thinking you are going to see an uptick in 18-22 college enrolled voters this year because many of them are at home in their home districts rather than on campus.

I spend a lot of time with the 18-22 year old group. They are pretty unhappy with the way things are going.

but will they drag their asses to the polls? Do you get the sense more of them are going to vote?

Anguish is useless if it doesn't lead to action.

I think so. Some are really cynical though.

CalvinBall wrote:

Werthless wrote:I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think about politics more than a couple times per week. What a challenging time.

Feel this. It's been a hard few weeks mentally for me.

Agree. Struggling to keep my mind away from it, it's so depressing and anxiety-inducing.

The Savior wrote:

The Dude wrote:Risk what? If you're going it's not risky for your wife either. We go back and forth on this, and the naked ballot thing has become worrisome

Risk it not getting here in time or something else go wrong with a last minute request.

In Chester County, at least, you can confirm that your mail-in ballot was received ahead of election day. If you don't get that confirmation, you can then go vote in person, with a provisional ballet; only one vote would count.

Seems the safest play, to me.

Yeah. Or just drop it off in person.

The only issue with VBM is they can't start opening the ballots until 7am on election day. It's just going to take time. BUT the counties now know that. They'll be better prepared and have way more staff.

Delco rented a huge warehouse in Chester. Chesco us using a gym and West Chester University. Counties are intimately aware of how best to handle this and have been making plans for months.

My concern with mailing in here is that they only count starting election day. That is a lot of work and the statement has to be overwhelming. Some over 50% of registered voters. To that end I will take my mail in ballot to the electoral board office, have it voided in front of me, then vote early.

Wolfgang622 wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

Werthless wrote:I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think about politics more than a couple times per week. What a challenging time.

Feel this. It's been a hard few weeks mentally for me.

Agree. Struggling to keep my mind away from it, it's so depressing and anxiety-inducing.

https://www.wired.com/story/stop-doomscrolling/

I realized after hearing about the RBG news, that I wasn't really interested in reading through all of the analysis. I saw the headlines, the hot takes on the right, the articles decrying the obvious hypocrisy, the articles advocating for packing the courts, the articles around why elections have consequences, the Biden Rule, etc etc etc. I opted out for the last week.

My goal, and this might be weird, is to find articles that I can send to my Trump-supporting mother. There are so few articles that report on something that Trump said that don't include a paragraph with the tone of "And of course, my dear liberal reader, the administration is leading us to a path of destruction that we can only hope to be saved from. Let me list the ways...." Once you start looking for that paragraph, you'll realize that almost every article has it. This is true even with WaPo articles.

Werthless wrote:This is true even with WaPo articles.

getting dangerously close to my statement that WaPo and NYT are pretty bad!


i've largely checked out on following politics. Nothing i can do(i'm not an activist) and no one i can influence. Cast my vote and move on. How people are following these daily polls seems like digging an early grave to me(stress).

F&M poll has Biden up 9% with registered voters (49-40) and up 6% with likely voters (48-42) in PA.

thephan wrote:Murkowski softening on SC stance since her position on things does not matter (and I’m sure there were some threats from Mitch and the administration).

A Republican with no backbone or principles? Next you'll try telling us that the sun rises in the east.

Interesting "Daily" podcast yesterday with a politically connected pro-life advocate. The discussion centered around how this organization has been building to this moment for 25 years and now that it is at hand, they are pushing all the chips in. She was very composed, picked her words carefully and she was extremely diplomatic in the approach. She emphasized the most important thing on her agenda and should be for every Republican is to get the Supreme Court in a position to overturn Roe v Wade. Suggesting everything else should be cast aside in order to achieve this goal. Host Michael Babaro pointed out how RGB actually did not like the Roe v Wade verdict bc it went so far and was so absolute that it left too many adversaries and that it would lead to this moment in time. He asked the advocate if taking this measure of a quick appointment may have the same result. She didn't think so but she said it ultimately didn't matter as long as the end goal is achieved. It will leave abortion rights to the states.

This left me thinking that as painful as it may be to lose Roe v Wade and the suffering it will cause for so many people, it may also ultimately bring about the end of the Republican party as we know it. The idea being Republican politicians will foresake most of their agenda in order to focus on this sole position in order to win. As pointed out in the podcast, the majority of America is pro-choice. When left to states' rights, there are many states that have Republican control of state government with the electorate not necessarily in lock-step with the pro-life leaning of the state house. It seems to me these states could turn more and more blue due to this issue and eventually vote out the pro-life supporters. Wait until a moderately Republican state loses the right to choose. It's a long process but one that may eventually bring about change. Believe me, I don't want to see what appears to be inevitable over these ensuing weeks. My silver lining is that this next month could be the catalyst for the significant change our democracy really needs even if the change is a slow burn with a long timespan to fruition.

Werthless wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

Werthless wrote:I don't know about anyone else, but I can't think about politics more than a couple times per week. What a challenging time.

Feel this. It's been a hard few weeks mentally for me.

Agree. Struggling to keep my mind away from it, it's so depressing and anxiety-inducing.

https://www.wired.com/story/stop-doomscrolling/

I realized after hearing about the RBG news, that I wasn't really interested in reading through all of the analysis. I saw the headlines, the hot takes on the right, the articles decrying the obvious hypocrisy, the articles advocating for packing the courts, the articles around why elections have consequences, the Biden Rule, etc etc etc. I opted out for the last week.

My goal, and this might be weird, is to find articles that I can send to my Trump-supporting mother. There are so few articles that report on something that Trump said that don't include a paragraph with the tone of "And of course, my dear liberal reader, the administration is leading us to a path of destruction that we can only hope to be saved from. Let me list the ways...." Once you start looking for that paragraph, you'll realize that almost every article has it. This is true even with WaPo articles.

...are they wrong? and i think citations needed because if anything their editorial staff goes the other way with something like 'trump breaks with tradition, does not guarantee peaceful transition of power'.

stevemc wrote:Interesting "Daily" podcast yesterday with a politically connected pro-life advocate. The discussion centered around how this organization has been building to this moment for 25 years and now that it is at hand, they are pushing all the chips in. She was very composed, picked her words carefully and she was extremely diplomatic in the approach. She emphasized the most important thing on her agenda and should be for every Republican is to get the Supreme Court in a position to overturn Roe v Wade. Suggesting everything else should be cast aside in order to achieve this goal. Host Michael Babaro pointed out how RGB actually did not like the Roe v Wade verdict bc it went so far and was so absolute that it left too many adversaries and that it would lead to this moment in time. He asked the advocate if taking this measure of a quick appointment may have the same result. She didn't think so but she said it ultimately didn't matter as long as the end goal is achieved. It will leave abortion rights to the states.

This left me thinking that as painful as it may be to lose Roe v Wade and the suffering it will cause for so many people, it may also ultimately bring about the end of the Republican party as we know it. The idea being Republican politicians will foresake most of their agenda in order to focus on this sole position in order to win. As pointed out in the podcast, the majority of America is pro-choice. When left to states' rights, there are many states that have Republican control of state government with the electorate not necessarily in lock-step with the pro-life leaning of the state house. It seems to me these states could turn more and more blue due to this issue and eventually vote out the pro-life supporters. Wait until a moderately Republican state loses the right to choose. It's a long process but one that may eventually bring about change. Believe me, I don't want to see what appears to be inevitable over these ensuing weeks. My silver lining is that this next month could be the catalyst for the significant change our democracy really needs even if the change is a slow burn with a long timespan to fruition.

Moz had a similar post prior to RBG's passing that was a little more... I can't think of the correct adjective and I do not want to step on Moz' toes when I don't mean to. I just think there are so many unintended consequences that we cannot comprehend. Poor women in states that outlaw abortion will either be forced to travel 100+ miles or take a less safe course of action. Also this could lead to shuttering women's clinics who may have abortion options but also provide other woman's health services that might not be available in rural <insert state here>.

Dan Carlin's latest common sense podcast had a good segment on states rights and republic vs democratic republic. Was a pretty good listen for once.

slugsrbad wrote:

stevemc wrote:Interesting "Daily" podcast yesterday with a politically connected pro-life advocate. The discussion centered around how this organization has been building to this moment for 25 years and now that it is at hand, they are pushing all the chips in. She was very composed, picked her words carefully and she was extremely diplomatic in the approach. She emphasized the most important thing on her agenda and should be for every Republican is to get the Supreme Court in a position to overturn Roe v Wade. Suggesting everything else should be cast aside in order to achieve this goal. Host Michael Babaro pointed out how RGB actually did not like the Roe v Wade verdict bc it went so far and was so absolute that it left too many adversaries and that it would lead to this moment in time. He asked the advocate if taking this measure of a quick appointment may have the same result. She didn't think so but she said it ultimately didn't matter as long as the end goal is achieved. It will leave abortion rights to the states.

This left me thinking that as painful as it may be to lose Roe v Wade and the suffering it will cause for so many people, it may also ultimately bring about the end of the Republican party as we know it. The idea being Republican politicians will foresake most of their agenda in order to focus on this sole position in order to win. As pointed out in the podcast, the majority of America is pro-choice. When left to states' rights, there are many states that have Republican control of state government with the electorate not necessarily in lock-step with the pro-life leaning of the state house. It seems to me these states could turn more and more blue due to this issue and eventually vote out the pro-life supporters. Wait until a moderately Republican state loses the right to choose. It's a long process but one that may eventually bring about change. Believe me, I don't want to see what appears to be inevitable over these ensuing weeks. My silver lining is that this next month could be the catalyst for the significant change our democracy really needs even if the change is a slow burn with a long timespan to fruition.

Moz had a similar post prior to RBG's passing that was a little more... I can't think of the correct adjective and I do not want to step on Moz' toes when I don't mean to. I just think there are so many unintended consequences that we cannot comprehend. Poor women in states that outlaw abortion will either be forced to travel 100+ miles or take a less safe course of action. Also this could lead to shuttering women's clinics who may have abortion options but also provide other woman's health services that might not be available in rural <insert state here>.

For many poor women in rural states, a legal abortion is already effectively unavailable. The only abortion provider in Arkansas is I believe in Little Rock.

slugsrbad wrote:

stevemc wrote:Interesting "Daily" podcast yesterday with a politically connected pro-life advocate. The discussion centered around how this organization has been building to this moment for 25 years and now that it is at hand, they are pushing all the chips in. She was very composed, picked her words carefully and she was extremely diplomatic in the approach. She emphasized the most important thing on her agenda and should be for every Republican is to get the Supreme Court in a position to overturn Roe v Wade. Suggesting everything else should be cast aside in order to achieve this goal. Host Michael Babaro pointed out how RGB actually did not like the Roe v Wade verdict bc it went so far and was so absolute that it left too many adversaries and that it would lead to this moment in time. He asked the advocate if taking this measure of a quick appointment may have the same result. She didn't think so but she said it ultimately didn't matter as long as the end goal is achieved. It will leave abortion rights to the states.

This left me thinking that as painful as it may be to lose Roe v Wade and the suffering it will cause for so many people, it may also ultimately bring about the end of the Republican party as we know it. The idea being Republican politicians will foresake most of their agenda in order to focus on this sole position in order to win. As pointed out in the podcast, the majority of America is pro-choice. When left to states' rights, there are many states that have Republican control of state government with the electorate not necessarily in lock-step with the pro-life leaning of the state house. It seems to me these states could turn more and more blue due to this issue and eventually vote out the pro-life supporters. Wait until a moderately Republican state loses the right to choose. It's a long process but one that may eventually bring about change. Believe me, I don't want to see what appears to be inevitable over these ensuing weeks. My silver lining is that this next month could be the catalyst for the significant change our democracy really needs even if the change is a slow burn with a long timespan to fruition.

Moz had a similar post prior to RBG's passing that was a little more... I can't think of the correct adjective and I do not want to step on Moz' toes when I don't mean to. I just think there are so many unintended consequences that we cannot comprehend. Poor women in states that outlaw abortion will either be forced to travel 100+ miles or take a less safe course of action. Also this could lead to shuttering women's clinics who may have abortion options but also provide other woman's health services that might not be available in rural <insert state here>.

there is no clever 'well maybe' 3D chess outcome that will make up for what this would do to women across the country, specifically poor, and women of color, and especially, as always, poor women of color. it reeks of privilege to even begin to think about it on any other level.

I respect your post JUburton. It's insensitive of me to project in this way. Bad coping on my part. The changing of the court will damage women and especially the poor when you consider the inevitable repeal of the ACA.

I still hope for change.

went to vote over lunch. feels good to be done and it is september!

said a huge batch was at their mailer to be sent out today or tomorrow. so if you are in chesco yours could be coming soon. they ended up just cancelling ours and giving us new ones. said to just shred the one that comes in the mail.