The 2024 Presidential Election- The LONG General Election

[JJ Husker]

10 minutes ago, walksalone said:

 

Kinda surprised Kristi Noem isn't on that list...

 

She did mastermind SD's anti-meth campaign.... lol

Meth! We’re On It.

 

lol

[walksalone]

1 minute ago, JJ Husker said:

Meth! We’re On It.

 

lol

 

Yeah, I worked at a detox facility when that gem was unveiled...

 

My boss asked if I wanted to meet her, I respectfully declined

 

The best part of that is that debacle cost a mere $450k

[DevoHusker]

35 minutes ago, sho said:

 

 It is looking more and more like it'll  be voting for the lesser of two evils election again instead of the best candidate.

So...maybe the third time's a charm...?

[walksalone]

3 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

So...maybe the third time's a charm...?

 

I don't think we're going to get that opportunity.  I think we're hosed for awhile...

[teachercd]

So who would the top 3-4 be on the R side?

Trump (Who I don't think will run)

Desantis??

 

Is there a 3rd?

[TGHusker]

On 5/27/2022 at 8:25 AM, Ulty said:

 

The inability of the Democrats to position someone, anyone, to be a qualified and attractive candidate to stem off the GOP cult has been absolutely negligent and will be devastating to this country. 

I hear you and agree. The Dems have had a “who’s next’ mentality for so

many election cycles. I’m thinking a gov needs to jump in to save the party. Michigan or California governors could grap the nomination and be a challenge to the GOP

[nic]

27 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

I hear you and agree. The Dems have had a “who’s next’ mentality for so

many election cycles. I’m thinking a gov needs to jump in to save the party. Michigan or California governors could grap the nomination and be a challenge to the GOP

Whitmer or Newsome? Please pick someone further to the center that is not a hypocrite. Although I would say that politicians and hyocrites are synonymous regardlesss of party affiliation. 

[Dr. Strangelove]

13 hours ago, nic said:

Whitmer or Newsome? Please pick someone further to the center that is not a hypocrite. Although I would say that politicians and hyocrites are synonymous regardlesss of party affiliation. 

Joe Biden was probably the most moderate candidate in the primary, at least with a shot of winning. 

 

Even the progressive wing of the party criticizes the President every chance they get - with primaries how they are it's unlikely we get many moderate candidates on the Dem side. Especially with the novice political skills of Sanders and Warren ruining the electability of huge swaths of their party.

[nic]

32 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Joe Biden was probably the most moderate candidate in the primary, at least with a shot of winning. 

 

Even the progressive wing of the party criticizes the President every chance they get - with primaries how they are it's unlikely we get many moderate candidates on the Dem side. Especially with the novice political skills of Sanders and Warren ruining the electability of huge swaths of their party.

Yes primaries. The more active people are likely to vote and are probably further to the extremes. Then there are all the independents that can’t vote in a primary in some states. I was able to vote in Colorado as an independent in the last election. They sent me both ballots. At first I thought this was a stupid idea but maybe it’s what we need. I voted for Klobuchar. I thought about Yang. It didn’t makes sense to vote on the republican side cause it was a one horse ballot. I need to find the Denver post clip I took a snapshot of, because a day or so after the primary with 75+% of the vote counted Klobuchar had zero votes. I am not sure if I was in the 25% mix or there is a weird primary rule with candidates that get less than 1% of the vote, but it looked like my vote didn’t count. My neighbor voted Klobuchar too. It Sort of pissed me off. 

[TGHusker]

20 hours ago, nic said:

Whitmer or Newsome? Please pick someone further to the center that is not a hypocrite. Although I would say that politicians and hyocrites are synonymous regardlesss of party affiliation. 

I'm not saying I support them, I'm thinking they are the higher profile governors who may have a chance of winning the nomination

[nic]

29 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

I'm not saying I support them, I'm thinking they are the higher profile governors who may have a chance of winning the nomination

Gotcha. Try the CO gov. He is at least sensible 

[Dr. Strangelove]

About now is the time - at least for the 2022 midterms - that the results are baked in.

 

Because of gerrymandered districs making all but a handful of races uncompetitive, Democrats are likely to lose 35-40 House seats.

 

In the Senate, it looks like Democrats will lose 4 seats, with an outside shot of 5. Although the Republican candidates are mostly terrible - and I mean this might be the worst crop of candidates they've fielded in a long time - they're likely to under perform Relative to the popular vote. Even still, stringing together 3 words and having an R next to their name should be enough to win 4 seats.

 

For the 2024 election, Republicans have a ~65% chance of winning the Presidency with Trump, and slightly lower (but still favored) with any other candidate.

 

*They have a nearly 100% chance of controlling the Senate, but with also a ~60+% of holding more than 60 seats, giving them a filibuster proof majority. 

 

*The House will be much closer, it's going to be ~60% odds of Republicans controlling the chamber.

 

All this is pretty likely, all while Republican candidates collectively get ~15 million FEWER votes across the 2022 and 2024 election cycles. Also, if you think our electoral system is bad now - the institutions favor the minority party - it is only going to get much, much, much worse.

[schriznoeder]

43 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

About now is the time - at least for the 2022 midterms - that the results are baked in.

 

Because of gerrymandered districs making all but a handful of races uncompetitive, Democrats are likely to lose 35-40 House seats.

 

In the Senate, it looks like Democrats will lose 4 seats, with an outside shot of 5. Although the Republican candidates are mostly terrible - and I mean this might be the worst crop of candidates they've fielded in a long time - they're likely to under perform Relative to the popular vote. Even still, stringing together 3 words and having an R next to their name should be enough to win 4 seats.

 

For the 2024 election, Republicans have a ~65% chance of winning the Presidency with Trump, and slightly lower (but still favored) with any other candidate.

 

*They have a nearly 100% chance of controlling the Senate, but with also a ~60+% of holding more than 60 seats, giving them a filibuster proof majority. 

 

*The House will be much closer, it's going to be ~60% odds of Republicans controlling the chamber.

 

All this is pretty likely, all while Republican candidates collectively get ~15 million FEWER votes across the 2022 and 2024 election cycles. Also, if you think our electoral system is bad now - the institutions favor the minority party - it is only going to get much, much, much worse.

 

I've posted these same stats before, but over the last three federal election cycles, the D's have netted nearly 50M more votes than the R's. But yet, here we are... 

 

2016 House: 63,173,815 - 61,776,554 = 1,397,261

2016 Senate: 51,496,682 - 40,402,790 = 11,093,892

2016 Presidential: 65,853,514 - 62,984,828 = 2,868,686

 

2018 House: 60,572,245 - 50,861,970 = 9,710,275

2018 Senate: 52,260,651 - 34,723,013 = 17,537,638

 

2020 House: 77,545,341 - 72,877,981 = 4,667,360

2020 Senate: 44,106,711 - 41,958,212 = 2,148,499

2020 Presidential: 81,281,888 - 74,223,251 = 7,058,637

 

NET DIFFERENCE = 49,390,728

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

 

In the Senate, it looks like Democrats will lose 4 seats, with an outside shot of 5. Although the Republican candidates are mostly terrible - and I mean this might be the worst crop of candidates they've fielded in a long time - they're likely to under perform Relative to the popular vote. Even still, stringing together 3 words and having an R next to their name should be enough to win 4 seats

I guess that tells you something about how terrible the Democrats being replaced are if someone who only needs to put 3 words together can replace them 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Americans are pretty lazy voters and that's why brand names counts so much. It's how we get multiple Clintons and Bushs, recycled Vice-Presidents and reality show hosts. 

 

But we don't alway go according to plan, either. In 2020, Kamala Harris checked off a lot of boxes, got the DNC and the top consultants on her bandwagon early, posted some decent initial polling numbers......and then completely faded down the stretch. She couldn't even compete with the Andrew Yang's and Amy Klobuchers. It was a serious spanking. 

 

She kinda made sense as VP, where she could check the same boxes in a supporting role, but I don't think anyone is misreading the numbers. She's the sitting VP and Dems know the party would really really love it if people could rally around her --- and of course they will support her over any Republican -- but once past the name recognition of the 2020 retreads you will have the same enthusiasm gap that got you Joe Biden. Back in the day, all that mattered was getting Trump out of office, and I remember folks willing to settle for one term of Biden, while the party groomed Harris with a high profile of successful initiatives and international duties. But that's not what's happening. We remain the party of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Shumer, and we simply have to get younger, more engaging, and less entitled. 

 

By "we" of course I mean "they."  Even if I'm stuck voting Democrat, I want them to actually earn it.