2018 Midterm Election Thread

[B-Fly]

Pretty interesting piece:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...=.1745b1809252

Yes, interesting. By that logic, even Harris (54) and Klobuchar (58) would be pretty old, exceeding the age of all the winning Democratic non-incumbents.

[frae]

Yes, interesting. By that logic, even Harris (54) and Klobuchar (58) would be pretty old, exceeding the age of all the winning Democratic non-incumbents.

It is interesting and I agree with it on why I don't want Warren, Sanders, or Biden to be the nominee. I won't dismiss Harris easily because she checks some big boxes for a party in terms of being progressive (minority and a woman). Klobuchar just is perfect in the midwest, but maybe that would be too safe. I still want to see her run to elevate herself and even if she can't win it positions her as a solid VP nominee.

[baldgriff]

It is interesting and I agree with it on why I don't want Warren, Sanders, or Biden to be the nominee. I won't dismiss Harris easily because she checks some big boxes for a party in terms of being progressive (minority and a woman). Klobuchar just is perfect in the midwest, but maybe that would be too safe. I still want to see her run to elevate herself and even if she can't win it positions her as a solid VP nominee.

Respectfully - and Im trying to understand this -

When I look at making decisions about who should fill a role in leadership or whatever - I want the best person for the job based on their qualifications, credentials, and in the case of politics who best aligns with my ideals. I dont honestly give a rats ass what color or sex they are.

Why is it that there is this push to make sure we get a minority or woman? What if they are not the best candidate for the job.

Im asking this as an honest question - not to try and troll people - Honestly, I lost what respect I had for HRC when they started the "Im with Her" campaign, because it placed her sex above her experience. The idea that we should have voted for her - because she was a woman - rather than being the better option I think was a real mis-step in her campaign (among many others).

I dont know if Im phrasing it correctly or asking it correctly - but why should I care what sex or what race a person is when I vote for them? I want the most qualified person - no matter who they are.

[frae]

Respectfully - and I'm trying to understand this -

When I look at making decisions about who should fill a role in leadership or whatever - I want the best person for the job based on their qualifications, credentials, and in the case of politics who best aligns with my ideals. I don't honestly give a rats ass what color or sex they are.

Why is it that there is this push to make sure we get a minority or woman? What if they are not the best candidate for the job.

I'm asking this as an honest question - not to try and troll people - Honestly, I lost what respect I had for HRC when they started the "I'm with Her" campaign, because it placed her sex above her experience. The idea that we should have voted for her - because she was a woman - rather than being the better option I think was a real mis-step in her campaign (among many others).

I dont know if Im phrasing it correctly or asking it correctly - but why should I care what sex or what race a person is when I vote for them? I want the most qualified person - no matter who they are.

For me, it is about this election. I am not a pollster or a political operative but I think the optics in this one are going to matter. If the Democrats put an over 70-year-old white guy up there against Trump they aren't going to energize certain parts of their party. Fly and I are generally talking about who we like and for me it is about demographics some. The Democratic party is a weird coalition and to bring everyone along and energize everyone it takes a type of candidate. I am only 39 so for me I only saw the Clinton candidacy as an HS kid, but with Obama, I saw a guy that could inspire my party. Kerry, Gore, Clinton were all fine Democrats, but they never had that for me. I am looking for that ability to bring all parts of the coalition together and as a bunch of mostly white males here I think we may not put as much credence to how much impact the metoo movement and the Kavanaugh hearings will have on Democratic women to want a female on the ticket somewhere. I am not going into this race saying we have to have X or Y or they must be a minority or a woman, but to ignore that a good minority woman candidate wouldn't energize a number of parts of my party I think would not be logical. Right now we are talking about who the Democrats nominate and how that candidate connects with the Democratic party voters is important.

That said if you made me pick one today I might pick Beto at the top of the ticket so I will go with the best candidate in my mind when I vote in the primary and when the general comes I cannot see a realistic candidate at this time who I would not support over Trump.

[B-Fly]

Respectfully - and Im trying to understand this -

When I look at making decisions about who should fill a role in leadership or whatever - I want the best person for the job based on their qualifications, credentials, and in the case of politics who best aligns with my ideals. I dont honestly give a rats ass what color or sex they are.

Why is it that there is this push to make sure we get a minority or woman? What if they are not the best candidate for the job.

Im asking this as an honest question - not to try and troll people - Honestly, I lost what respect I had for HRC when they started the "Im with Her" campaign, because it placed her sex above her experience. The idea that we should have voted for her - because she was a woman - rather than being the better option I think was a real mis-step in her campaign (among many others).

I dont know if Im phrasing it correctly or asking it correctly - but why should I care what sex or what race a person is when I vote for them? I want the most qualified person - no matter who they are.

Unlike, say, a corporate CFO position, elected government positions are about representing the values, concerns, hopes and priorities of your constituents. For that reason, background/affinity connections are legitimately qualifications for effective representation. They're not remotely the only ones and one doesn't need to share a race, sex, generational age, religion or ethnicity to deeply understand, empathize with and effectively represent constituents from those backgrounds, but I think it's wrong to suggest there's anything "immoral" about considering those connections and affinities when looking at candidates for office. The Democratic primary electorate is far more heterogeneous, more female, more non-white and younger, on the whole, than the Republican primary electorate. For a Democratic candidate to succeed first in a primary and then in a general, they need to be able to connect more heterogeneously to provide confidence that they can effectively represent the voters.

[baldgriff]

Unlike, say, a corporate CFO position, elected government positions are about representing the values, concerns, hopes and priorities of your constituents. For that reason, background/affinity connections are legitimately qualifications for effective representation. They're not remotely the only ones and one doesn't need to share a race, sex, generational age, religion or ethnicity to deeply understand, empathize with and effectively represent constituents from those backgrounds, but I think it's wrong to suggest there's anything "immoral" about considering those connections and affinities when looking at candidates for office. The Democratic primary electorate is far more heterogeneous, more female, more non-white and younger, on the whole, than the Republican primary electorate. For a Democratic candidate to succeed first in a primary and then in a general, they need to be able to connect more heterogeneously to provide confidence that they can effectively represent the voters.

Fly -
Im not trying to make a morality assessment. In general - I want the person that is best capable of doing a job. In politics, I understand that the person is representing values, concerns, hopes and such.... Yeah - Im not conveying this very well. Moving on.....

[In the Corn]

I am only 39 so for me I only saw the Clinton candidacy as an HS kid, but with Obama, I saw a guy that could inspire my party. .

I think there were a lot of people that would say that Trump inspired, or at least spoke to where they were in 2016. Leaders are elected because they connect with people on a gut-level, both positively and negatively.

[frae]

And just when you guys thought I would stop talking about the 2018 house vote, up pops NC-9. We have a possibility of real voter fraud and the irregularity seems to benefit Republican candidate Mark Harris. I won't get into it much because 538 will explain it better than me, but basically, we have two counties with some real irregularities in terms of how the absentee ballot vote came in. The NC election board voted unanimously to not certify the election and have a hearing later in Dec after the investigation. So looks like we aren't done yet...

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-the-heck-is-happening-in-that-north-carolina-house-race/

[frae]

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1069730439810768901

538 moves the NC-9 to a toss up. This is getting interesting.

https://twitter.com/ShaneGoldmacher/status/1069647149015736321

Crazy stuff....

[revo]

Wisconsin State Legislature pulling some terrible shenanigans. Why does it always seem it’s the GOP pulling this kind of sore loser nonsense?

[DMT]

Wisconsin State Legislature pulling some terrible shenanigans. Why does it always seem it’s the GOP pulling this kind of sore loser nonsense?

Because they've embraced authoritarianism and believe only they should hold power.

[frae]

Election fraud appears to have definitively occurred the question now is what happens from here. I hope this story starts to pickup coverage and attention. This tweet has a link to a Washington Post article laying it out better than me.

https://twitter.com/redistrict/status/1069854138727567366?s=21

[Ken]

Because they've embraced authoritarianism and believe only they should hold power.

Strange, could be just my memory but it seems like this really started picking up steam with the Al Gore hanging chads in Florida. Doesn't feel partisan to me, both parties seem to be guilty.

[Judge Jude]

Election fraud definitively has been claimed. "definitively occurred"?

talk about guilty until proven innocent - I hope if I appear before a court, you aren't on my jury.

and the "it's always the GOP" meme is comical.

"street money" payouts to locals in exchange for showing up to vote has been a revered practice in Philadelphia and Chicago, among other cities, for decades. who do you think they are being told to vote for? you only get one guess.

[DMT]

Election fraud definitively has been claimed. "definitively occurred"?

talk about guilty until proven innocent - I hope if I appear before a court, you aren't on my jury.

and the "it's always the GOP" meme is comical.

"street money" payouts to locals in exchange for showing up to vote has been a revered practice in Philadelphia and Chicago, among other cities, for decades. who do you think they are being told to vote for? you only get one guess.

Also comical is the "but both sides are to blame" response to everything.