The Official Dallas Hwy 2022 Mid-term Election Thread

Another Trump-endorsed candidate bites the dust in the Senate race in Arizona. I hate to break it to ya'll but the GOP is not going to get the senate majority. Trump is blaming McConnell for not spending much money in Arizona, but Trump didn't either.
 
Boss 302 said:
Another Trump-endorsed candidate bites the dust in the Senate race in Arizona. I hate to break it to ya'll but the GOP is not going to get the senate majority. Trump is blaming McConnell for not spending much money in Arizona, but Trump didn't either.
Click to expand...
If you would have seen the advertising out here, for Kelly and against Masters, it would have been clear that Maters never stood a chance.

The same pretty much holds true with Kari Lake.

Not sure who to blame, but the GOP got hammered everyday in and on the media.
 
MudFlap said:
If you would have seen the advertising out here, for Kelly and against Masters, it would have been clear that Maters never stood a chance.

The same pretty much holds true with Kari Lake.

Not sure who to blame, but the GOP got hammered everyday in and on the media.
Click to expand...
I was reading Kelly raised more than $52 million. Most of it most likely from outside the state. Warnock has raised more than $111 million. There's no way one can raise that kind of money in this state, so you know his money came from outside sources as well.

I remember how the Dems would blast the GOP for accepting so much money from the Koch brothers while pretending they were not receiving hundreds of millions from Buffett and Soros.
 
Boss 302 said:
I was reading Kelly raised more than $52 million. Most of it most likely from outside the state. Warnock has raised more than $111 million. There's no way one can raise that kind of money in this state, so you know his money came from outside sources as well.

I remember how the Dems would blast the GOP for accepting so much money from the Koch brothers while pretending they were not receiving hundreds of millions from Buffett and Soros.
Click to expand...

Jimmy Buffett is a leftist ?

Uggggh..... just wait & see if I listen to Margaritaville ever again.
 
314369074_10225883280921131_5440576939090352554_n.jpg
 
Well, Laxalt was just declared the loser in Nevada., so other than putting a hobbed nail boot in Warnock's backside, there is no need for a runoff in Georgia. They waited until this evening to find 6,000 votes to give the dem the lead, and then immediately called the race for her.
I hope the democrats in Nevada get shankers the size of coconuts!
 
At this point, would it be better if the Democrats retain control of the house? That would allow Republicans to continue to blame Democrats for everything. Otherwise, the Democrats will blame the Republican house for the economy, inflation, etc. in 2024.
 
I'm watching something interesting in Alaska with it's RCV, (Ranked Candidate Voting). In both the senate and house races it looks like the candidate that is leading when all of the votes have been counted, will not be the winner. A lot of democrats want RCV quite badly, so there must be some advantage in it, but I'm having trouble getting my head around the logic of it all.
The basic concept is an open primary where the top 4 or 5, (4 for Alaska), move on to the general election. In the general election the voters then vote for as many of the candidates as they like by ranking them from 1-4 (or 5). The winner must get 50% plus 1. If that doesn't happen, then the candidate with the fewest votes is dropped and his/her #2 choice is redistributed to the remaining candidates and a new total is taken. This continues until someone gets 50% plus 1. All of this monkey motion is handled by computers, which throws up a big flag with me and it makes me wonder how you go about doing a recount. Additionally, I can't figure out what happens to the #3 and 4 choices and when they get used, like if the #3 gets eliminated then their #2 get redistributed and candidate-4 valid #3's get redistributed, then you could wind up with more votes counted than cast,,, so why have them?
Nevada is probably going to this system and other states already use it in just some counties for county elections. It's a bit bizarre but warrants further research as to how it can be manipulated as it is becoming more popular,,, check it out and let everyone know what you think.

By the way, check out the Alaska races, I'm thinking Murkowski will be the senator and Sarah Palin will be the house rep, any bets?
 
RCV in the Georgia senate race would probably have meant Walker would have been declared the winner since I'm guessing most of the Libertarian voters would rank him second.
 
Paxilpapa said:
I'm watching something interesting in Alaska with it's RCV, (Ranked Candidate Voting). In both the senate and house races it looks like the candidate that is leading when all of the votes have been counted, will not be the winner. A lot of democrats want RCV quite badly, so there must be some advantage in it, but I'm having trouble getting my head around the logic of it all.
The basic concept is an open primary where the top 4 or 5, (4 for Alaska), move on to the general election. In the general election the voters then vote for as many of the candidates as they like by ranking them from 1-4 (or 5). The winner must get 50% plus 1. If that doesn't happen, then the candidate with the fewest votes is dropped and his/her #2 choice is redistributed to the remaining candidates and a new total is taken. This continues until someone gets 50% plus 1. All of this monkey motion is handled by computers, which throws up a big flag with me and it makes me wonder how you go about doing a recount. Additionally, I can't figure out what happens to the #3 and 4 choices and when they get used, like if the #3 gets eliminated then their #2 get redistributed and candidate-4 valid #3's get redistributed, then you could wind up with more votes counted than cast,,, so why have them?
Nevada is probably going to this system and other states already use it in just some counties for county elections. It's a bit bizarre but warrants further research as to how it can be manipulated as it is becoming more popular,,, check it out and let everyone know what you think.

By the way, check out the Alaska races, I'm thinking Murkowski will be the senator and Sarah Palin will be the house rep, any bets?
Click to expand...
MATH IS HARD !!!

math-is-hard-addition.gif
 
Independents decide elections. The youth vote cannot be overlooked in these races. Especially at local levels that boast a large number of colleges. The left energizes campuses and make the GOP the boogeyman. The left is pro-choice, pro-weed, pro-student debt relief, pro-environment, anti- LE, etc. The right hates women, love narcs, expects debts to be paid, hates manatees, loves cops, etc. The antithesis (sp) of young vulnerable socialists. This group by itself cannot determine elections but add them in large numbers to the yellow dog Dems and they can have an effect. Also I have little hope Hershel will win the run off.
 
Stonewall said:
Independents decide elections. The youth vote cannot be overlooked in these races. Especially at local levels that boast a large number of colleges. The left energizes campuses and make the GOP the boogeyman. The left is pro-choice, pro-weed, pro-student debt relief, pro-environment, anti- LE, etc. The right hates women, love narcs, expects debts to be paid, hates manatees, loves cops, etc. The antithesis (sp) of young vulnerable socialists. This group by itself cannot determine elections but add them in large numbers to the yellow dog Dems and they can have an effect. Also I have little hope Hershel will win the run off.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter now because the Dems retained 50 seats. This will keep a lot of Georgia conservatives from going to vote in the runoff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top