Odd, I thought one big problem with Clinton was how everyone assumed she would win the primary.
Now Sanders is the presumptive nominee even before the fucking Midterms.
Really? She doesn't seem to have to shrewd political skills of McCaskill and Manchin.I don't think there are many people in DC who would bet on Heitkamp losing.
North Dakota and Indiana, respectively.
Really? She doesn't seem to have to shrewd political skills of McCaskill and Manchin.
Should not is.Odd, I thought one big problem with Clinton was how everyone assumed she would win the primary.
Now Sanders is the presumptive nominee even before the fucking Midterms.
Montana I get: Polls have looked good for Tester and I haven't read anyone say Rosendale as being a particularly high quality candidate. I have heard otherwise about Cramer.
How many seats have Bernie's "Justice Democrats" won again?
I admittedly know a lot less about Heitkamp than about McCaskill and Tester, but a condescending tone isn't helpful: enlighten me.I'm sorry, this reeks of a lack of knowledge of Heidi and this race. What???? lol
I mean, it's a condescending tone because you're speaking in declaratives about a race you don't seem too knowledgable about. That's kind of annoying!I admittedly know a lot less about Heitkamp than about McCaskill and Tester, but a condescending tone isn't helpful: enlighten me.
Well, you're acting like you're super knowledgeable about the race without actually demonstrating you are. Also, a poll a couple weeks ago had Heitkemp down 4 to Cramer, so I don't know where you're getting such confidence from.I mean, it's a condescending tone because you're speaking in declaratives about a race you don't seem too knowledgable about. That's kind of annoying!
ND and IN, respectively.
McCaskill should just run for president. With her goddamn luck, she'd win.
Was there any recent pulling that should have us be concerned? Or are those states too far into Trump territory?Really? She doesn't seem to have to shrewd political skills of McCaskill and Manchin.
North Dakota and Indiana, respectively.
When someone doesn't understand the difference between someone writing "Sanders should be the presumptive nominee" and someone thinking it means that Sanders is currently the presumptive nominee, I guess it is semantics.
When someone doesn't understand the difference between someone writing "Sanders should be the presumptive nominee" and someone thinking it means that Sanders is currently the presumptive nominee, I guess it is semantics.
Heitekamp is a very strong incumbent and if she loses the state in this environment it's basically unwinnable.Well, you're acting like you're super knowledgeable about the race without actually demonstrating you are. Also, a poll a couple weeks ago had Heitkemp down 4 to Cramer, so I don't know where you're getting such confidence from.
A poll from 10 days ago had Heitkemp down by four. It's one poll and within the margin of error, so it's not a lost cause, but considering the environment I would say it's not a race you should consider in the bag like Kaitos seems to be.Was there any recent pulling that should have us be concerned? Or are those states too far into Trump territory?
Well, you're acting like you're super knowledgeable about the race without actually demonstrating you are. Also, a poll a couple weeks ago had Heitkemp down 4 to Cramer, so I don't know where you're getting such confidence from.
Because it was completely wrong. No one said he was the presumptive nominee "even before the fucking midterms". It also ignores that Robinson intentionally uses quotes around "pragmatic" and "presumptive nominee" that suggests that he doesn't really agree with connotations and denotations of those words.It does not change my underlying argument, yet you chose to latch onto it.
Because it was completely wrong. No one said he was the presumptive nominee "even before the fucking midterms". It also ignores that Robinson intentionally uses quotes around "pragmatic" and "presumptive nominee" that suggests that he doesn't really agree with connotations and denotations of those words.
Ok I'm not going to worry about North Dakota. Now can you write an analysis about Indiana? If we can win that one?Good lord.
Heidi Heitkamp is a North Dakotan institution. She's been a statewide elected Democrat since the 80s. She only lost her run for governor because she was running against Hoeven and got breast cancer.
Because North Dakota is so small, it's basically the retail politics state. That's how Heidi ran so many points ahead of Obama and got so many Romney voters on the same ballot.
The past 6 years have been Heidi continuing to do retail politics, focus on rural mail and broadband (huge issues in ND) and focus on Native youth. That's why her approvals are sky high. She basically has done everything to appeal to any potential gettable voter plus her name rec. That's why even dumbass Kevin Cramer starts his ads with "we all like Heidi, but" he's dealing with an unconfortabl truth: North Dakota voters really fucking like Heidi.
And then you're trying to say that she's not "shrewd"? She made sure she was photographed in Trump tower in the transition, she ended up on AF1 and went on stage with Trump where he praised her, and then Trump had had her STANDING NEXT TO HIM when he was signing the farm bill and Cramer freaked out. These are now in her ads. So when you say she's now shrewd, it makes me think you don't quite understand the dynamics here.
Also the NRSC passed over Cramer at first because he can't get his foot out of his mouth and always says incendiary things about women which is how Heidi beat Rick Berg in the first place. They were stuck with him when everyone else they wanted passed and Trump stupidly told Cramer to run. And now Trump hasn't attacked Heidi because he likes her so much.
So yes I do understand this race.
I also said she was likely to win, not that it's in the bag. Those are different things.
Ok I'm not going to worry about North Dakota. Now can you write an analysis about Indiana? If we can win that one?
Never, ever give Donald Trump an opportunity to seize the moral high ground.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/105/hr629One final point: All of this has been a "pragmatic" argument for why Bernie Sanders should be considered the "presumptive" nominee.
Maybe you've seen a more recent poll, but I wouldn't consider 50% approval sky high. It's not bad though seeing she still has a +17 net approval rating.Good lord.
Heidi Heitkamp is a North Dakotan institution. She's been a statewide elected Democrat since the 80s. She only lost her run for governor because she was running against Hoeven and got breast cancer.
Because North Dakota is so small, it's basically the retail politics state. That's how Heidi ran so many points ahead of Obama and got so many Romney voters on the same ballot.
The past 6 years have been Heidi continuing to do retail politics, focus on rural mail and broadband (huge issues in ND) and focus on Native youth. That's why her approvals are sky high. She basically has done everything to appeal to any potential gettable voter plus her name rec. That's why even dumbass Kevin Cramer starts his ads with "we all like Heidi, but" he's dealing with an unconfortabl truth: North Dakota voters really fucking like Heidi.
And then you're trying to say that she's not "shrewd"? She made sure she was photographed in Trump tower in the transition, she ended up on AF1 and went on stage with Trump where he praised her, and then Trump had had her STANDING NEXT TO HIM when he was signing the farm bill and Cramer freaked out. These are now in her ads. So when you say she's now shrewd, it makes me think you don't quite understand the dynamics here.
Also the NRSC passed over Cramer at first because he can't get his foot out of his mouth and always says incendiary things about women which is how Heidi beat Rick Berg in the first place. They were stuck with him when everyone else they wanted passed and Trump stupidly told Cramer to run. And now Trump hasn't attacked Heidi because he likes her so much.
So yes I do understand this race.
I also said she was likely to win, not that it's in the bag. Those are different things.
this is argument #1 for voting for younger candidates: having less of a record is good!https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/105/hr629
That article fuck right on off
Twice
Eh, why the fuck not. For good measure:
Three times
Morning Consult favorable polls are garbage. Her approval is much higher in every one else's tracking polls.Maybe you've seen a more recent poll, but I wouldn't consider 50% approval sky high. It's not bad though seeing she still has a +17 net approval rating.
Was that so hard? I appreciate the explanation, even with the attitude. I'm skeptical because I learned my lesson in 2016 and I'm not sure everyone here did.
It's not that I'm not worried about North Dakota, but at the end of the day, I think Heidi is probably a favorite, especially since we'll get so little polling in North Dakota as is.
I think Donnelly could lose Indiana. It's very 50/50 and I don't have a good sense of Brain as a candidate.
Hey man, you could have responded later. :P I don't think it's unreasonable to question anyone's stance here.Morning Consult favorable polls are garbage. Her approval is much higher in every one else's tracking polls.
And yes it was hard. I was on my phone and had to stop what I was doing to explain to you something I didn't really want to because you refused to take my word for it and questioned my knowledge of the subject matter and now I'm late.
Tennessean here. I've seen way more Bredeson ads and think people here still like him from when he was governor. I'm expecting us to win this shit.
I'm thinking we keep MT,ND,WI,MI,OH,MO,FL,WV,VA,PA. Lose IN.
But gain NV,AZ, and TN.
We would then have 51 seats, I think.
this is argument #1 for voting for younger candidates: having less of a record is good!
I want Beto to pull it of in Texas but I don't know.Tennessean here. I've seen way more Bredeson ads and think people here still like him from when he was governor. I'm expecting us to win this shit.
If it makes you feel better, he's more likely to win after this last week. How much more likely, I can't tell you.
No one said he was perfect. Funny how purity is applied. I definitely have my issues with Sanders, as well. But for me, he's closer to my kind of politics than most other politicians.https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/105/hr629
That article fuck right on off
Twice
Eh, why the fuck not. For good measure:
Three times
I'd be down for a younger candidate if they're closer to my views than most other politicians.this is argument #1 for voting for younger candidates: having less of a record is good!
The fucking article you posted made an argument for pu... Why the fuck am I even wasting my time with you?
Swift boating is entirely true. Trump would probably say that Sanders wants to throw everyone into gulags. I agree that Sanders needs some more bite as well against Trump.Swift-boating proved that people are willing to use anything about you against you, and that people are still willing to believe anything. Bernie Sanders has already proven that playing basketball, running for a train, and everything else is less popular nationally than, say, a woman running for president. He also isn't willing to tell Trump off the way that is needed by the next candidate that runs, he called him "Mr. Trump" too many times.
Clinton all but admitted in her book that she should have told Trump to back away from her during the debates. Whoever can do this, early and often, will have a better chance - not someone who seemingly possesses the least tempting features for Trump to criticize.
From 2015, yall