[Terez]

It usually only works that way downwind. In other words, a president of one party will usually inspire a victory for the other party in midterm elections in Congress. But in presidential elections, whoever wins the presidency usually also wins Congress downticket. Right now the House is gerrymandered toward Republicans, though, so if a Democrat wins the presidency then they'll probably also win the Senate, but not the House.

[Mentalist]

Terez, on 15 December 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:

It usually only works that way downwind. In other words, a president of one party will usually inspire a victory for the other party in midterm elections in Congress. But in presidential elections, whoever wins the presidency usually also wins Congress downticket. Right now the House is gerrymandered toward Republicans, though, so if a Democrat wins the presidency then they'll probably also win the Senate, but not the House.

Ah, I see.

Fwiw, among Ukis I speak to, whenever the election's brought up, people tend to lean Republican, b/c they expect a tougher anti-Russian position, and also b/c there are doubts about Hillary and whether or not she may do some kind of backroom deal with VVH that'll leave UA at his mercy.

Entirely subjective and biased, I know. Simply offering perspective on what people not directly involved can be thinking.

[HoosierDaddy]

If you want another proxy war, Republicans are your best bet. I don't think you want that. Seriously.

[HoosierDaddy]

Name the conditions Terez.

[Nicodimas]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2015 - 07:40 PM, said:

If you want another proxy war, Republicans are your best bet. I don't think you want that. Seriously.

Thoughts?

http://www.reuters.c...N0TX2PG20151215

Quote

The states it listed as joining the new coalition included Egypt, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Malaysia, Pakistan and several African nations.

The list did not include Shi'ite Muslim Iran, the arch rival of Sunni Saudi Arabia for influence across the Arab world. Tehran and Riyadh are ranged on opposite sides in proxy conflicts in Syria and Yemen.

Let me just leave this right here too:

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 15 December 2015 - 08:35 PM

[Mentalist]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2015 - 07:40 PM, said:

If you want another proxy war, Republicans are your best bet. I don't think you want that. Seriously.

Can't say I do. But given the alternative presented is being assimilated into the Russian sphere influence, economic gouging and cultural assimilation, there's lots of people for whom going down fighting seems the more appealing option.

[Abyss]

Any bets on which GOP candidate spoils THE FORCE AWAKENS tonight?

I'd put money on Trump cuz he's hip like that, but could see Bush or Cruz' advisors coaching them to it because it's trending and you gotta trend hard.


(credit where due, channeling Gawker here...
)

[Terez]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

Name the conditions Terez.

Cruz wins Alabama, you get my avatar for a month. Cruz doesn't win Alabama, I get yours for a month.

[Terez]

Briar King, on 16 December 2015 - 03:41 AM, said:

Noooooooooo

What was that for?

[Terez]

Lindsey Graham is out. Not that he was ever a significant player.

http://fivethirtyeig...g/?ex_cid=538fb

I wonder if the main stage debates are going to raise their standards or if they're going to do away with the early debates altogether.

[worry]

It might be a mercy to those candidates. It would cull the herd, and resulting dropouts may swing numbers into all the remaining non-Trump columns. It might not, either, but even in a best case scenario would it nudge anyone up to true rival status? Mathematically speaking. I suppose Cruz is their one anti-Trump hope, but even brushing Cruz with the word "hope" feels disgusting. The Rubio surge still isn't happening for some reason.

[Obdigore]

worry, on 21 December 2015 - 10:36 PM, said:

The Rubio surge still isn't happening for some reason.

Because he looks 'Mexican' and the people who vote in republican primaries are generally pretty racist.

[Terez]

Rubio already got one small surge. It just wasn't very impressive because there are still too many candidates in the race. He probably won't get a decent surge until some of the other establishment types drop out. Christie, Kasich, and Bush would give him about 10% more. Rubio's long term problem is that the anti-establishment candidates have about 60% of the vote tied up.

[Terez]

Pataki is out.

http://fivethirtyeig...sidential-race/

[worry]

He and Kasich came out of the same vat of protohuman genetic pudding.

[Maark Abbott]

worry, on 30 December 2015 - 04:30 AM, said:

He and Kasich came out of the same vat of protohuman genetic pudding.

I can't be the only one flashing back to Fallout 1 and the FEV vats, now.

[worry]

Jeb in South Carolina tonight. His stupidity really does tend toward blithe cruelty.

[Terez]

The clock is ticking on the Carson campaign:

http://www.nbcnews.c...on-quit-n488576

News like this is never good; it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as it signals to donors that you're losing viability.

[worry]

You're right. And on the one hand, it's not surprising, since he's clearly not a great leader. But imploding before even Iowa -- like not being able to convince your closest people to hold out another month -- really does seem like an especially disastrous sign.

[Terez]

His problem got a lot worse after I posted that last article.

http://www.rawstory....s-out-the-door/

At the time he had only lost 5 top staffers. That quickly climbed to 20.