Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

2016 Midterms - Discussion, Factors, Predictions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
    That's my wild guess too.

    I have some very serious doubts about seeing that great "blue wave" we keep hearing about.
    I'm getting ever more skeptical that there will be any "blue wave."

    Democrats have exposed themselves, shown themselves to be anything BUT "democrats"

    Hateful, nasty, power-mad crazies is what they now are.

    Do Americans want to vote for people like this ? ... I don't know, but I have some very serious doubts...

    As I said here;

    "today these people have nothing to do with, or in common with the once known Democrat party."

    https://www.uspoliticsonline.com/for...053#post559053

    The democrat 10 comandments

    ....
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The entire nation came face to face with the neon glare of the nastiness that is now the Democratic Party.

    they have developed their own Decalogue.

    These they adhere to with a vengeance:


    1. Thou shalt have no other gods but human power. Winning elections is the Democrat raison d'ךtre because power is their god; the party is their church; and its manifestation is large, centralized government. The party may demand that Democrats lie, cheat, steal, destroy property, shoot baseball-players, or kill babies, but all those activities are for the greater good: power.

    2. Thou shalt worship under the direction of these priests: Darwin, Alinsky, Spock, Marx, Dewey, and Sanger – to say nothing of Baal. Child sacrifice is their sacrament. All ideas counter to the thinking of these apostles must be mocked, blocked, and twisted.

    3. Thou shalt bow down to nothing wholesome or productive. Kindness, genuine caring, duty, and honor are attributes to fake in order to win elections – see the First Commandment – but are never indulged with sincerity. These values can clog with guilt many of the actions necessary for the required political fight to the death.

    4. Thou shalt demonstrate no respect for the universe as God's creation. Good Democrats must see the Earth as fragile, purposeless, and a god itself. Democrats may show up for church on Sunday, but they are not to take any of it seriously and should choose a church that preaches Marx rather than Paul.

    5. Thou shalt destroy all vestiges of family. Democrats believe in taxing citizens so intensely that both parents have to earn a wage. Their public school curricula train children to revere government rather than parents. Democrats champion sexual deviance and prepare children to indulge their sexuality from a young age. They champion abortion at all stages of fetal development and deny the differences between the sexes to produce maximum societal confusion. When the family fails, then government can take over. One can see the resemblance to the ancient phallic cults.

    6. Thou shalt attack, provoke, ridicule, and kill whoever gets in your way. Even when they don't physically kill their political opponents, they kill their livelihoods, their reputations, their families. This commandment gives modern Democrats an excuse to run conservatives out of restaurants, out of theaters, out of their homes. Democrats can attack with impunity Republicans' electronic privacy – Dems can spy, tap, intercept emails, whatever is necessary. This commandment goes so far as to block any attempt their opponents can make to defend themselves – take their guns, take their knives, keep them vulnerable. Remember – winning is everything because winning brings power.

    7. Thou shalt have any kind of sex with whomever, whenever, and wherever. Refer back to the fifth commandment. Societal chaos and desperation open the door to government control – i.e., power.

    8. Thou shalt legalize theft by authorizing the government to steal. Big government requires big money to bribe voters, to keep them dependent, to be able to import new voters. Under this command, law enforcement must be hamstrung to such an extent that property crimes can't be enforced. All ideas of private property must be squelched and socialism championed.

    9. Thou shalt bear false witness against thine enemies. They make up elaborate stories of sexual deviance and financial malfeasance, of drunken orgies and high school shenanigans. Though they condone such behavior among themselves, they feign horror and outrage at the supposed missteps of their opposition. They gum up the operations of government with said allegations and erase all remembrance of innocence until proven guilt. Winning, remember, is everything.

    10. Thou shalt envy, covet, and indulge all jealous attitudes, hating anyone who has accumulated more wealth, more power, or more fame than you have. This is the engine the runs the whole thing. Without envy, there is no discontent. Where there is no discontent, there is little need of government. Where there is little need of government, there is no accumulation of power. If there is no accumulation of power, there is none for the party to grab and no wealth for the party to pocket.

    What we saw the Democrats do before, during, and after the Kavanaugh inquiry had to have sobered up a lot of honest, honorable Americans because what we saw on display was grotesque. Kavanaugh was damned if he did and damned if he didn't before he even walked into that chamber. Without one word of testimony Democrats were spouting their "I believe her," decrees as if they were holy proclamations.

    The Democratic adherence to these leftist directives, these ancient pagan mandates, proved to be too ugly to countenance. No doubt, decent Democrats all over the nation looked in that national mirror and were as horrified as the rest of us were. The voting booth is the only way we have to wash that venomous taste from our mouths.



    https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...mandments.html






    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #77
      I am still not willing to call the House safe for the GOP, but the numbers have all pretty much moved in the right direction since Labor Day. The RCP Generic Ballot was at +9.5 on September 4; it is now at +6.6 and most of that decline was post-Ford accusation. The Democrat enthusiasm was arguably hitting a ceiling just over anti-Trump hatred, it had very little room to go up. Conversely, Republicans were suffering a huge enthusiasm gap, and the disgusting drive-bye political hit job the Democrats just tried to pull has energized Republicans tremendously, and Independents are slightly more likely to view the democrats negatively over this whole affair than the Republicans.

      And all these numbers are occuring in the context of long-term trends for the Generic Ballot, Presidential Job Approval, and Direction of the Country numbers that have been trending steadily in favor of the Republicans for almost a year. I think if you hear a constant drumbeat from the left that a priority if they take the House will be to investigate/impeach Kavanaugh, you will see the GOP hold the House. Also, going back to 2002, the RCP averages have underpredicted GOP showings in 3 of 4 mid-terms (from averaging 1.3 points lower for GOP than their actual performance), but the ranges have been significant (interesting note, the one time it underpredicted for the Democrats was not in 2006, when they did well in the mid-terms...they actually underperformed the RCP average substantially). Just to keep everything in perspective, the last "blue wave" in 2006, the RCP average had the democrats up over 11 points, they only won by 7.9 points (higher than their current RCP average) and only picked up 31 seats; all before the 2010 redistricting that the GOP shored up a lot of seats with. These numbers could all be way off, but they are what we have for now.

      I think the chances of the GOP picking up 1-3 Senate seats has improved over the last two weeks.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #78
        Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
        I am still not willing to call the House safe for the GOP, but the numbers have all pretty much moved in the right direction since Labor Day. The RCP Generic Ballot was at +9.5 on September 4; it is now at +6.6 and most of that decline was post-Ford accusation. The Democrat enthusiasm was arguably hitting a ceiling just over anti-Trump hatred, it had very little room to go up. Conversely, Republicans were suffering a huge enthusiasm gap, and the disgusting drive-bye political hit job the Democrats just tried to pull has energized Republicans tremendously, and Independents are slightly more likely to view the democrats negatively over this whole affair than the Republicans.

        And all these numbers are occuring in the context of long-term trends for the Generic Ballot, Presidential Job Approval, and Direction of the Country numbers that have been trending steadily in favor of the Republicans for almost a year. I think if you hear a constant drumbeat from the left that a priority if they take the House will be to investigate/impeach Kavanaugh, you will see the GOP hold the House. Also, going back to 2002, the RCP averages have underpredicted GOP showings in 3 of 4 mid-terms (from averaging 1.3 points lower for GOP than their actual performance), but the ranges have been significant (interesting note, the one time it underpredicted for the Democrats was not in 2006, when they did well in the mid-terms...they actually underperformed the RCP average substantially). Just to keep everything in perspective, the last "blue wave" in 2006, the RCP average had the democrats up over 11 points, they only won by 7.9 points (higher than their current RCP average) and only picked up 31 seats; all before the 2010 redistricting that the GOP shored up a lot of seats with. These numbers could all be way off, but they are what we have for now.

        I think the chances of the GOP picking up 1-3 Senate seats has improved over the last two weeks.
        And I think the "media" and how it's handling itself might play a part in this equation as well.

        Very good things are happening in America and FOR Americans. Do we hear about this ?

        Never.

        Which would be the opposite were this a liberal administration. Even if good things weren't happening, we'd hear endless praise and outright lies that they WERE !

        currently...

        It's all negative, all nastiness and hate for president trump all the time. Hate for conservatives. Hate for Christians.

        None of it justified.

        People's lives are better now and we don't hear about it. We only get to hear sob stories about this or that person losing their "health care" because obamacare is losing ground. Lies & negative garbage like this is all we'll get.

        The "media" dare not speak of anything positive without exposing their ideas & who they support, for the failures they are.

        People aren't dumb, they can see what's going on.

        "Blue wave" ? We're soon going to see

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #79
          I'm not sure if that is good news (Marcus) or an unfortunate prognostication, given the general malaise we see in the GOP congress at this time. They HAVE both houses AND the white house and, now, SCOTUS as well. IF EVER there was a time in American politics for the GOP to effect some meaningful change, it is now ... but all we get is crickets.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #80
            Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
            I'm not sure if that is good news (Marcus) or an unfortunate prognostication, given the general malaise we see in the GOP congress at this time. They HAVE both houses AND the white house and, now, SCOTUS as well. IF EVER there was a time in American politics for the GOP to effect some meaningful change, it is now ... but all we get is crickets.
            Well, I would argue we have already started to see meaningful change, the tax cuts, stronger border enforcement, actually fighting for victory (i.e. Kavanuagh), substantial rollback of regulations under the Executive branch, Obamacare has had a number of key aspects cut (including the individual mandate). You can't really count the court's role yet, we only just replaced a moderate with a (presumed) conservative two days ago...the Court can't just start issuing rulings absent pending cases on a particular issue, changes from the Supreme Court take years, if not decades, even with a solid majority in place.

            As for the House, they are gun shy about passing major legislation that would not pass the Senate. I think McConnell is (rightly) hesitant to do away with the legislative fillibuster...though I think they should revert to the good-ol' days when they had to actually hold the floor and speak in order to maintain it. Add back some pain (and farcical television) to the effort.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #81
              Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

              Well, I would argue we have already started to see meaningful change, the tax cuts, stronger border enforcement, actually fighting for victory (i.e. Kavanuagh), substantial rollback of regulations under the Executive branch, Obamacare has had a number of key aspects cut (including the individual mandate). You can't really count the court's role yet, we only just replaced a moderate with a (presumed) conservative two days ago...the Court can't just start issuing rulings absent pending cases on a particular issue, changes from the Supreme Court take years, if not decades, even with a solid majority in place.

              As for the House, they are gun shy about passing major legislation that would not pass the Senate. I think McConnell is (rightly) hesitant to do away with the legislative fillibuster...though I think they should revert to the good-ol' days when they had to actually hold the floor and speak in order to maintain it. Add back some pain (and farcical television) to the effort.
              I see most of that as effected by the President and not necessarily the Congress. Congress didn't fight for Kavanaugh, Trump did (although, yes, you are right about not counting the Court's impact just yet). Congress did not create the tax cuts, Trump did. Border enforcement? Isn't that mostly the president, through Homeland Security and, then, ICE, removing the barriers to them doing their job(s)?

              We already have a court (in California, no less) ruling against Sanctuary State: Where is congressional action on this KIND of thing (though not that specifically)? Where is congressional action on immigration reform (even given, as we've discussed previously, starting to enforce existing laws). How about Congress stepping up and actually forcing the funding for Veteran's welfare? OR actually LEADING the effort to reduce the size of government?

              So many issues, so little action.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #82
                Originally posted by DavidSF View Post

                I see most of that as effected by the President and not necessarily the Congress. Congress didn't fight for Kavanaugh, Trump did (although, yes, you are right about not counting the Court's impact just yet). Congress did not create the tax cuts, Trump did. Border enforcement? Isn't that mostly the president, through Homeland Security and, then, ICE, removing the barriers to them doing their job(s)?

                We already have a court (in California, no less) ruling against Sanctuary State: Where is congressional action on this KIND of thing (though not that specifically)? Where is congressional action on immigration reform (even given, as we've discussed previously, starting to enforce existing laws). How about Congress stepping up and actually forcing the funding for Veteran's welfare? OR actually LEADING the effort to reduce the size of government?

                So many issues, so little action.
                I think that is a bit unfair with regard to Kavanuagh. With the exception of Murkowski, the Senate GOP held the line on his nomination (with a bit of gratuitous dramatics on the part of Flake and Collins, but they came out on the right side in the end). I was of two minds on whether they should have reopened the FBI background check, there really was nothing to "investigate", there were no disprovable facts presented by Ford, and the democrats would have rejected anything that did not "prove" her allegations as having been insufficient in scope, duration, etc...

                In the end I think the additional FBI interviews ended up being politically helpful, but only because the democrats were so disingenuous about them (like complaining that Ford and Kavanuagh were not re-re-interviewed). Ford had already testified and had said that she had nothing to add, so there was no point in the FBI interviewing her (other than to press her harder on her story and the inconsistencies which the democrats would have screamed like stuck pigs over).

                The other thing I thought that did not play very effectively on television, but turned out to be well done was the GOP bringing in the sex crimes prosecutor from AZ to handle most of their questioning of Ford...her report based on very respectful, systematic questioning of Ford was devastating in the mind of anyone who was trying to honestly assess the credibility of the allegations and the accuser based on facts rather than politics.

                On reducing the size of government, let's be clear, Trump is no limited government conservative, and there is only so much oxygen in the room at any given moment.

                Anyway, back to the actual thread topic. Generic Ballot is below 7 for the democrats, down substantially from its recent peak of 9.5 points on September 4. Changes in individual Senate and Gubernatorial races have mostly in the direction of the GOP for the last week and a half (a couple of weeks ago, the aggregate "no toss ups" polling had the democrats gaining 1 Senate seat, it is back to a net gain of 1 for the GOP now with a number of other very close Senate races having been trending in the GOP's direction). Things could break decisively for one party or the other (particularly with the Senate and the Generic House ballot) over the next few weeks, but right now I would say the GOP is likely to pick up 1-3 Senate seats, and the Democrats will take the house with a 5-10 seat margin. I think there is more downside for the democrats in the House now than for the GOP in the Senate. Major wild cards:
                - Stock market
                - Gas prices
                Last edited by Marcus1124; 4 weeks ago.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

                  I think that is a bit unfair with regard to Kavanuagh. With the exception of Murkowski, the Senate GOP held the line on his nomination (with a bit of gratuitous dramatics on the part of Flake and Collins, but they came out on the right side in the end). I was of two minds on whether they should have reopened the FBI background check, there really was nothing to "investigate", there were no disprovable facts presented by Ford, and the democrats would have rejected anything that did not "prove" her allegations as having been insufficient in scope, duration, etc...

                  In the end I think the additional FBI interviews ended up being politically helpful, but only because the democrats were so disingenuous about them (like complaining that Ford and Kavanuagh were not re-re-interviewed). Ford had already testified and had said that she had nothing to add, so there was no point in the FBI interviewing her (other than to press her harder on her story and the inconsistencies which the democrats would have screamed like stuck pigs over).

                  The other thing I thought that did not play very effectively on television, but turned out to be well done was the GOP bringing in the sex crimes prosecutor from AZ to handle most of their questioning of Ford...her report based on very respectful, systematic questioning of Ford was devastating in the mind of anyone who was trying to honestly assess the credibility of the allegations and the accuser based on facts rather than politics.
                  I see a difference between "fighting for" and "voting for."

                  Now that I say that, however, the Republicans ON the Judiciary Committee did "fight for" Kavanaugh. Particularly people like Cruz, Graham, Sasse and even Grassley. So yes, I am being a bit overzealous here, but by and large, republican senators sat on their hands as the democrats floated their turds in the process pool.

                  Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
                  On reducing the size of government, let's be clear, Trump is no limited government conservative, and there is only so much oxygen in the room at any given moment.
                  Trump's proclivities were not the point except insofar as he is the ONLY GOP leader doing anything at this point. My question is, where are the GOP congress members with all of these issues, now that they have the majority in both houses?

                  Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
                  Anyway, back to the actual thread topic. Generic Ballot is below 7 for the democrats, down substantially from its recent peak of 9.5 points on September 4. Changes in individual Senate and Gubernatorial races have mostly in the direction of the GOP for the last week and a half (a couple of weeks ago, the aggregate "no toss ups" polling had the democrats gaining 1 Senate seat, it is back to a net gain of 1 for the GOP now with a number of other very close Senate races having been trending in the GOP's direction). Things could break decisively for one party or the other (particularly with the Senate and the Generic House ballot) over the next few weeks, but right now I would say the GOP is likely to pick up 1-3 Senate seats, and the Democrats will take the house with a 5-10 seat margin. I think there is more downside for the democrats in the House now than for the GOP in the Senate. Major wild cards:
                  - Stock market
                  - Gas prices
                  I hope you're wrong about the house.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                    I see a difference between "fighting for" and "voting for."

                    Now that I say that, however, the Republicans ON the Judiciary Committee did "fight for" Kavanaugh. Particularly people like Cruz, Graham, Sasse and even Grassley. So yes, I am being a bit overzealous here, but by and large, republican senators sat on their hands as the democrats floated their turds in the process pool.
                    I care more about the outcome rather than the theatrics which lead up to the outcome. I couldn't care less if my team screams and makes asses of themselves like the other side, if we ultimately lose. And I couldn't care less if they pull their punches at times, if they believe it will ultimately facilitate victory. Almost all the Republican Senators were a solid yes (unless there were actual evidence against Kavanuagh). The GOP played this one perfectly, as evidenced by actually winning the vote, and the fact that they have benefited politically based on all the available evidence (they have improved in the RCP standings for the Senate, the House, and even for net losses in governors' races.


                    Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                    Trump's proclivities were not the point except insofar as he is the ONLY GOP leader doing anything at this point. My question is, where are the GOP congress members with all of these issues, now that they have the majority in both houses?
                    You are assuming that we have the votes for all the things you want in the Senate. Even if McConnell were to eliminate the legislative filibuster (which would be radical), they still have a number of votes they could potentially lose on any particular bill that you and I may favor, from "moderate" Republicans who unlike such disingenuous hacks like the recently departed Sen. McCain did not actively campaign on voting with the party on those particular topics or who have a long record of being a bit more liberal on those particular areas. Let's be honest, no political party can have a genuinely enduring majority (or even close to it) if they do not accept less than ideologically pure candidates that can win in races where there is more fertile ground for the opposition party. What I object to is the establishment types who LIE to the voters about being in favor of something, but go out of their way to avoid actually doing it. That is not the same thing as the party overall quietly avoiding a losing vote where they genuinely don't have the votes, or prioritizing things.

                    Given such a slender Senate majority (including a few genuinely liberals GOP Senators who we could legitimately lose on any vote, and yes, a few pathetic "never-Trump" showboating losers like McCain, Flake, and Corker). Quite frankly, we have had a stellar performance given the political landscape, and as someone who believes in prioritzing the long-game, getting two SCOTUS justices seated, a big tax cut bill (most importantly, one that starts to limit the deduction for state and local taxes), and Trumps regulatory scalebacks and imigration crackdowns are far more important than many of the more easily reversed things.

                    Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                    I hope you're wrong about the house.\
                    Well, so do I, but as I said at the beggining of the thread, this is about reasoned, thoughtful analysis and prediction, not wishful thinking.

                    I stand by my current assessment (subject to change based on data), that we are more likely than not to lose the House (right now I would say worst case scenario is a thirty seat loss), but I think that both the long-term trends and the current short-term trends show more upside for the GOP than for the Democrats. The stock market and gas prices are two major wild cards at the moment, as is Trump's ability to just be a gratuitous jackass. If Trump can stay on message for the next few weeks (he is actually capable of revving up the base without saying or doing things that alienate Independents, but he doesn't always show that good judgement and restraint).. The RCP scenarios have dropped in the last few weeks from an average pick up of 31 seats for the Democrats to 24.5 currently.

                    In the Senate, we have shifted from the RCP predicting a one seat gain for the Democrats two weeks ago to a two seat gain for the GOP. I see things shaking out to a one to three seat gain in the Senate. On the governors' races, the democrats had been holding steady at a net pickup of 8 until today; it has dropped to 7. One wild card could be Florida, where the aftermath of Hurricane Michael could negatively impact turnout and voting logistics in the Panhandle (the more heavily GOP area of the state), but I am sure Governor Scott will do everything he can to ameliorate that (but there is only so much that can be done).



                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #85
                      Ok, just over a week out, and things have not fundamentally changed since my last post. I am moving closer to calling a range of GOP House Seat losses (20-35), with the edge still going to the Democrats to win the 23 seats they need to take control. In the Senate, I predict a net gain of 3-5 seats by the GOP. Governor's races, I think a net loss of 6-7 by the GOP..

                      One interesting point that could signal a late-break for the democrats is that their share of the Congressional Generic Ballot 7-day rolling average broke above their previous high (49.1) over the weekend and is at 49.3. However, the net spread of the generic ballot (on a 7-day rolling average) is still well below its most recent, early-September high of 8.8 (currently at 7.6 and trending slightly downward since Oct-25).

                      On my tracking of the rolling 7-day Generic Ballot spread, I have two adjusted scenarios, the first, applying the average polling under performance of Republicans compared to actual votes for mid-terms going back to 2002 (about 1.4 percent) and another applying the polling under performance of Republicans for the last Democratic "Wave" election in 2006 (3.6 points). This range (5.2 to 7.6) is within the range that most project the Democrats needing to take the House (most analysts that I consider straight shooters have indicated that Democrats need to win the national House vote by 5-7 points to take back the House due to natural over-concentration of their voters and gerrymandering). So, this is consistent with my overall assessment.

                      The big question is what is more likely, an upside surprise for the Democrats, or for the Republicans. Given the single biggest polling over performance for Democrats was in their last "wave" year of 2006, I think that it is unlikely that the Democrats significantly over perform their national polling. I think the GOP has a better chance of doing better than the polls are projecting for the following (previously stated) reasons:
                      • The Right Track/Wrong Track polling, though a net negative, is far less so than during previous mid-terms (less than half what it was in 2006, 2010, and 2014)
                      • Trump's net approval rating on the economy is still positive (by over 8 points), which I think offsets his net negative overall job approval.
                      • The long-term trend lines for the major indicators, Generic Ballot, Trump Job Approval, Right/Wrong track are still in favor of the GOP.

                      Three additional factors why I think that there is a modestly greater chance of GOP over performance of the polling than Democrats:
                      1. I think that there is still a certain (not huge, but potentially decisive in a close electoral environment like this) likelyhood "shy" Trump supporters with pollsters.
                      2. Undecided voters, rather than breaking strongly for the party that does not hold the White House may be so disgusted by both sides that they simply do not turn out
                      3. In a number of key races, this may not be seen as Left/Democrat vs. Right/Republican, but Insider/Establishment vs. Outsider/non-Establishment. In this, I still think the Trump coalition has strength.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #86
                        A few more days and this mystery will be solved.

                        What kind of America does America want ?

                        We're soon going to find out.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #87
                          Great... NOW we have to put up with Pelosi again...

                          anticipating nothing of value lid coming out of the House for a couple years.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                            Great... NOW we have to put up with Pelosi again...

                            anticipating nothing of value lid coming out of the House for a couple years.
                            It will only expose the moronic arrogance of the left, again. I guess we felt the need to examine this some more.

                            Don't ask me why LOL

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #89
                              I just read, Pelosi has affirmed her first duty will be to demand Trumps Income Statements.

                              Like I said, nothing of value.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
                                I just read, Pelosi has affirmed her first duty will be to demand Trumps Income Statements.

                                Like I said, nothing of value.
                                Other than to incite anger, hate & envy in those who don't have as much income.

                                Another way to manipulate people. Typical liberal.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X