GOP looking good for the trifecta If Trump wins all they need is West Virginia and that one is a sure thing for them, re taking the house of reps is the only hope Downballot effects of a Biden loss are clear for Democrats. The House would likely be gone. GOP has opened up an edge on the generic ballot. If Biden loses, the chance of Democrats holding the Senate is close to zero because of the map and WV being an easy GOP pickup. pic.twitter.com/8tMK2giqDK— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) July 9, 2024
At least the news are good for down ballot Democrats. Lots of data getting thrown around these days but my favorite piece of data today is that on @FiveThirtyEight Dems have their largest lead in the congressional generic since mid May and one of their largest leads of the year. https://t.co/WFl17g9ic4— Simon Rosenberg (@SimonWDC) July 20, 2024
This is why a switch will hurt more than help. It will only project chaos. The amount of people saying it's alarmist and no proof there will be chaos or it will energize things and make some news the Dems can turn into a positive, really are underestimating things from getting names on Ballots, lawsuits by the GOP and so on.
So far, it seems to have energized Dems, particularly young, minorities, and female voters. It has only been a day, so we can't tell the lasting impacts, but, so far, the change seems to have been positive.
And one day later the people that are in chaos are the Republicans. They are whining up a storm and demanding Democrats give them money for all the attack ads the Republicans did against Biden.
Not to mention threatening lawsuits to block Harris from ballots. The lawsuits will certainly be interesting, but given the time frames, I don't see them making it through the court system in time.
I love this. This will tie the GOP in knots for weeks. Let em fulminate. Nobody "goes on the ballot" til they're chosen at convention.
The route that they will take is that a number of states have laws that require delegates to vote for the candidate selected in the state's primary/caucus. There argument will be that because Biden won the state's primary/caucus, the delegates are required to vote for Biden. Of course, it doesn't account for the wishy-washy nature of those laws, or what happens if the winner of the state's primary/caucus fails to win the nomination. For states where it matters, I'd imagine that the DNC will have the delegates vote for Biden on the first ballot, he'll fail to win the majority of delegates as Harris will have enough delegates from Democratic controlled states, or states that don't have such laws, to block Biden from getting an absolute majority, then those delegates will switch to Harris on the second ballot.
You may be surprised how important having kids is to Republicans. There are actually movements to either require people to have children before they can vote, or to give their vote more wait.
There was a recent Supreme Court decision where a state tried to remove someone from the ballot for Constitution-related reasons, I believe it was the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court said, no, you have to let the voters decide, you can't just remove a candidate from the ballot even if you have a good reason, like the Constitution doesn't allow insurrectionists to hold office. Obviously in that case, the candidate was Trump, but I'm sure that precedent will apply to these states trying to keep Harris off the ballot.
It's cute you think the Supreme Court will treat that as a precedent when it doesn't help the orange fascist. That one was about removing a candidate from the ballot, whereas this one is about adding a candidate to a ballot. Totally different! [/sarcasm]
So Dems lose the senate on Aug 20, no? Full text of Bob Menendez’s resignation letter: pic.twitter.com/OgmhaneZH4— Ursula Perano (@UrsulaPerano) July 23, 2024 Or does that make it 50-49?
What? You mean the Democrats aren't howling "LAWFARE!!!" and "PERSECUTION!!" and otherwise complaining about this massive injustice done by one of their own? I mean... come on!
Tester has refused to endorse Harris I’m not sure that’s a good strategy. I get that he’s in a very vulnerable state. I just think that’s precisely why he should endorse rather than distance himself.
Probably a good idea in Montana. He probably is going to lose some of that Montana black vote, but he may make it up somewhere else.
Harris has bigger issues than Tester not endorsing her in Montana. Tester has bigger issues than not endorsing Harris (like trying to win Montana).
I wasn’t implying that Harris should give a shit. I just don’t think Dems that distance themselves from Harris are increasing their chances of winning…regardless of the makeup of their state. If I recall that strategy didn’t exactly work out to well for quite a few Dem critters in swing states in the mid terms (distancing from Biden obviously…but perhaps I’m misremembering)
Lake in the dessert. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...rizona-senate-republican-primary/74604424007/