• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump-Backed Candidate Wins Ohio Special Election

Hedgology said:
Less than 1% of people in the district has requested an provisional ballot. I'm not sure why you're making numbers up



This is why you keep losing at the ballot box. You don't seem to understand the difference between winning and losing.
Click to expand...

3435 provisional and over 5,000 absentee ballots mailed out so a portion will come back we don't know how many. But it won't be 8000 it'll probably be around 4000
Because not all of the ballots mailed out will come back.

So far the win is .9% and if the provisional ballots which tend to go with Democrats sinks at below .5% there will be an automatic recount
 
Napoleon said:
Lmao. You don’t even know if the GOP managed to keep a seat it has otherwise easily held by wide margins for most of the last century and Democrats are the ones with shortcomings? :lol:
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Studies have been shown that presidential approval ratings are predictive of special election outcomes. This race is merely close because the President is unpopular.

But Democrats still lost, so they're even bigger losers.
 
Hedgology said:
The Sec of State website says the numbers are unofficial.
Click to expand...

Correct, but can you not read? The website explains:

The number of Ballots Cast, Outstanding Absentees and Outstanding Provisionals are provided to the Secretary of State’s office by the 88 county boards of elections on Election Night. These numbers are unofficial and merely provide a snapshot until the final results are certified in the weeks following the election. By state law, outstanding provisionals and absentees are not tabulated before the 10th day following the Election.
Click to expand...

They're "unofficial" until certified at a later date. Why are you trying so hard to prove you're ignorant? I mean, it's OK by me, but I don't know what your point is here unless making yourself look clueless is your goal here....:confused:

Prehaps. We won't know until later...
Click to expand...

Correct!!

That is exactly what a wring state means; both major political parties have an equal level of support and it's usually the independents that tilt the election in favor of a candidate.
Click to expand...

Do you have a newsletter that I can subscribe to for more excellent analysis like that? :lamo
 
Hedgology said:
Pretty much. Studies have been shown that presidential approval ratings are predictive of special election outcomes. This race is merely close because the President is unpopular.

But Democrats still lost, so they're even bigger losers.
Click to expand...

Republicans are underperforming by very wide margins we shall see who has the last laugh in November
 
JasperL said:
Political analysts don't predict election outcomes - that's the job of people we call pollsters, and the polls conducted by those professionals had the R winning a close race, which it appears he did.
Click to expand...

You mean to tell me you've never seen a single political analyst predict an election outcome? Are you being obtuse on purpose?
 
Anagram said:
I can't see how they would pass anything so controversial in the last 3 months before the midterms that Balderson's seat would be within spitting distance of being the deciding vote. And this is especially since anything passing that narrowly with so many Republicans against would probably not be able to pass in a Senate where one Republican defection like Collins would sink it.
Click to expand...
Barring rapid movement on immigration, the next GOP issue will be.....healthcare. And that will be after November.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Hedgology said:
Pretty much. Studies have been shown that presidential approval ratings are predictive of special election outcomes. This race is merely close because the President is unpopular.

But Democrats still lost, so they're even bigger losers.
Click to expand...

Who won and who lost is still to be determined.
 
JasperL said:
Correct, but can you not read? The website explains:

They're "unofficial" until certified at a later date. Why are you trying so hard to prove you're ignorant? I mean, it's OK by me, but I don't know what your point is here unless making yourself look clueless is your goal here....:confused:
Click to expand...

The reason why is irrelevant. We already know that the number may be less or more. I'm not sure what you are so adamant on the accuracy? Just wait until next week.


Correct!!

Do you have a newsletter that I can subscribe to for more excellent analysis like that? :lamo
Click to expand...

Why don't you just take a civics class. That is always how swing states have worked.

And swing states usually change.
 
Hedgology said:
I don't know where you are getting those numbers from, so for now I'm going to assume you made them up.
Click to expand...

Steve Kornacki said he got it by telephone from the Ohio election commissioner or whoever the appropriate official is I forget. We won't know what the official count is until at least 10 days and that is only if there is no recount.
 
Hedgology said:
The reason why is irrelevant. We already know that the number may be less or more. I'm not sure what you are so adamant on the accuracy? Just wait until next week.

Why don't you just take a civics class. That is always how swing states have worked.

And swing states usually change.
Click to expand...

LOL, excellent stuff there. :roll:

Swing states "usually change?" That's such a nonsense statement it genuinely made me LOL, right here in front of the dog, who's now looking at me funny.
 
Hedgology said:
That is technically true, but Balderson declared himself the winner so I'm just going with that.
Click to expand...

With that many votes separating them one would expect the so-called journalists would have called it..
 
JasperL said:
I don't know - in the big picture I would think the GOP might be a lot worried about today's results. November is a long ways off, so we'll see. I will say the republicans today are reminding me a lot of Democrats in the runup to the 2010 elections.

As to the bolded, that's correct, thanks for restating my point.
Click to expand...
Your point was that it was a good day for GOP?
 
Carjosse said:
I smell recount.
Click to expand...

How many Russians voted. I thought they were over here stuffing all the ballot boxes and we are helpless to stop them.:lamo
 
JasperL said:
LOL, excellent stuff there. :roll:

Swing states "usually change?" That's such a nonsense statement it genuinely made me LOL, right here in front of the dog, who's now looking at me funny.
Click to expand...

Illinois and Texas were key states to win for either candidate in the 1960 election. Florida didn't become a competitive state until 2000. Now Michigan and Minnesota have become competitive. I'm not sure why you're convinced that history began today, but swing states have always changed. It's called "demographics."
 
Bullseye said:
Your point was that it was a good day for GOP?
Click to expand...

Not really, but a win is a win I guess.

My actual point was a lot of Democrats were in denial before the big wave in 2010, and the GOP faithful these days are reminding me of those Democrats....

But I claim no special insight into elections 100 days or so off. We'll see, but a district moving 10 points to the Ds (or 35 points, or 13 points, depending on how you count it) isn't something I'd be drinking to in celebration if my job was electing R's this year.
 
Hedgology said:
Illinois and Texas were key states to win for either candidate in the 1960 election. Florida didn't become a competitive state until 2000. Now Michigan and Minnesota have become competitive. I'm not sure why you're convinced that history began today, but swing states have always changed. It's called "demographics."
Click to expand...

OK we're at the point where you randomly throw crap against the wall for no discernible point I can find, so I think I'll leave it to you. Seen this movie!
 
Trump won by double digits, it has virtually evaporated in 18 month's. Dems can be hopeful, that swing to the Dems should be very worrying to the GOP for Nov.
 
LincolnRossiter said:
What is it about being a Trumpkin that makes you guys so clueless? The GOP candidate is hanging on to a .9% lead in a district Republicans have held for all but 2 of the last 80 years, after spending 2x as much on the race.

This is a bad outcome for Republicans.
Click to expand...

This is safe Rep seat, and the Rep canidate is hanging on by a thread. The Adorables do not understand the word "swing" as used in elections.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
How many Russians voted. I thought they were over here stuffing all the ballot boxes and we are helpless to stop them.:lamo
Click to expand...

I am sure the illegals were bussed in from Mass, what ever did happen to that specific Trump lie ? Oh ya, look at the spurce lol
 
JasperL said:
OK we're at the point where you randomly throw crap against the wall for no discernible point I can find, so I think I'll leave it to you. Seen this movie!
Click to expand...

No one is making things up. It's called "history."

JFK won Texas with only 50.52% of the vote.
No Presidential Candidate has won Flordia by more a 5% margin since 1996.
And obviously, anyone can look at the current political landscape in Michigan and Minnesota to see that it has become more competitive.

Swing states always change. The Democrat's mistake is your mistake, in assuming that they never change.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
With that many votes separating them one would expect the so-called journalists would have called it..
Click to expand...

I'd think real honest to goodness "journalists" would let the election experts call the race and report on that, unless you think some reporter with a journalism degree is a good person to do the analysis about a race separated by 1700 votes with 8500 left to count. Myself, I'd rather rely on the data geeks who have some evidence-based insight into those outstanding votes and what's possible for the splits, but you do you!
 
JasperL said:
I'd think real honest to goodness "journalists" would let the election experts call the race and report on that, unless you think some reporter with a journalism degree is a good person to do the analysis about a race separated by 1700 votes with 8500 left to count. Myself, I'd rather rely on the data geeks who have some evidence-based insight into those outstanding votes and what's possible for the splits, but you do you!
Click to expand...

Clearly given the snark overload you have something on your mind...

Go ahead and lay it on me, perhaps I can help.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Clearly given the snark overload you have something on your mind...

Go ahead and lay it on me, perhaps I can help.
Click to expand...

Nope, bored mostly...

The point was that actual journalists don't call elections, or shouldn't, because it's way the hell outside their area of expertise. That's the job of gear heads with lots of data who sit in back rooms. So, "so-called journalists" would be the ones making calls best left to experts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom