Sonic Winter

4y

To be fair I think Kelly is a fairly strong candidate to go up against.

krishna bound

4y

current numbers for senate are 48-48

kelly winning in AZ and then counting alaska (which still hasn't been called) that's 49-49. NV is obv gonna go to Laxalt so that's 49-50, which means it once again all comes down to GA runoffs.

K DOG 99

4y

I don’t think NV is obviously going R

krishna bound

4y

even if NV doesn't go to Laxalt that makes it projected at 50/50 (inc run-off results) regardless. that said, polls had Laxalt favored in NV even before the election and current numbers and remaining counts are still in his favor

krishna bound

4y

even if NV doesn't go to Laxalt that makes it projected at 50/50 (inc run-off results) regardless. that said, polls had Laxalt favored in NV even before the election and current numbers and remaining counts are still in his favor

krishna bound

4y

someone like JD Vance winning in Ohio is unimpressive and expected because it's a red state. it'd be like trying to exclaim winning as a republican in Florida is impressive.

by comparison, AZ is pretty close to a microcosm of the wider american political landscape as possible; it's essentially a purple state and the way they vote follows little consistency term to term. You can run very conservative and very liberal candidates there and they can win interchangeably.

Masters ran basically the quintessential Thiel ideological campaign (besides just the fact he was literally funded by him); the head to toe of his campaign was entirely representative of those talking points, something more indicative of New Right politics rather than traditional american conservatism. He ran a pretty hardcore campaign there and campaigned on strong talking points and such. He was also obv endorsed by Trump.

Losing there is a big indictment of those talking points in terms of rejection by populaces representatives of wider america, especially given demographics per distict in Arizona. If they can't win in a purple state, no less one actually WILLING to vote for more hardcore right candidates in theory, there's no way in reality that the movement would ever be viable anywhere outside of pre-existing hard red states, which is a massive problem for electoral strategies from republicans.

similarly, every single major race backed by Trump has essentially lost except in unimpressive red states where a republican was going to win anyway (Alaska) - this is an actual problem because Ds performed very poorly in polls downticket, and there was actual will in many purple states to vote R, showing that the Trump endorsement and attached talking points really actively hurt Rs in underperforming

Sonic Winter

4y

I’m not saying it’s a done deal but Wasserman and Jon Ralston (Nevada Independent) are convinced that CCM has a good chance of winning.

Young D

4y

This is odd to me given where things stand, but I trust Wasserman. And the Needle had been showing CCM as winning pretty much the whole time before it was turned off

Young D

4y

This is a very valid post. It will be interesting to see how Lake ends up in the AZ governor race though, which is still very close. However, you could make the case that lake has the unique appeal to "Karen voters," who include white suburban females that seem to like MAGA when it's packaged in a way that appeals to them.

Also on Alaska, Peltola looks like she's taking the W again, and Murkowski is keeping it close. Alaska is a state I could see becoming purplish in a decade.

krishna bound

4y

someone like JD Vance winning in Ohio is unimpressive and expected because it's a red state. it'd be like trying to exclaim winning as a republican in Florida is impressive.

by comparison, AZ is pretty close to a microcosm of the wider american political landscape as possible; it's essentially a purple state and the way they vote follows little consistency term to term. You can run very conservative and very liberal candidates there and they can win interchangeably.

Masters ran basically the quintessential Thiel ideological campaign (besides just the fact he was literally funded by him); the head to toe of his campaign was entirely representative of those talking points, something more indicative of New Right politics rather than traditional american conservatism. He ran a pretty hardcore campaign there and campaigned on strong talking points and such. He was also obv endorsed by Trump.

Losing there is a big indictment of those talking points in terms of rejection by populaces representatives of wider america, especially given demographics per distict in Arizona. If they can't win in a purple state, no less one actually WILLING to vote for more hardcore right candidates in theory, there's no way in reality that the movement would ever be viable anywhere outside of pre-existing hard red states, which is a massive problem for electoral strategies from republicans.

similarly, every single major race backed by Trump has essentially lost except in unimpressive red states where a republican was going to win anyway (Alaska) - this is an actual problem because Ds performed very poorly in polls downticket, and there was actual will in many purple states to vote R, showing that the Trump endorsement and attached talking points really actively hurt Rs in underperforming

CrimsonArk

4y

So have Republicans just kind of given up on the whole “rigged election!” s***?

MrMudManMood

4y

Preciate this heavy

One of @sniper 's posts earlier in this thread was the first time I have ever seen the term new right - can you tell me more about their talking points and the Thiel talking points you mentioned

If you have any reading/videos you can suggest on those topics I'd appreciate that too

CrimsonArk

4y

So have Republicans just kind of given up on the whole “rigged election!” s***?

allmygirlsdoyoga

4y

Masters

Plankton

4y

Rest in piss bozo.

On the real though glad he lost, he has dictator potential

sniper

4y

Thiel’s puppet

The dictatorship is for Thiel and Yarvin and for Vance and Masters to be the court jesters