Mellor wrote: » It will be much closer that the EC results will suggesting. But the majority of the discomfort was down to the republican votes being counted first and dems having to claw back the wins. If these states counted postal votes first, we'd be looking Biden establishing a huge lead and Trump's futile attempt to catch him. That's a much more comfortable count back. Even though the votes are the same in both cases.
BorneTobyWilde wrote: » People are dreaming, CNN trying to not declare anything, lets just squeeze another few hours, another few minutes with this dream of winning. Tears in their eyes. It's done, Trump won, and got more votes than last time.
Manic Moran wrote: » Comfortable? Have you missed the last 24 hours' worth of posts on this thread? How comfortable did the posters seem to you? Sure, the final tally is good, but as we all know, in the winner-takes-all system, the EC votes don't tell the story of just how close it came do the other direction. If you want 'comfortable' in terms of EC, look at the election results from the 1980s.
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1324182358828961794 I hope this is correct. Most of my hopes right now rest on PA.
~Rebel~ wrote: » I'm not sure am I mistaken on something? Are those not just the numbers of the uncounted ballots? Like, nothing to do with polling or prediction, just the raw numbers of how many physical ballots remain to be counted from each county?
~Rebel~ wrote: » They just mentioned on CNN that some of the Nevada areas have numbers at the ready but that the states position is to release it all together. A fearful little piece of me is wondering if they have unfavorable numbers and want to wait for GA or PA to release a Biden victory first so that their own release isn't immediately met by Trump again claiming victory as a result. .
Manic Moran wrote: » Comfortable? Have you missed the last 24 hours' worth of posts on this thread? How comfortable did the posters seem to you? Sure, the final tally is good, but as we all know, in the winner-takes-all system, the EC votes don't tell the story of just how close it came do the other direction. If you want 'comfortable' in terms of EC, look at the election results from the 1980s. What better conditions are required for the Democrats to regain control of the Senate? This is the Trump senate and associated with him, ramming supreme court judges through, blocking the House at every turn, and pick whatever other complaint you want, and with far more R seats in the 'tossup' category than D. Only five years ago the Democrats had a majority 55-45 (including the two D-independents). Either the Ds need a better background environment (eg an even worse incumbent Senate), the Republicans had stellar candidates, or the Democrats put forward candidates who did not succeed in reaching the voters. Yes, it's not called yet, but it'll take some reasonably dramatic last second returns to give the Democrats 50. I don't see it happening. There was also no movement in the state legislatures, now I'm looking. Outside of losing the Montana governor's mansion, they also seem on track to lose the New Hampshire Senate. In return, they get the Arizona House. It is the most stable election in terms of state houses since 1944.
Rjd2 wrote: » Not a route, but if we ignore the initial hysteria about Florida it looks a comfortable enough win for Biden as he seems to have won much more swing states than he even needed. They will have a majority in the house, the republicans have not held the senate yet and Biden has won. They arguably would have taken that before the counting begun.
sheeplover55 wrote: » I could jumble a box of cornflakes around and let you guess how many individual flakes are in the bag too. Stealing a living - 2016, Brexit and now this election. Look at the congressional races, completely out of whack.
~Rebel~ wrote: » I mean, yeah... he's literally providing the raw information for you to come to your own conclusion. How many votes left, where they are, and what % would be needed to switch.
Mr.Nice Guy wrote: » https://twitter.com/TalKopan/status/1324179050156490754 I think that's between 5am and 8am our time. Yikes.
sheeplover55 wrote: » Oh he's made a quantitative edit - how Scientific. New York times +11 Wisconsin, Reuters +10. Same story across all the toss up states. Collins not a single polling outlet predicted her to win - the average was +10 for her D challenger. She won her race +10.
~Rebel~ wrote: » Christ, whatever else you want to say about her, she's definitely smart.
sheeplover55 wrote: » Pelosi isn't smart, she's just there to pander.
TomOnBoard wrote: » Nancy played a blinder in marking Trump. So, she needs to no retire as those skills are no longer required. A younger generation of leadership needs to be introduced. Chuck was a bit meh! during the last term. I'd like to see someone a bit less corporate and a bit more progressive take on that role.
Mellor wrote: » It's a bit premature to be making those sorts of claims tbh. 306 to 232 is very much still on the cards
Water John wrote: » Van Jones was saying that. The Dems need to respect and reflect the positions of their ground supporters esp black women and the Latino members. Do the likes of Schumer and Pelosi need to be moved sideways? I would say yes. They're white and old, like myself.
Manic Moran wrote: » So I'm presuming that there will be an AAR thread once this is all over with, to discuss why the Democrats have not done as well as anticipated?
TomOnBoard wrote: » Makes sense to analyse it. I'm not sure if it can be fully understood for a while though. But the Dems certainly need to do a whole lot of introspection even before Biden picks an Administration/ Cabinet. In particular, the roles of Corporate entities, Progressive members, Minority representation will need to be understood and feature in future policy. Also, they must try to understand how the decades long ignoring and marginalisation of folks who had been the blue-collar backbone of the country became fodder for the populist Trump machine that gave them an ear and a voice for the first time in decades.
marno21 wrote: » Big questions have to be asked. If they can’t retake the Senate in a year like this when will they ever retake the Senate?
