@Nuke I can ban you

@Nuke what’s a salt miner

Do you guys think that Abdul El-Sayeed guy has a chance of winning for Michigan Governor if he wins Tuesday's primary?

I would honestly change the rating to tilt Republican. Maybe even lean.

What white working class man will vote for a guy named Abdul El-Sayeed?

@Pielover19 Anti-Muslim sentiments are high across all demographics in the USA.

Not quite as bad as how atheists are viewed but badn onetheless.

A Justice Democrat secured the Democrat nomination for Governor of Maryland. How does this affect your rating, @Pielover19?

It's Safe R. Always has been.

Good.

@Pielover19 so do you think Gretchen Whitmer is likely to beat Bill Schuette ?

She's got an edge.

I haven't really analyzed the gubernatorial races at anywhere near the level of depth I have for the congressional races

After looking into Michigan's history with primaries, I'll say that it does look better for the D but it's no reason to give up. Back in 2002, there was a million votes done in the dem primary, 580k for the R primary. The dem won the governor race, but it was incredibly close.

It was only a 4 point difference

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_gubernatorial_election,_2010

good news is that the Michigan GOP 2018 primary had a vote total almost as high as the 2010 one

That is a lot of red

yep

the senate primary total was much larger than 2012 and 2014 for the GOP

yeah, GOP turnout is higher in 2018 (a midterm year) than in 2012 (a presidential year) for the GOP primary

I don't think it has too much relevance if it's a midterm or presidential year when it comes to primaries

Oh, it does. Presidential years almost always have primaries higher than midterms for the party in power.

A good example is Ann Wagner's district in Missouri.

Higher primary turnout in 2016 than her Democratic opponents, 20,000 less than the Democrats this year.

@[Lex] do you mean for the party not in power

http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/jRLE

THE MAP HAS BEEN FIXED

I know gubernatorial races are much less partisan, but it's funny to see states like Maryland, Massachusetts, and Vermont marked as solidly red

Lol yeah

So in the democrat primary for Govenor in Vermont one of the candidates is a Trannie and the other is a 14 year old boy

The absolute state of the Democrat party

My gubernatorial predictions.

@Walter Johnson How the fuck does a 14 year old boy get on the ballot?

They don't have age limits in Vermont

What the fuck?

That’s odd

@Ghawk There's a lot of states without age limits, like Kansas.

Also remember that tilt exists

I know tilt exists, I have tilt on a few states, but I think many are solid Republican.

@Nuke

I don't see it on there.

Alaska, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire are all tilt.

That's lean lol.

Tilt is the fourth shade. It's new.

https://www.mydaytondailynews.com/news/mike-pence-talk-tax-cuts-raise-money-for-mike-dewine-cincinnati-tuesday/xeADUlhspuW1xyK02EgE4J/

Pence will also be in Toledo for Renacci.

There have been 10 year old mayors before

And yeah, there are states without an age limit

IIRC New York has one though: 30 for governor

In Ohio you have to be 18 to be governor.

https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2018/07/30/vt-insights-gov-scott-drops-poll-but-has-democratic-support/862213002/

**Vote him out**

Vermont has an open primary, so that could very easily nominate him

See here's the conflict.

Democrats love Scott for bringing gun control to VT.

And working with them.

But they're conflicted on whether to vote for the first Transgender Gov candidate, or him.

So this election is unpredictable.

hopefully they vote more in the Democratic Primary which leads to Keith Stern primarying him out

Some stats in the case of Wisconsin - in 2014, the GOP had 240k votes in total in the primaries. In 2018, it had well over 450k.
In 2014, the Democrats had 310k votes in total in the primaries. in 2018, it had well over 530k.
The ratio of D-R in primary votes greatly favours the Republican compared with 2014.
Remember also, Scott Walker had 70k less primary votes in 2014 but tidily won the election with 52.3% to 46.6%.

I'd give Wisconsin a tilt/lean GOP in terms of its governorship.

@[Lex] but democrats are more energized now and will get better turnout for being the party out of power.

Democrats need the independent white vote to win this.

the same pattern keeps holding

Democrats are massively improving from their 2014 numbers, but Republicans are moderately improving

keep in mind that 2014 was a Republican favored year though

The fact that Walker faced a primary challenge will likely hurt his support.

Remember that without the help of #NeverTrumpers who voted for Cruz in the Wisconsin primary, Trump had to rely on Sanders supporters to win Wisconsin in the general.

I don't think Scott Walker can depend on this.

remember that Romney had a higher vote total in Wisconsin than Trump

partly due to suburban voters shifting towards Hillary

Scott Walker has incumbency advantage though

btw, we gotta update the Wordpress for a bunch of states

I haven't changed things in almost two months

we need to do writeups on all the senate and gubernatorial races that have already had their primaries

@Deleted User mostly due to the fact democrats stayed home in Wisconsin.

I think Trump carrying that state was a fluke, it won't happen again if democrats are prepared.

We won that state on their laziness, not because Trump inspired more people to vote for him.

next 2020 Democratic Candidate could also have shit appeal for Wisconsin, like Hillary

they weren't 'lazy' in 2016 for Hillary, they just didn't like her

on the other hand, when it comes to Pennsylvania and Michigan, you do see the "Trump inspiring more people to vote for him" narrative exist

same thing applies to Florida, Ohio, Iowa

all states Romney lost in 2012

Trump didn't even campaign in Wisconsin as much as some others

@Deleted User yeah but those people he appealed to are abandoning him now, Trump approval among whites in all the rust belt states is below 50%.

@zakattack04 that ain't true

@Deleted User it is ;-;

Other thing is she didn’t campaign as good in the rust belt

And most of her supporters thought that she was going to win the election because at the time it looked like she was going to win

Hillary was leading in Wisconsin by 7 according to the polls

@Deleted User Hillary lost by one point in Wisconsin but again she should went back campaign harder then what she did

Can’t always look at polls because they do change a lot

I’m not saying that your wrong or anything i do remember that she was was 7 points but again you can’t tell how turn out is going to be like

it just shows that polling isn't always reliable, and can sometimes be way off

Exactly

@Deleted User But Hilary was ahead of Trump, but the Democrats there were so confident of victory they didn't show up to vote.

We won Wisconsin with luck, Trump lost votes from Romney in WI but won it because Democrats stayed home.

If they decide to show up, Wisconsin goes blue.

That goes back to Voter turn out

We had more voter turn out then we though Democrats didn’t stayed home Zack they didn’t have a turn out like they thought

So yes your are wrong because i have no idea where you are getting this info at

@zakattack04 or maybe the polls were just off?

>if they decide to show up

part of why they didn't show up is because the Democrats suck

and some of them crossed over to vote for Trump

there were suburban Republicans who voted Hillary because she specifically tried to court that type

Exactly 👆🏻

@Jebber22 (IN-08) Trump won Wisconsin, but had less votes than Romney, which means the Democrats didn't show up to vote. or voted third party.

Which also explains why turnout in Wisconsin was down like 4%

Because Democrats stayed home.

Okay whatever.... I don’t see how the Democrats stayed home but whatever

Wait no

Trump and Romney had about the same

Trump- 1,409,467 and Mitt 1,408,746

Right there.... I’m done talking about it because you not listen me and I’m done trying to explain it

@zakattack04 part of it is because there are Democrats who have left the party since 2012, you can't deny that

@Jebber22 (IN-08) 2012 Romney Wisconsin Vote: 1,407,966
Trump Wisconsin Vote: 1,405,284

Trump had less votes than Romney, but still carried the state.

Which means the only reason we won this white working class state was because of peopel voting 3rd party and democrats staying home.

No

Those numbers don’t add up

Here did you get them

They don't have too.

because people vote 3rd party

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Wisconsin,_2016

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Wisconsin,_2012

No don’t get shit from Wikipedia

Those numbers i got where from the New York Time or post whatever it’s called

Just stop when you ahead Because you not making any sense at all and it’s pissing me off

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2012/results/president.html

@Jebber22 (https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2012/results/states/wisconsin.html

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/wisconsin

That makes it even worse

Dude just stop

I'm still correct.

LMAO

It says right there.

1,408,000 for Romney

Because you are pissing me off

1,405,000 for Trump

Where are you getting your facts frmo?

because so far I can't find the numbers you cited at anywhere.

The Mitt one is right but i can’t fine where i got the Trump numbers but your logic behind doesn’t make since and now I’m going to drop it and go on with my life

Why doesn't it make sense.

Dude move on

If Trump has less votes than Romney, but carried the state, that means that less democrats voted in Trump's election than in Romney's election, or more democrats voted third party.

I don’t give shit about it anymore because I’m trying move on

*sigh*

Really?

Don’t sigh me

Lol

https://www.facebook.com/RichCordray/videos/10156346809200180/

This is a fucking joke. He is in panic mode as DeWine called him out.

Is this for Governor, what seat is this for

Yes, he running for governor.

Ah

ffs here's how to make sense of it

Obama -> Trump voters increased in Wisconsin, and Romney -> Third Party must've as well, at a larger rate.

🆙 | **FLanon leveled up!**

Another thing to consider: Right to Work

Democrat turnout is typically hurt by about 3 points when Right to Work is enacted. Wisconsin is a RTW state and their laws were enacted in 2015, so when thinking of it that way, that's a way to make sense of the shift without saying it'll revert.

@FLanon Hilary had 238,449 less votes than Obama and Trump had 2,000 less votes than Romney, but 3rd Party votes only increased by 147,947 votes. So you're telling me 12% of Democratic votes in 2012 either voted for Trump or voted 3rd Party in 2016?

No, what happened is Democrats stayed home. Milwaukee County (which is a heavy Democratic area) saw 60K fewer votes than in 2012. It wasn't because Obama voters switched to Trump, it was because Democrats stayed home because they thought they were going to win.

Also I don't see how right to work would effect turnout of 2012 if it was enacted in 2015, furthermore I doubt that right to work would have more of an effect on turnout than the presidential election.

That's also, just one of the many counties that this happened too.

2016

Wisconsin had it's lowest turnout in two decades in 2016.

Yes

Romney is different than Trump

All they have to do is increase that and the state goes back to Democrat

RTW gets implemented in 2015 -> low dem turnout in 2016

Right to work wouldn't depress Democratic turnout in a presidential election. What depressed turnout was the "it's in the bag" mentality, and low enthusiasm for Clinton.

And for Trump also

It is presidential elections though

https://www.thenation.com/article/right-to-work-laws-are-killing-democrats-at-the-ballot-box/

"Their findings should strike terror into the hearts of Democratic Party strategists: Right-to-work laws decreased Democratic presidential vote share by 3.5 percent."

Hail Victory

Dear god this website is retarded

"On the right, the origins of right-to-work laws are deeply racist: Early laws were aggressively pushed by white supremacists with KKK ties aiming to break up cross-racial working-class solidarity."

I don't think this is the reason.

And it obviously didn't effect he primaries considering Wisconsin just had their highest turnout since 2002 in the primary.

"In Wisconsin, nearly 1 million voters cast ballots, or about 22 percent of the voting-age population, surpassing the 14 percent rate posted in both 2016 and 2014, according to a spokesman for the Wisconsin Elections Commission. That is the highest since a 22.5 percent turnout rate in 2002, but the official figure could still exceed that when all votes are counted. "

Well their rationalizing is retarded but the data is sound

part of why Hillary had 238,449 fewer votes than Obama was because Trump ran a better campaign. It's not just about getting people to vote for you, it' about getting the people who would otherwise vote for your opponent to stay home, and Trump did a good job of that by going on the offense against Hillary

Romney only did so well because he picked Ryan as his VP and deliberately targeted Wisconsin

and had a more refined GOTV effort

whereas Trump managed to win Wisconsin without much effort

his main pushes were for Florida, Pennsylvania, and Michigan

he also notably abandoned Virginia months before November, which is also why Romney managed to do better there in 2012

Romney was specifically trying to flip Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, and Colorado in order to beat Obama

Trump managed to flip the first three. He flipped the first two at solid margins

he didn't spend any real effort on flipping the last two

@Deleted User If Trump ran a better campaign he would've gotten more votes than Romney, not lost them.

Unless you're arguing the Romney > 3rd party rate was EQUAL to the Obama >trump rate which honesty sounds like BS to me

I'll concede that one

@zakattack04

> If Trump ran a better campaign he would've gotten more votes than Romney, not lost them.

not true

he wasn't focusing as much on Wisconsin

Right to Work I would say is more compelling

his attacks on Hillary did contribute to her voters staying home

Maybe if it had been implemented in, say, 2011, Romney would've won

The attacks on Hillary too, yeah

Romney ran a pretty lackluster campaign overall

Obama was beatable in 2012

There was a pretty big "She's a crook" sentiment Trump was able to use to convince people to either vote 3rd party or stay out of the election completely

@Deleted User so you're agreeing with me

Of course, that doesn't mean he won't lose an election without it. If he does well enough in following through on his promises from now to re-election, he can win those states and more

That Trump won Wisconsin because democrats stayed home, not because he got newfound grassroots support.

"His attacks on Hillary did contribute to her voters staying home."

Bruh

@zakattack04 part of why they stayed home is because Trump was effective

@Deleted User not because white's in WI liked Trump's agenda

But because they didn't like Hilary

IE: we won on a fluke.

I believe the White Vote in Wisconsin decreased on both sides iirc

Most Rust Belt states, the White Vote for Dems went down

that's not a fluke though because it happened through Trump's efforts

Yeah I don't believe it was a fluke

;

@Deleted User It was a fluke because it won't be consistent.

Trump can do the same thing in 2020

probably will have an easier time too

incumbency advantage

@Deleted User No because the right now it looks like the front runner is Joe Biden, which would most likely slaughter trump.

Biden will take a fat chuck of the college educated vote white vote, and a portion of the white working class vote.

But yeah incumbency advantage I guess...

Biden would lose the minority vote

And he has that pedo shit

Plus he’s old as fuck

Biden is old

has lots of baggage

went nowhere when he ran for the Presidency in 1988

got last place in 2008 when he ran again for the Presidency, got lucky that Obama tapped him for VP

alright we can stop purging

yeah this is reasonable

Wtf

right before this was talking about wisconsin, so it's good

Oh that note, what do we need to do to win Ohio's gubernatorial race?

I think that's one of the easier ones iirc

Make a lot of fake IDs and then register to vote there and vote

that's a great thing to say on discord

Tell me about it

Yeah, that's why I'm bringing it up.

probably someone from ohio is better for this

Yeah @Ghawk should we do anything to help DeWine/Renacci?

@Nuke Show the quote that Richard Codray made.

<@&415171664574414849> Make sure to vote out the current governor!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/election-results/alaska/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.be19d4c2e28a

RED STORM CRYSTAL BALL RATINGS CHANGES:
Minnesota: Tossup to Lean Democrat
California: Likely Democrat to Safe Democrat (The dream is over, folks.)
http://www.270towin.com/2018-governor-election/zEyA

Oof

But you’re biased

Regarding /rsg/'s gubernational endorsements, I would like to make an objection on behalf of RI

Allan Fung is your typical establishmentarian moderate who cares little for conservative policies

During his time as mayor of Cranston, he used municipal funds to supplement his own coffers using legal means and gave prominent town projects to his financial backers

Issue is in these deep blue areas like RI, MD, VT, and MA, the only Republicans that are able to realistically have a chance at getting elected is the "Liberal but with lower taxes" archetype