It's a good job conservatives have so much self-control, or he might have killed the guy.
Printable View
It's a good job conservatives have so much self-control, or he might have killed the guy.
I fully expect the Montana conservatives to cheer and happily vote for this guy. Not sure about those identifying as independent. The conservative smear campaign against journalism has been depressingly successful, so, assaulting a journalist for doing his job might be regarded as heroic for anyone not liberal/ progressive minded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
You may or may not be right, but he has pretty good chances anyways because of heavy early voting in the state.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
And this was not a close race either.Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggin
Fivethirtyeight had a little bit about the polling; it shows a GOP lead but the polls are of poor quality so it's hard to say how big it really is. Given the general tilt of Montana, even a close race should be a concern for the GOP looking forward to midterms (as were the two previous special elections that also showed overperformance by Dem challengers). I think this particular incident is likely to have a muted effect, though, since as many as two thirds of votes were already cast before the incident.
Plus of the remaining third a certain percentage wouldn't have been voting for him anyway, which won't change because of this. So at most maybe 1/5th of voters (assuming he was winning by a healthy margin) would be yet to vote for him and of those I suspect most still will either because they don't pay enough attention to notice this story, or don't care about it.
There's actually an interesting question here having to do with the composition of the early voting population. Are early voters more likely to be partisan (e.g. unlikely to be swing voters)? If so, that implies that you can have more of an effect with a late surprise than you'd expect, because you weren't going to swing early voters one way or the other. It's a hypothesis, but I don't know if anyone has tested it yet.
I think I read the same 538 article you did wigster, and didn't they make the point that the early voting population is more likely to be made up of people who already made up their mind?
Early voting predicted nothing in the Georgia special election.
I only skimmed the article but it's possible. While this is a logical conclusion, I don't know if it's actually backed by any data.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
By definition, people who vote early are more excited about the election. At the very least, it means the same people would turn out to vote during the normal voting period if the early one wasn't available. Lots of early votes for party X simply means fewer votes being cast for that party on election day.
I'm not convinced that's 'by definition'. Maybe people vote early because it's less of a hassle than voting on election day and they wouldn't vote otherwise. Maybe they vote early because they're less politically engaged and don't want to bother following the last few weeks of the campaign. Maybe they're a specific demographic that finds it difficult to make it to a polling place on election day. Etc. The easier you make it to vote early, the less certain we are that the population of early voters is particularly partisan or politically engaged. For that matter, that assumes that swing voters are less politically engaged than partisan voters, which may or may not be the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I would guess someone has looked at this with real data, and if I had to put money down it would be to agree that the proportion of partisan voters in early voting is indeed higher than on election day. But I wouldn't put a lot of money on it.
Looks like Wicks won :downcast:
Barging into a place uninvited in Montana? He may have gotten off lucky?
:p
I blame gangsta rap for the thuggish behavior of Montana Republicans.
Pervasive culture of violence among Montana liberals:
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/...ould-have-shot
#thuglyfe
Seriously though, what the hell is up with these thin-skinned snowflakes?
You know, this thread is nearly a year old now.
I think we can all agree we've seen nearly unprecedented levels of self-control form conservatives across America during that time.
Running people over. Shooting at people. Electing the worst man in the world as president because liberals were mean to them. Lying, constantly. Insulting the families of dead soldiers. Repeatedly trying to take healthcare away from millions for no reason other than spite. Being completely unhinged about safe-spaces and "SJWs" and free speech being under attack, then turning round and completely losing their shit because a black dude knelt for the anthem. Inventing a bizarre conspiracy theory about fast food joints, then believing it. Maybe starting a war with North Korea.
These people are practically zen buddhists.
circling back on this
Trump to BLM : “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”
Trump to rioters he instigated: ”remain peaceful”
Sadly hypocrisy is everywhere. If you storm government buildings you should be shot. Doesn't matter your cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust