I know you are, LOL. But just to show you that I'm not engaging in wishful thinking or mere hand waving that these general election matchups are meaningless in this part of the cycle. see Greg Sargent here.
Here was Tom yesterday:
Here was Tom yesterday:
"He was engaged in some rather humorous hand-wringing about recent polls that show Ben Carson doing well in a hypothetical general election matchup with Hillary Clinton."
"Mike, I trust your political sense on this... HOWEVER... the fact that any national poll ever in history would put Carson not only at the top of the GOP, but tied with Clinton is terrifying and nausea inducing. In other words, it borders on cold comfort."
"It's like saying "don't worry about all of our medicines being useless against this latest outbreak in this new series of strains of the plague... this one broke out in Kyrgyzstan and it'll likely fizzle before it gets to the US" ... what I'd find much more worrying is the fact that there have been a SERIES of plague outbreaks that we're utterly defenseless against!"
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-gops-debate-about-debates.html?showComment=1446598250007#c4659994580899057638
Greg Sargent:
"A new NBC/WSJ poll finds that Ben Carson is the only Republican candidate who is tied with Hillary Clinton among voters nationally, at 47-47. Clinton leads Trump by 50-42; she leads Jeb Bush by 47-43; and she leads Rubio by 47-44.
"Once again, head-to-head general election polling this far out is largely meaningless. But we will continue to post these numbers, because they are featured in the campaign spin wars and pundit chatter, and just to let you know that they are there."
"A new Quinnipiac poll shows Donald Trump and Ben Carson at the top of the Republican heap: Trump has 24 percent of GOP voters nationally, to 23 percent for Carson. Marco Rubio (14) and Ted Cruz (13) continue to jostle for position at the top of the second tier."
"Oh, and Carson is leading Clinton among voters nationally by 50-40! If this doesn’t demonstrate that head-to-head general election polling is largely meaningless this far out, nothing does."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/11/04/morning-plum-a-brutal-reality-check-for-the-democratic-party/
Again, I would love a Ben Carson GOP candidacy. The only thing better for me is Trump who is my guy. LOL. I don't care what anyone says, he's funny as fuck.
Here is a new reason to be a Trump Democrat-or even dare I say it-a Ben Carson Democrat?! They might just give the Dems a chance at something they aren't supposed to be able to do before 2020-a shot at taking back the House.
"Carson and Trump, through their lack of experience and long histories of overheated rhetoric, could easily turn off some of the voters who might have otherwise happily supported someone like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio but don’t think Carson and Trump pass the smell test as a potential president. That could lead to depressed GOP turnout in crucial swing districts, robbing some incumbents of votes, or could even prompt a wholesale rejection of the Republicans in certain districts down the ticket, effectively making 2016 a Democratic wave year"
"A widely-cited obstacle to Democrats winning back the House is that, even while Barack Obama was defeating Mitt Romney by four points, Romney won 226 House districts. There’s no question the House map is skewed toward Republicans, thanks in part to the GOP controlling redistricting in many key states after the last census. But what would those House districts look like if, in 2016, the Democratic nominee did better than Obama did in 2012? Again, a historically poor Republican nominee could help make that happen."
"Let’s say the Democratic nominee wins about 53 percent nationally in 2016, two points better than Obama in 2012 and matching his 2008 win. Obama won 237 House districts in 2008 under the current lines. Many of these districts are more Republican than the nation as a whole, but a rising Democratic tide could lift many boats. If the GOP nominee is bad enough, it may be difficult for the rest of the party to quarantine itself from a top-of-the-ticket electoral affliction."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/how-democrats-could-win-the-house-213318#ixzz3qXcgccDJ
Sorry, Tom Brown. I can't see any downside to being a Trump Democrat. In my view, the case is airtight. Look if Ben Carson wins 270 electoral votes I will admit that I really was in the minority all along. The conservatives really were right.
I don't see at that point how I could rightfully be confident of anything anymore. It's a bet I'm willing to make. LOL.
Ok. so there is some small hypothetical risk-as in all human endeavors. But you never do anything riskless. Being a Trump Democrat is about as close as you will get.
"It's like saying "don't worry about all of our medicines being useless against this latest outbreak in this new series of strains of the plague... this one broke out in Kyrgyzstan and it'll likely fizzle before it gets to the US" ... what I'd find much more worrying is the fact that there have been a SERIES of plague outbreaks that we're utterly defenseless against!"
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-gops-debate-about-debates.html?showComment=1446598250007#c4659994580899057638
Greg Sargent:
"A new NBC/WSJ poll finds that Ben Carson is the only Republican candidate who is tied with Hillary Clinton among voters nationally, at 47-47. Clinton leads Trump by 50-42; she leads Jeb Bush by 47-43; and she leads Rubio by 47-44.
"Once again, head-to-head general election polling this far out is largely meaningless. But we will continue to post these numbers, because they are featured in the campaign spin wars and pundit chatter, and just to let you know that they are there."
"A new Quinnipiac poll shows Donald Trump and Ben Carson at the top of the Republican heap: Trump has 24 percent of GOP voters nationally, to 23 percent for Carson. Marco Rubio (14) and Ted Cruz (13) continue to jostle for position at the top of the second tier."
"Oh, and Carson is leading Clinton among voters nationally by 50-40! If this doesn’t demonstrate that head-to-head general election polling is largely meaningless this far out, nothing does."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/11/04/morning-plum-a-brutal-reality-check-for-the-democratic-party/
Again, I would love a Ben Carson GOP candidacy. The only thing better for me is Trump who is my guy. LOL. I don't care what anyone says, he's funny as fuck.
Here is a new reason to be a Trump Democrat-or even dare I say it-a Ben Carson Democrat?! They might just give the Dems a chance at something they aren't supposed to be able to do before 2020-a shot at taking back the House.
"Carson and Trump, through their lack of experience and long histories of overheated rhetoric, could easily turn off some of the voters who might have otherwise happily supported someone like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio but don’t think Carson and Trump pass the smell test as a potential president. That could lead to depressed GOP turnout in crucial swing districts, robbing some incumbents of votes, or could even prompt a wholesale rejection of the Republicans in certain districts down the ticket, effectively making 2016 a Democratic wave year"
"A widely-cited obstacle to Democrats winning back the House is that, even while Barack Obama was defeating Mitt Romney by four points, Romney won 226 House districts. There’s no question the House map is skewed toward Republicans, thanks in part to the GOP controlling redistricting in many key states after the last census. But what would those House districts look like if, in 2016, the Democratic nominee did better than Obama did in 2012? Again, a historically poor Republican nominee could help make that happen."
"Let’s say the Democratic nominee wins about 53 percent nationally in 2016, two points better than Obama in 2012 and matching his 2008 win. Obama won 237 House districts in 2008 under the current lines. Many of these districts are more Republican than the nation as a whole, but a rising Democratic tide could lift many boats. If the GOP nominee is bad enough, it may be difficult for the rest of the party to quarantine itself from a top-of-the-ticket electoral affliction."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/how-democrats-could-win-the-house-213318#ixzz3qXcgccDJ
Sorry, Tom Brown. I can't see any downside to being a Trump Democrat. In my view, the case is airtight. Look if Ben Carson wins 270 electoral votes I will admit that I really was in the minority all along. The conservatives really were right.
I don't see at that point how I could rightfully be confident of anything anymore. It's a bet I'm willing to make. LOL.
Ok. so there is some small hypothetical risk-as in all human endeavors. But you never do anything riskless. Being a Trump Democrat is about as close as you will get.
Mike, I'm not worried that you being a Trump Democrat or a Carson Democrat is going to have any causal effect on the election process. I'm just questioning your gallows levity... something I'm too much of a pessimist to always appreciate.
ReplyDeleteHere's a scenario... say we have a mini-recession between now and then? What are the chances? Yellen is under enormous pressure to raise interest rates (in part I think because the GOPers who possess brains and lots of money and make their money rent seeking would like nothing more than recession). I think the chances of that are pretty good. Then Hillary's "comfortable" 3% lead on Ben could evaporate overnight and turn into an insurmountable obstacle.
Then it's hello president Carson! Maybe he'll pick Mark Levin as secretary of State... and John Hagee as secretary of Defense... Good men! Men of "faith" ... so you know they're good! Lol. Then it's "hello WW3." You might want to buy a lead suit now while it's still a buyer's market. Ok... a bit of hyperbole, maybe. Maybe.
So I don't want to ruin the party... please live it up, and enjoy yourself! But your party reminds me a little of this. Lol.
The white male middle aged gun owning fundamentalist Limbaugh listeners know their insanely (and cynically) radicalized world view is on the ropes... it looks like the stress of it all has them dying off sooner than they otherwise would:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/heartland-of-darkness/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body
Inventing BS paranoid fantasy scenarios of perverts using LBGT protections to violate their white women folk in public bathrooms (Huston's vote yesterday)... wait, where have I heard of a cynical use of brainless empathy like that before?... Hmmm, perhaps white women being violated by black men? Wasn't that the motivation for lynchings?
I wouldn't put it past them to attempt to cling to power by any means necessary. For example by curtailing voting rights and undermining campaign finance reform. Oh wait, they already did that! What's next? Limits on freedom of speech under the guise of freedom of religion? Maybe they'll claim they have a right not to be offended by "blasphemy."
Kentucky is a bad sign in my view. A bit of a surprise. It's not like Obama is running at 57% approval rating... he's hovering around 45% to 50%. The GOP has a shot, no matter who they nominate.
OK, I'll try to put my own paranoia behind me and put a smile on my face and cheer up.... maybe it's not a bunker party after all. It's too early to tell. But I'm afraid I'll have to see some more evidence before I feel like a glass of champagne.
Of course it's ironic that I'm using "BS paranoid fantasy scenariods" in my argument above. I just hope they really are BS! I really do.
DeletePity, This is really good champagne! I am an optimist. Kentucky is Red State country, it doesn't shock me and I don't think this is a bellwether for the rest of the country.
ReplyDeleteKentucky is going GOP no matter who the candidate is. After all this is Kim Davis country. LOL
Still, there have been very few GOP governors for a LONG time now. People likely were convinced against their own interests with the health care thing.
DeleteI think you mean Dem governors and that's true. The Dems are having a tough time at the state level right now for a variety of reasons. The silver lining is that the party is becoming aware of that problem.
DeleteBut we are discussing national Presidential elections. If you start with Bill Clinton in 1992, the Dems have done well at this level.
Trouble is the GOP runs Congress and the state governments.
We are a very divided country no doubt.
I meant GOP governors in Kentucky.
Delete"Inventing BS paranoid fantasy scenarios of perverts using LBGT protections to violate their white women folk in public bathrooms (Huston's vote yesterday)... wait, where have I heard of a cynical use of brainless empathy like that before?... Hmmm, perhaps white women being violated by black men? Wasn't that the motivation for lynchings?"
ReplyDeleteYes, but these are the tactics they have used for years-remember when I talked about the Nixonian GOP?
I will agree that the most plausible case that Ben could win is the chance of an economic downturn.
The political scientists tell us that this is usually very important. But remember my theory-this is a different election. The normal rules don't apply.
If someone as out there as Ben were out there my guess is she still might win even with a recession.
The economy doesn't always decide it-like in 2000, Gore should have won based on the economy.
The economists right now don't see a recession before November next year as likely.
But let's say there were one. My guess is that she could win by 8 to 10 points easily over Ben if not more.
So a mild recession might mildly take away form her commanding lead but not enough.
Mike, you might be right, but so far the data says otherwise. You've been criticizing pundits for months now that they're salivating for Trumps downfall, and ignoring the numbers right in their face.
DeleteAnd now there are some numbers saying Carson ties with Hillary, and that he's leading the GOP primary. I know there haven't been that many, but you started in early on your criticism of Trump haters. How do you know you're not guilty of the same wishful thinking?
(better get that bid in on that lead suit!)
Here's the difference. General election polls at this time of the cycle mean very little. So I throw that out.
ReplyDeletePrimary polls aren't wholly meaningless right now.
If you see what I wrote, I agree that there are some polls that show he's leading nationally. In fact, the RCP average of polls-which is a scientific as it gets right now-shows him with about a 1 point lead-25% to 24%.
My point is this hasn't been the case long enough to know if this means Carson is the new leader or not.
Some things that make me think maybe not.
1. These elections won't be won at the national poll level. We have to look at th estate by state basis. The early primary states for the GOP are in order:
Iowa, NH, SC, Florida, and Nevada.
The only one Ben is actually leading right now of these is Iowa-which is what you'd expect as he's a religious conservative and that's where they are-in Iowa.
But what I hear none of those who want Trump over right now saying is that Carson is leading in Iowa and may win Iowa-though right now his RCP is down to a margin of error 3% over Trump now after last week rising as high as 9%-which could mean Carson has already peaked but too soon to say that either way yet.
But in NH Trump has close to a 20 point lead, in SC he has a big lead, a poll from Florida yesterday showed him with a 20 point lead, and he's been rolling in Nevada.
So my math tells me Trump could be looking very strong after these five primaries. Yet you have all these pundits saying Trump is slipping now.
Placing second in a couple of national polls-and in the recent Iowa polls is not enough to prove that.
They Trump bashers are too eager.
I guess that '1' of mine was superfluous!
ReplyDelete"If you see what I wrote, I agree that there are some polls that show he's leading nationally. In fact, the RCP average of polls-which is a scientific as it gets right now-shows him with about a 1 point lead-25% to 24%."
I'm referring to Carson here