Will republicans turn out in GA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Dems will turn out like never befoire. Stacey Abrams will continue turning the state.

Yeah she tweeted the other day that about 600k mail in ballots were requested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They will and it will be a comfortable victorious for the GOP.

I work for a legislative think tank and we have been talking about this. According to our high profile republicans, the concern is that Trump is telling Rs that the election is rigged and their absentee ballots are corrupt. They have competing messages and can't now say that the election is not rigged. They can't say that it was corrupt for trump and now is perfect. It's hurting the Rs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They will and it will be a comfortable victorious for the GOP.

I work for a legislative think tank and we have been talking about this. According to our high profile republicans, the concern is that Trump is telling Rs that the election is rigged and their absentee ballots are corrupt. They have competing messages and can't now say that the election is not rigged. They can't say that it was corrupt for trump and now is perfect. It's hurting the Rs.

Seems like some crafty democratic groups could take advantage of this situation by running targeted ads on facebook and such that encourage republicans not to participate in a rigged election.

[Anonymous]

I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

The GOP isn’t interested in government, so if they hold the Senate you’ll get nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Not that poster, but I certainly do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Not that poster, but I certainly do.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

The GOP isn’t interested in government, so if they hold the Senate you’ll get nothing.

No, I think I’ll get reasonable compromises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Not that poster, but I certainly do.

Sincere question: why? Gridlock is what got us the fiscal cliff, budget sequestration, and government shutdowns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Yup. With a few reasonable compromises that come out of it. And the thought of Ds getting rid of the filibuster is downright frightening. Biden was necessary for a reset on the presidential level. But total D control is a bridge too far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

The GOP isn’t interested in government, so if they hold the Senate you’ll get nothing.

No, I think I’ll get reasonable compromises.

I used to think the way you did, but after Lucy pulled back the football for the millionth time, I'm deeply skeptical that Mitch McConnell is going to play Biden's game of reasonable compromise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Yup. With a few reasonable compromises that come out of it. And the thought of Ds getting rid of the filibuster is downright frightening. Biden was necessary for a reset on the presidential level. But total D control is a bridge too far.

Reasonable compromise like McTurtle holding up a Supreme Court seat under Obama?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Yup. With a few reasonable compromises that come out of it. And the thought of Ds getting rid of the filibuster is downright frightening. Biden was necessary for a reset on the presidential level. But total D control is a bridge too far.

Reasonable compromise like McTurtle holding up a Supreme Court seat under Obama?

Yep. And the "let the voters decide" line of reasoning went straight out the window when the shoe was on the other foot. There's no negotiating and compromising with people who act in bad faith.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sure hope so. I’m a moderate who voted for Biden, but I want divided government.

So you want gridlock?

Not that poster, but I certainly do.

Sincere question: why? Gridlock is what got us the fiscal cliff, budget sequestration, and government shutdowns.

The BCA was one of the few bipartisan laws of consequence of the last twenty years. I'm a big fan of it and similar laws, and hope we get something like it again.

Government shutdowns have not been shown to be consequential in any significant way.