2022 Senate Map

[Anonymous]

Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, sh*t. That’s different from the narrative the GOP is driving.

This means there will be a blue wave? Makes sense. The choice issue.

I do not think so. You're forgetting that COVID happened between 2018 and today and that politicized who votes early. Republicans used to vote early (via absentee) but it is now primarily democrats who vote early. So I don't think comparisons to 2018 are particularly useful.

This is just about early voting, not absentee voting. Republicans did not make early voting into a bogeyman like they did with absentee voting.

I have heard many republicans attacking early voting since 2020. Here's an article about Kari Lake attacking it just the other day based on some bizarre argument that the constitution says "Election Day" and not Election Month (it doesn't):https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/kari-lake-suggests-early-voting-restricted-arizona-repeats/story?id=91920284

Exactly, since 2020. Thread:

It’s proof that the leaders of the party are not actually on control of the monster they’ve created.

So far they’re still riding the tiger. But they’ll end up in it sooner or later.

Are they really though? I don’t think David Perdue, or Paul Ryan, or the many other republicans forced from office by MAGA craziness would agree.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, sh*t. That’s different from the narrative the GOP is driving.

This means there will be a blue wave? Makes sense. The choice issue.

I do not think so. You're forgetting that COVID happened between 2018 and today and that politicized who votes early. Republicans used to vote early (via absentee) but it is now primarily democrats who vote early. So I don't think comparisons to 2018 are particularly useful.

This is just about early voting, not absentee voting. Republicans did not make early voting into a bogeyman like they did with absentee voting.

I have heard many republicans attacking early voting since 2020. Here's an article about Kari Lake attacking it just the other day based on some bizarre argument that the constitution says "Election Day" and not Election Month (it doesn't):https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/kari-lake-suggests-early-voting-restricted-arizona-repeats/story?id=91920284

Exactly, since 2020. Thread:

It’s proof that the leaders of the party are not actually on control of the monster they’ve created.

So far they’re still riding the tiger. But they’ll end up in it sooner or later.

Are they really though? I don’t think David Perdue, or Paul Ryan, or the many other republicans forced from office by MAGA craziness would agree.

Yeah but…

…the polling is way too close, and the corporate media is still very much in the GOP’s corner. The majority of the GOP is on the tiger’s back. For now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, sh*t. That’s different from the narrative the GOP is driving.

This means there will be a blue wave? Makes sense. The choice issue.

I do not think so. You're forgetting that COVID happened between 2018 and today and that politicized who votes early. Republicans used to vote early (via absentee) but it is now primarily democrats who vote early. So I don't think comparisons to 2018 are particularly useful.

This is just about early voting, not absentee voting. Republicans did not make early voting into a bogeyman like they did with absentee voting.

I have heard many republicans attacking early voting since 2020. Here's an article about Kari Lake attacking it just the other day based on some bizarre argument that the constitution says "Election Day" and not Election Month (it doesn't):https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/kari-lake-suggests-early-voting-restricted-arizona-repeats/story?id=91920284

Exactly, since 2020. Thread:

It’s proof that the leaders of the party are not actually on control of the monster they’ve created.

So far they’re still riding the tiger. But they’ll end up in it sooner or later.

Are they really though? I don’t think David Perdue, or Paul Ryan, or the many other republicans forced from office by MAGA craziness would agree.

Yeah but…

…the polling is way too close, and the corporate media is still very much in the GOP’s corner. The majority of the GOP is on the tiger’s back. For now.

Hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Cite? I’d love it, but would like to see a poll or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, sh*t. That’s different from the narrative the GOP is driving.

This means there will be a blue wave? Makes sense. The choice issue.

I do not think so. You're forgetting that COVID happened between 2018 and today and that politicized who votes early. Republicans used to vote early (via absentee) but it is now primarily democrats who vote early. So I don't think comparisons to 2018 are particularly useful.

This is just about early voting, not absentee voting. Republicans did not make early voting into a bogeyman like they did with absentee voting.

I have heard many republicans attacking early voting since 2020. Here's an article about Kari Lake attacking it just the other day based on some bizarre argument that the constitution says "Election Day" and not Election Month (it doesn't):https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/kari-lake-suggests-early-voting-restricted-arizona-repeats/story?id=91920284

Exactly, since 2020. Thread:

It’s proof that the leaders of the party are not actually on control of the monster they’ve created.

So far they’re still riding the tiger. But they’ll end up in it sooner or later.

Are they really though? I don’t think David Perdue, or Paul Ryan, or the many other republicans forced from office by MAGA craziness would agree.

Yeah but…

…the polling is way too close, and the corporate media is still very much in the GOP’s corner. The majority of the GOP is on the tiger’s back. For now.

Hilarious.

Are you the same person on the RW vs LW media who refuses to address the multiple examples of the media’s pro-Republican bias? Don’t try to have this conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Because they remember when the polling had biden winning in a blow out and the democrats taking a comfortable majority of senate seats

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Cite? I’d love it, but would like to see a poll or something.

Ann Selzer for the Des Moines Register who’s viewed as the gold standard in Iowa polling has Grassley up by only three
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2022/10/15/iowa-us-senate-race-chuck-grassley-mike-franken-poll-election/69562063007/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Because they remember when the polling had biden winning in a blow out and the democrats taking a comfortable majority of senate seats

yeah, Jamie Harrison was definitely going to beat Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins was going to be soundly defeated...

Nate Silver was totally convinced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Because they remember when the polling had biden winning in a blow out and the democrats taking a comfortable majority of senate seats

yeah, Jamie Harrison was definitely going to beat Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins was going to be soundly defeated...

Nate Silver was totally convinced.

Yes, it’s curious how Republicans always overperform their polls, even exit polls. Very curious, especially with the projection party always complaining about stolen elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Cite? I’d love it, but would like to see a poll or something.

Ann Selzer for the Des Moines Register who’s viewed as the gold standard in Iowa polling has Grassley up by only three
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2022/10/15/iowa-us-senate-race-chuck-grassley-mike-franken-poll-election/69562063007/

Thank you.

If Republicans were decent people, Grassley would be out on his butt for one huge reason: he was involved in the plot to overturn the election. Remember that he was supposed to be the guy to certify the election for Trump after the seditionists disappeared Pence and Pelosi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Because they remember when the polling had biden winning in a blow out and the democrats taking a comfortable majority of senate seats

yeah, Jamie Harrison was definitely going to beat Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins was going to be soundly defeated...

Nate Silver was totally convinced.

Yes, it’s curious how Republicans always overperform their polls, even exit polls. Very curious, especially with the projection party always complaining about stolen elections.

Not sure what you’re suggesting. You don’t trust election results?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Cite? I’d love it, but would like to see a poll or something.

Ann Selzer for the Des Moines Register who’s viewed as the gold standard in Iowa polling has Grassley up by only three
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2022/10/15/iowa-us-senate-race-chuck-grassley-mike-franken-poll-election/69562063007/

3 is enough to win, isn’t it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Iowa is in play.

I don't understand the GOP optimism.

Because they remember when the polling had biden winning in a blow out and the democrats taking a comfortable majority of senate seats

yeah, Jamie Harrison was definitely going to beat Lindsey Graham, Susan Collins was going to be soundly defeated...

Nate Silver was totally convinced.

Yes, it’s curious how Republicans always overperform their polls, even exit polls. Very curious, especially with the projection party always complaining about stolen elections.

+1, something has been deeply screwed up for a while.

And yes, every accusation is an admission