2022 election results thread

[Anonymous]

NBC calling Wisconsin for Johnson. Now it comes down to AZ, GA, and NV.

[Anonymous]

Trump and MAGA crazies are the reason the Pennsylvania Senate seat was open in the first place. Toomey would have been re-elected but retired because he didn’t to be part of the circus. He voted to convict Trump in the 2nd impeachment trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NBC calling Wisconsin for Johnson. Now it comes down to AZ, GA, and NV.

AZ is very likely D. Kelly is up 5% and all of the red counties are over 80% (some over 90%) counted. There are several large blue counties that are still only 60% counted. Based on historic voting patterns, Kelly is more likely to gain percentage points or stay even than to lose percentage points. There is very little room for Masters to catch up.

So, once AZ and AK are counted, it will essentially be 49D+I vs 49R and it will come down to NV and the GA runoff, which is about 99% assured at this point. The runoff is most likely going to be Dec 6, so we are unlikely to know the Senate control until then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NBC calling Wisconsin for Johnson. Now it comes down to AZ, GA, and NV.

AZ is very likely D. Kelly is up 5% and all of the red counties are over 80% (some over 90%) counted. There are several large blue counties that are still only 60% counted. Based on historic voting patterns, Kelly is more likely to gain percentage points or stay even than to lose percentage points. There is very little room for Masters to catch up.

So, once AZ and AK are counted, it will essentially be 49D+I vs 49R and it will come down to NV and the GA runoff, which is about 99% assured at this point. The runoff is most likely going to be Dec 6, so we are unlikely to know the Senate control until then.

Manchin and Murkowski hold all the power regardless of who holds the gavel. Let's hope they use it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NBC calling Wisconsin for Johnson. Now it comes down to AZ, GA, and NV.

AZ is very likely D. Kelly is up 5% and all of the red counties are over 80% (some over 90%) counted. There are several large blue counties that are still only 60% counted. Based on historic voting patterns, Kelly is more likely to gain percentage points or stay even than to lose percentage points. There is very little room for Masters to catch up.

So, once AZ and AK are counted, it will essentially be 49D+I vs 49R and it will come down to NV and the GA runoff, which is about 99% assured at this point. The runoff is most likely going to be Dec 6, so we are unlikely to know the Senate control until then.

Manchin and Murkowski hold all the power regardless of who holds the gavel. Let's hope they use it.

That is not even close to true. The power over what to bring to the floor is huge. Biden will get no nominees through if McConnell is leader because there will never be a vote.

[Anonymous]

I have not seen Larry Sabato from UVA on any of the election coverage programs. Wondering what has happened to him, he is one of my favorite political commentators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if Republicans had not messed with women’s reproductive rights, they would be sweeping the elections.
Maybe if Democrats had been tougher on crime, they would be destroying the abhorrent Reps tonight.
Oh well.

What does “tougher on crime” mean?

+1

Only one party supported more funding to local police forces and it wasn't the GOP. Only one party wants to get some of the most lethal weaponry off our streets, and it isn't the GOP.

You'll only convince many of us when we don't have liberals in DA and other court positions who think it's fine to have low bail, cashless bail, and repeat criminals walking the streets to prey on innocent victims who are just trying to go about the business of living and get mugged, carjacked, raped, and murdered by those with a violent criminal history.

You forgot about kids peeing in litter boxes, drag queen story time and CRT.

PP here. You brought up those "concerns," not me. I don't even remotely worry about your list. I do care about he safety of innocent people who are violently assaulted, often unexpectedly.

Then please vote for Democrats. Republican extremists break into peoples homes and assault relatives of politicians and their leaders make jokes about it and encourage it.

The GOP is not tough on crime. They are the criminals. And they just lie about it.

+100. Well said!

Then I hope both of you will agree that anyone who violently assaults someone should not be walking freely. Ever.

Of course. Violent criminals should not be on the streets.

But I will not ignore it if you say that Democrats as a PARTY support letting violent criminals go free. That is not true. That is ridiculous.

Don't confuse the desire to reform the criminal justice system, which IS disproportionally harmful to POCs and needs major work, to saying that violent criminals can just walk free.

That is classic GOP lying.

I agree, but this wouldn't be such a heavy lift if we could all agree to strict gun control. Criminality would go down overnight.

Democrats tend to not enforce gun laws either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NBC calling Wisconsin for Johnson. Now it comes down to AZ, GA, and NV.

AZ is very likely D. Kelly is up 5% and all of the red counties are over 80% (some over 90%) counted. There are several large blue counties that are still only 60% counted. Based on historic voting patterns, Kelly is more likely to gain percentage points or stay even than to lose percentage points. There is very little room for Masters to catch up.

So, once AZ and AK are counted, it will essentially be 49D+I vs 49R and it will come down to NV and the GA runoff, which is about 99% assured at this point. The runoff is most likely going to be Dec 6, so we are unlikely to know the Senate control until then.

Manchin and Murkowski hold all the power regardless of who holds the gavel. Let's hope they use it.

That is not even close to true. The power over what to bring to the floor is huge. Biden will get no nominees through if McConnell is leader because there will never be a vote.

And then Biden can pull a Trump and ignore the confirmation process. GOP then sues and the case gets decided just before 2024. It's a win win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have not seen Larry Sabato from UVA on any of the election coverage programs. Wondering what has happened to him, he is one of my favorite political commentators.

He’s been tweeting.

[Anonymous]

MAGA Barbie, Karoline Leavitt, lost in NH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Overwhelming voters say that inflation and the economy is a major problems but choose to continue to select the Ds the same people. Something is off here and it will be fodder for election fraud conspiracies

I am worried about crime and illegal immigration. But way more bonkers is forcing 11 year olds to give birth or defending storming the capital and voiding elections. I would consider just about any moderate. Republicans mostly threw them away.

Worrying about crime and immigration is not grounded in any reality.

[Anonymous]

When will AZ and NV finish counting?

[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:Maybe if Republicans had not messed with women’s reproductive rights, they would be sweeping the elections.
Maybe if Democrats had been tougher on crime, they would be destroying the abhorrent Reps tonight.
Oh well.

What does “tougher on crime” mean?

+1

Only one party supported more funding to local police forces and it wasn't the GOP. Only one party wants to get some of the most lethal weaponry off our streets, and it isn't the GOP.

You'll only convince many of us when we don't have liberals in DA and other court positions who think it's fine to have low bail, cashless bail, and repeat criminals walking the streets to prey on innocent victims who are just trying to go about the business of living and get mugged, carjacked, raped, and murdered by those with a violent criminal history.

You forgot about kids peeing in litter boxes, drag queen story time and CRT.

PP here. You brought up those "concerns," not me. I don't even remotely worry about your list. I do care about he safety of innocent people who are violently assaulted, often unexpectedly.

Then please vote for Democrats. Republican extremists break into peoples homes and assault relatives of politicians and their leaders make jokes about it and encourage it.

The GOP is not tough on crime. They are the criminals. And they just lie about it.

+100. Well said!

Then I hope both of you will agree that anyone who violently assaults someone should not be walking freely. Ever.

Of course. Violent criminals should not be on the streets.

But I will not ignore it if you say that Democrats as a PARTY support letting violent criminals go free. That is not true. That is ridiculous.

Don't confuse the desire to reform the criminal justice system, which IS disproportionally harmful to POCs and needs major work, to saying that violent criminals can just walk free.

That is classic GOP lying.

I agree, but this wouldn't be such a heavy lift if we could all agree to strict gun control. Criminality would go down overnight.

I disagree. Prosecuting/incarcerating criminals would probably be more effective.

But...but...but...it hasn't been effective. You know what was effective? Automatic weapons ban. That was effective.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if Republicans had not messed with women’s reproductive rights, they would be sweeping the elections.
Maybe if Democrats had been tougher on crime, they would be destroying the abhorrent Reps tonight.
Oh well.

What does “tougher on crime” mean?

+1

Only one party supported more funding to local police forces and it wasn't the GOP. Only one party wants to get some of the most lethal weaponry off our streets, and it isn't the GOP.

You'll only convince many of us when we don't have liberals in DA and other court positions who think it's fine to have low bail, cashless bail, and repeat criminals walking the streets to prey on innocent victims who are just trying to go about the business of living and get mugged, carjacked, raped, and murdered by those with a violent criminal history.

You forgot about kids peeing in litter boxes, drag queen story time and CRT.

PP here. You brought up those "concerns," not me. I don't even remotely worry about your list. I do care about he safety of innocent people who are violently assaulted, often unexpectedly.

Then please vote for Democrats. Republican extremists break into peoples homes and assault relatives of politicians and their leaders make jokes about it and encourage it.

The GOP is not tough on crime. They are the criminals. And they just lie about it.

+100. Well said!

Then I hope both of you will agree that anyone who violently assaults someone should not be walking freely. Ever.

Of course. Violent criminals should not be on the streets.

But I will not ignore it if you say that Democrats as a PARTY support letting violent criminals go free. That is not true. That is ridiculous.

Don't confuse the desire to reform the criminal justice system, which IS disproportionally harmful to POCs and needs major work, to saying that violent criminals can just walk free.

That is classic GOP lying.

I agree, but this wouldn't be such a heavy lift if we could all agree to strict gun control. Criminality would go down overnight.

I disagree. Prosecuting/incarcerating criminals would probably be more effective.

But...but...but...it hasn't been effective. You know what was effective? Automatic weapons ban. That was effective.

+1. Vote to bring that back folks. We had it for a decade and it was great and American carried on just fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Overwhelming voters say that inflation and the economy is a major problems but choose to continue to select the Ds the same people. Something is off here and it will be fodder for election fraud conspiracies

Cry baby.

Not a cry baby, something is off either polling or something else. The news needs to look into how far off things are.

WTF are you talking about. Enough voters just don’t want these treasonous f**ks. It’s just that simple. Some do, but a lot don’t

Stop being traitors to your own country and you’ll win elections. It’s really that GD simple