Too Late To Start Thinking About 2018?

[El Guapo]

I would so love to see busloads of voters pile out early at the voting station, creating a backlog a mile long. If that prevents wealthy people from voting, they would only have themselves to blame.

The look of wealthy white males standing impatiently in line behind thousands of not wealthy white males would be an epic photo-op.

That would be a win for Republicans. They're working to maximize their vote state-wide. A long line means a long wait, and not a ton of poor people are going to be able to get to the polling station, wait for a long time, and then get home. On top of that, if a Republicans in Dodge City are inconvenienced out of voting, that's no big deal, because a greater number of non-Republicans are going to be disincentivized from voting, and the Republicans can count on getting most of the vote elsewhere in the state.

[GreenGoo]

I would so love to see busloads of voters pile out early at the voting station, creating a backlog a mile long. If that prevents wealthy people from voting, they would only have themselves to blame.

The look of wealthy white males standing impatiently in line behind thousands of not wealthy white males would be an epic photo-op.

That would be a win for Republicans. .

Uh...it's already a win for the GOP. That's the entire point of why I'd love to see it backfire on those who are complicit in it.

The obvious solution is to have more voting stations in convenient locations.

My comments were not about solutions.

[El Guapo]

I would so love to see busloads of voters pile out early at the voting station, creating a backlog a mile long. If that prevents wealthy people from voting, they would only have themselves to blame.

The look of wealthy white males standing impatiently in line behind thousands of not wealthy white males would be an epic photo-op.

That would be a win for Republicans. .

Uh...it's already a win for the GOP. That's the entire point of why I'd love to see it backfire on those who are complicit in it.

The obvious solution is to have more voting stations in convenient locations.

My comments were not about solutions.

I'm saying that I would hate to see busloads of voters create a backlog a mile long. That's what Republicans are aiming for, and I'd rather that they not achieve that, even if a few wealthy people would also be inconvenienced in the process.

[GreenGoo]

I'm saying that I would hate to see busloads of voters create a backlog a mile long. That's what Republicans are aiming for, and I'd rather that they not achieve that, even if a few wealthy people would also be inconvenienced in the process.

Well neither of us are going to get what we want, so you can take some solace in that.

[Formix]

I deliberately voted in NC on Sunday to stick it to The Man. Also, I figured there's be fewer folks, this being the bible belt and all.

[Isgrimnur]

Early voting starts today in Texas. I plan on going out on Saturday.

[Sepiche]

I always like to treat myself on election day to what should be the rule throughout the country: I take the day off and, once I've voted, I reward myself with fast food and ice cream, and then I go home to numb the pain with an afternoon of games.

[malchior]

Is it just me or is it super comforting that many voices are now talking about the increasing chance that Trump is going to interfere with or de-legitimize the mid-term election or go bonkers afterwards if the GOP loses a chamber?

And what will happen afterward if he does any of those things? That one is easy - nothing which is why it is very plausible he will do something. Especially if it'll keeps him and his kin rich and out of jail.

[coopasonic]

Early voting starts today in Texas. I plan on going out on Saturday.

I've only voted once and that was thoroughly demoralizing. Maybe voting early will turn out better. At least this time I have no hope of a positive outcome so it shouldn't feel as bad when Cruz wins.

[GreenGoo]

I always like to treat myself on election day to what should be the rule throughout the country: I take the day off and, once I've voted, I reward myself with fast food and ice cream, and then I go home to numb the pain with an afternoon of games.

[Isgrimnur]

Dodge City

Lyft is partnering with a Latino activist group to take voters in Dodge City, Kan., to the polls on election day.

Voto Latino announced the partnership after it was announced that the majority-Hispanic city would move its lone polling site outside city limits, more than a mile away from the closest bus stop.
...
Voto Latino said that brands Steve Madden and Johnnie Walker are also helping sponsor the move, but the group is raising additional funds through ActBlue.
...
Lyft notes in an August blog post on their website that they are working with Voto Latino, local Urban League affiliates, and the National Federation of the Blind to provide free rides to underserved communities.

[El Guapo]

Dodge City

Lyft is partnering with a Latino activist group to take voters in Dodge City, Kan., to the polls on election day.

Voto Latino announced the partnership after it was announced that the majority-Hispanic city would move its lone polling site outside city limits, more than a mile away from the closest bus stop.
...
Voto Latino said that brands Steve Madden and Johnnie Walker are also helping sponsor the move, but the group is raising additional funds through ActBlue.
...
Lyft notes in an August blog post on their website that they are working with Voto Latino, local Urban League affiliates, and the National Federation of the Blind to provide free rides to underserved communities.

Nice.

Also, I believe that Uber and Lyft are doing this (free rides to the polls) nationally.

[LordMortis]

During the primaries the radio was constant barrage of "Such and such is Trump. Vote such and such." Now that the political ads have returned to non stop, I've not heard one "Such and such is Trump. Vote such and such." ad yet. I hope that's a good sign.

[hepcat]

My 82 year old father, who has voted Democrat most of his life, just got his Ohio voter registration rejected because they're telling him he didn't fill it in correctly. He's been voting for longer than most of the people who are telling him this have been alive. He's annoyed because he swears it's fine and he can't find the problem. Not outraged. Just annoyed.

[LordMortis]

My 82 year old father, who has voted Democrat most of his life, just got his Ohio voter registration rejected because they're telling him he didn't fill it in correctly. He's been voting for longer than most of the people who are telling him this have been alive. He's annoyed because he swears it's fine and he can't find the problem. Not outraged. Just annoyed.

Does he have to keep registering? I registered when I was 18 the same time I registered for the selective services and that registration has followed me from house to house, district to district for 30 years. They mail me my new district card every time I've moved.

[Unagi]

I was wondering the same thing.
Perhaps Ohio is a new state?

[Paingod]

Everyone in the US should register Republican and then vote however they damn well please.

[hepcat]

My 82 year old father, who has voted Democrat most of his life, just got his Ohio voter registration rejected because they're telling him he didn't fill it in correctly. He's been voting for longer than most of the people who are telling him this have been alive. He's annoyed because he swears it's fine and he can't find the problem. Not outraged. Just annoyed.

Does he have to keep registering? I registered when I was 18 the same time I registered for the selective services and that registration has followed me from house to house, district to district for 30 years. They mail me my new district card every time I've moved.

If you move, you have to update your registration in Ohio. They returned his updated form and for the life of me, I can’t figure out why. It seems to have all the right info.

[gilraen]

My 82 year old father, who has voted Democrat most of his life, just got his Ohio voter registration rejected because they're telling him he didn't fill it in correctly. He's been voting for longer than most of the people who are telling him this have been alive. He's annoyed because he swears it's fine and he can't find the problem. Not outraged. Just annoyed.

Does he have to keep registering? I registered when I was 18 the same time I registered for the selective services and that registration has followed me from house to house, district to district for 30 years. They mail me my new district card every time I've moved.

If you move, you have to update your registration in Ohio. They returned his updated form and for the life of me, I can’t figure out why. It seems to have all the right info.

Maybe you can register him online, at least then you know you follow their layout: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/

Of course, the deadline for this election has already passed...maybe that was their plan all along.

[Isgrimnur]

Ohio Provisional ballots

Any of the following scenarios would require you to cast a provisional ballot on Election Day:
...
Your voter registration has been challenged and/or a hearing on a challenge to your eligibility as an elector has been postponed until after Election Day
...
Voter eligibility challenged: If you cast a provisional ballot because your right to vote was challenged at the polling place under R.C. 3505.20, and the election officials either determined that you were ineligible to vote or were unable to determine your eligibility, you must provide any identification or other documentation required to resolve the challenge.

[El Guapo]

My 82 year old father, who has voted Democrat most of his life, just got his Ohio voter registration rejected because they're telling him he didn't fill it in correctly. He's been voting for longer than most of the people who are telling him this have been alive. He's annoyed because he swears it's fine and he can't find the problem. Not outraged. Just annoyed.

Does he have to keep registering? I registered when I was 18 the same time I registered for the selective services and that registration has followed me from house to house, district to district for 30 years. They mail me my new district card every time I've moved.

If you move, you have to update your registration in Ohio. They returned his updated form and for the life of me, I can’t figure out why. It seems to have all the right info.

Did he forget to check the "Republican" box and also to write in "I plan to vote for Republicans and to vote for Trump in 2020! #MAGA". Those are both essential to voter registration in many states.

[hepcat]

My 82 year old father, who has voted Democrat most of his life, just got his Ohio voter registration rejected because they're telling him he didn't fill it in correctly. He's been voting for longer than most of the people who are telling him this have been alive. He's annoyed because he swears it's fine and he can't find the problem. Not outraged. Just annoyed.

Does he have to keep registering? I registered when I was 18 the same time I registered for the selective services and that registration has followed me from house to house, district to district for 30 years. They mail me my new district card every time I've moved.

If you move, you have to update your registration in Ohio. They returned his updated form and for the life of me, I can’t figure out why. It seems to have all the right info.

Maybe you can register him online, at least then you know you follow their layout: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/

Of course, the deadline for this election has already passed...maybe that was their plan all along.

My father's pretty sure this whole internet thing is a fad that's gonna go away soon. But I should recommend this. I bought him a laptop for Christmas a few years back and I think he uses it as a coaster.

[El Guapo]

PSA: early voting numbers are probably meaningless in terms of predicting ultimate election results.

[hepcat]

1. We don't actually know how early voters voted; we just know what party they're registered with, and there's no guarantee that they voted for that party's candidate, especially in states where voter reg is weird like Ohio.

[pr0ner]

PSA: early voting numbers are probably meaningless in terms of predicting ultimate election results.

Yeah, I think people are so up in arms for a sweeping Democratic win on November 6 that they are just setting themselves up for disappointment.

The contest for control of the House remains close and hard fought, according to a new Washington Post-Schar School poll of the most-contested districts in the country, with Democrats holding a statistically insignificant lead over Republicans.

The latest survey shows only a marginal change in the race during October, with 50 percent currently supporting the Democratic candidate in their district and 47 percent backing the Republican. Candidates from the two parties collectively are running almost even in 48 contested congressional districts won by President Trump in 2016, while Democrats hold the advantage in 21 competitive districts won by Hillary Clinton. The Democrats’ lead in those Clinton districts has narrowed a bit since the beginning of the month.

[El Guapo]

The good news is that if the Democrats win all races rated "solid D", "likely D", and lean "D", and no tossups or anything, then that'll be enough to win the House.

The bad news is that the margins here are pretty narrow, so it wouldn't take a huge shove in the polls for the GOP to wind up with a narrow House majority.

[hepcat]

I don't have a lot of confidence in the ability of Dems to galvanize enough voters to do much. They need to hit rock bottom before they start to really take a long hard look at themselves. Maybe then they'll figure out what they need to do in order to reach the undecided and the disenfranchised. But right now they're just riding on one thing: opposition to Trump. And that isn't going to be enough. They need a solid message that gives people hope, not just reactionary messages that tell people what they already know and, apparently, don't give two shits about.

[Smoove_B]

If the events of the last two years don't motivate the undecideds (WTF??) and those that generally don't vote to actually vote this year? Then we get what we deserve.

[Defiant]

The good news is that if the Democrats win all races rated "solid D", "likely D", and lean "D", and no tossups or anything, then that'll be enough to win the House.

More likely than not that (the first part of that sentence, anyway) won't happen. It's very likely that some lean districts will be won by the opposing party, and a handful of likely voters will too. Although that'll work both ways.

[malchior]

If you use the unreliable (as it is generalized) measure of Dem support they lead by ~8.5% according to 538. The emerging pattern is anything +5% means they have a good chance of winning the House.

I don't know how you can handicap worst timeline though. Trump + GOP are going whole hog on stirring up via racism/nativism right now. Dangerous, dangerous times right now. Probably the most important mid-term...ever. The Republic has faced many risks but little that was as acute after a chronic decades long attack on our system as a 2-party state as the one we face right now.

The good news is that if the Democrats win all races rated "solid D", "likely D", and lean "D", and no tossups or anything, then that'll be enough to win the House.

More likely than not that won't happen. It's very likely that some lean districts will be won by the opposing party, and a handful of likely voters will too. Although that'll work both ways.

I agree. Plus, I would lay a bet that Millennials despite all their crusader tendencies aren't going to show up. I don't think people understand the risks right now.

[Defiant]

If you use the unreliable (as it is generalized) measure of Dem support they lead by ~8.5% according to 538. The emerging pattern is anything +5% means they have a good chance of winning the House.

You're right (Technically, 538 has it as 5.5% currently.) It had been 7% (or maybe a little higher?) earlier in the election cycle, though, so maybe the environment has gotten better for Democrats (that is, more of that lead has come from support in the toss-up districts).

Plus, I would lay a bet that Millennials despite all their crusader tendencies aren't going to show up.

I think they' youth vote will have a higher turnout than they've had historically, but it'll still be overshadowed by other age groups.

[malchior]

If you use the unreliable (as it is generalized) measure of Dem support they lead by ~8.5% according to 538. The emerging pattern is anything +5% means they have a good chance of winning the House.

You're right (Technically, 538 has it as 5.5% currently.) It had been 7% (or maybe a little higher?) earlier in the election cycle, though, so maybe the environment has gotten better for Democrats (that is, more of that lead has come from support in the toss-up districts).

Where are you seeing that? I just looked again and I see 8.8% as the popular vote margin.

Plus, I would lay a bet that Millennials despite all their crusader tendencies aren't going to show up.

I think they' youth vote will have a higher turnout than they've had historically, but it'll still be overshadowed by other age groups.

We will see. Unless people live in a competitive district they don't have any incentive to show up if they are marginally attached. There are more of those this year so that makes sense but then again so, so many people are very disillusioned with this system. Justifiably so in my opinion. Imagine them retaining the House with a -7% margin or so? That isn't outside the realm of possibility anymore.

Edit: Clarified incentives!

[El Guapo]

The good news is that if the Democrats win all races rated "solid D", "likely D", and lean "D", and no tossups or anything, then that'll be enough to win the House.

More likely than not that (the first part of that sentence, anyway) won't happen. It's very likely that some lean districts will be won by the opposing party, and a handful of likely voters will too. Although that'll work both ways.

Right, but as you say they're not going to lose every tossup and every "lean R" district. So just assigning all the "lean+" districts to one party is a reasonable way to guess at how things will ultimately shake out.

The bigger issue is that if the polls slide just a point or two towards the GOP over the final weeks, then a lot of those "lean D" will become "tossups", and "tossups" will become "lean R", etc., and things would start to get dicey fast.

[Defiant]

If you use the unreliable (as it is generalized) measure of Dem support they lead by ~8.5% according to 538. The emerging pattern is anything +5% means they have a good chance of winning the House.

You're right (Technically, 538 has it as 5.5% currently.) It had been 7% (or maybe a little higher?) earlier in the election cycle, though, so maybe the environment has gotten better for Democrats (that is, more of that lead has come from support in the toss-up districts).

Where are you seeing that? I just looked again and I see 8.8% as the popular vote margin.

Sorry, I meant a 5.5% lead is the current point at which the Democrats start becoming the favorites to win the House. The current lead in the generic ballot is 8.6%

[Kraken]

I don't have a lot of confidence in the ability of Dems to galvanize enough voters to do much.

Dems don't have a platform to spew lies (new tax cut in the works! immigrant caravan with shady Middle Eastern types! rioting in sanctuary cities!), and even if they did, they can't get away with just making shit up. Trump absolutely drives the news cycle by keeping big lies coming faster than anyone can shoot them down. The fact that it works is dumbfounding.

Longer-term, sure, Dems need something better than just being cautious relics who aren't crazy or evil.

[Holman]

I don't have a lot of confidence in the ability of Dems to galvanize enough voters to do much. They need to hit rock bottom before they start to really take a long hard look at themselves. Maybe then they'll figure out what they need to do in order to reach the undecided and the disenfranchised. But right now they're just riding on one thing: opposition to Trump. And that isn't going to be enough. They need a solid message that gives people hope, not just reactionary messages that tell people what they already know and, apparently, don't give two shits about.

I wonder about this.

I've seen lots of coverage (as well as most local ads crossing my path) indicating that actual Dem candidates are focused heavily on protecting healthcare, social security, and everything else threatened by the GOP's latest and next rounds of tax cuts. There's very little overt "opposition to Trump" coming from the campaigns themselves--that's coming organically from the base and from the punditry.

In fact I've seen pundits complaining that the Dem candidates are running too much like this is a normal, issues-oriented election and that they should be taking on Trump head-on and relentlessly.

Either way, it sucks to be a minority-party candidate when your opponents can just pull an international crisis out of a hat.

[El Guapo]

I do worry that the migrant caravan is likely to give Republicans a short term boost. Nothing fits Trump's political messaging to his base better than thousands of central American migrants moving en masse to the border.

[malchior]

In fact I've seen pundits complaining that the Dem candidates are running too much like this is a normal, issues-oriented election and that they should be taking on Trump head-on and relentlessly.

This part has been crazy to me. The elections are local and they have to play to local concerns for sure but they seem to afraid to tussle with him. I believe they fear that his popularity is actually bigger than it is and they are avoiding kicking the hornet's nest. Unfortunately, they are still playing the game with pre-2016 rules even though the GOP kicked over that table years ago.

Either way, it sucks to be a minority-party candidate when your opponents can just pull an international crisis out of a hat.

And how. Or just make up internal conflict by spouting lies with no evidence. He is making up a riot and a tax cut out of thin air. Parts of the media are challenging him but he just keeps doing it without consequence. This system clearly has a very exploitable flaw around accountability to the truth that he is putting his thumb on.

[ImLawBoy]

I've seen lots of coverage (as well as most local ads crossing my path) indicating that actual Dem candidates are focused heavily on protecting healthcare, social security, and everything else threatened by the GOP's latest and next rounds of tax cuts. There's very little overt "opposition to Trump" coming from the campaigns themselves--that's coming organically from the base and from the punditry.

Around these parts (heavily blue parts of Illinois), it's a healthy mix of the two. "We want to save health care . . . that Trump and his best buddy [opponent] are trying to take away."

The funny part to me is the Republicans around here have their own version of tying a candidate to Trump. Just about every Republican attack ad ties the Democrat to Mike Madigan, who is an extremely powerful Democrat in state politics. It doesn't seem to matter what office is at stake - Mike Madigan is the GOP boogeyman in Illinois.

[hepcat]

Amy Madigan is also considered pure evil too, I believe.