The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@Cycloptichorn,

Is that that "maccaca" [sp?] George Allen?

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Is that that "maccaca" [sp?] George Allen?

Yup. He's still quite popular amongst the mouth-breathing crowd down there.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

My opinion on the matter certainly does - including specific polling that I've seen of the people who actually ARE up for re-election. I didn't go into depth about this in my last post but I'd be MORE than happy to if you like.

I have noted that expressions, like this one, of your willingness to provide us all with key, convincing evidence of your assertions far outnumber the instances of actually doing so - even when your assertions themselves are challenged seriously. What then does it take to signal you that we would like some convincing proof of these assertions. My experience lately is that, when challenged, you change the subject or focus of the discussion, wave your hands (rhetorically) and renew your expressions of eagerness to provide us some of thei convincing data. However, the data never appears.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

That's because your opinions just don't match public opinion polling on the matter, at all. And you're not really willing to discuss the difference between your opinions and what the public signals in polls that they think should be a priority for the nation; you've specifically disparaged these polls many times in the past, preferring instead to substitute your own opinion of the situation. I can't have much a discussion about that.
....

I disagreed with your analysis based on historical trends, not waved it away. The vast majority of incumbents win re-election and I'd be willing to bet that when a President from their party is up for re-election as well, that number increases even further.

OK, but how does the ever feckless Jim Webb's announcement today that he will not run for reelection for his Democrat Senate seat from Virginia, count in your calculus? Neither of us knows his inner motives in this, but I know the man: he is very thin skinned and doesn't tolerate challenges very well. It would be very like him to abandon an enterprise in which he sees a prospective challenge. His was one of the "Safe Democrat" seats in the poll table above. Is this an indicator of things to come?

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

What then does it take to signal you that we would like some convincing proof of these assertions.

Just a request. It takes a lot of time to find the polling data that I've read, and to transcribe it here. I don't want to go to the trouble unless you are really interested.

It's always appropriate to ask where data comes from, or to ask for sources. You know that I have long maintained that opinion.

Quote:

OK, but how does the ever feckless Jim Webb's announcement today that he will not run for reelection for his Democrat Senate seat from Virginia, count in your calculus? Neither of us knows his inner motives in this, but I know the man: he is very thin skinned and doesn't tolerate challenges very well. It would be very like him to abandon an enterprise in which he sees a prospective challenge. His was one of the "Safe Democrat" seats in the poll table above. Is this an indicator of things to come?

This paragraph is an indicator of something: you don't read articles very closely when you cite them for evidence.

I say this because Webb is not, as you assert here, a 'safe democrat' in the poll table above. He was listed as a 'toss-up/tilt Democrat.' While I'm not happy he's retiring, it's not indicative of what you seem to claim - and he was a seat that you had already projected Republicans to win.

Here's a link if you'd like to check for yourself -

http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.com/ratings/senate

Small errors like this, while understandable, are a knock against the idea that we should accept your arguments without asking for factual attribution to back them up.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

I have noted that expressions, like this one, of your willingness to provide us all with key, convincing evidence of your assertions far outnumber the instances of actually doing so

Quote:

but I know the man: he is very thin skinned and doesn't tolerate challenges very well.

Jesus, Gob, you are not the slightest bit aware of what a hypocrite you are. You run as fast and as far as you can from anything that challenges and sources, I really can't remember you providing a source, ever.

Talk about clueless or blond.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
What then does it take to signal you that we would like some convincing proof of these assertions.

Just a request. It takes a lot of time to find the polling data that I've read, and to transcribe it here. I don't want to go to the trouble unless you are really interested.

It's always appropriate to ask where data comes from, or to ask for sources. You know that I have long maintained that opinion.

The truth is I don't have a lot of time to spend delving into the arcane details of someone else's interpretation of the results of polls whose questions and sampling methods are usually not well described. Frankly, I don't have the interest either.

At the same time, I believe you use the usually unfulfilled threat of revealing these reams of data as a bludgeon to diflect reasoned and often correct disagreement.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

This paragraph is an indicator of something: you don't read articles very closely when you cite them for evidence.

I say this because Webb is not, as you assert here, a 'safe democrat' in the poll table above. He was listed as a 'toss-up/tilt Democrat.' While I'm not happy he's retiring, it's not indicative of what you seem to claim - and he was a seat that you had already projected Republicans to win.

Small errors like this, while understandable, are a knock against the idea that we should accept your arguments without asking for factual attribution to back them up.

Cycloptichorn

OK I'll take that one - I was wrong. I suspected that, given the observable Republican resurgence in Virginia, Webb might have a fight on his hands next time out, but merely assumed his was a "safe Democrat" seat ... and I was wrong. I'll also acknowledge that I am at times careless of some details. However, that doesn't diminish my confidence in my analysis or intuition ... which have served me well for a long time.

This outcome is also interesting in light of your somewhat dogmatic assertion above that "tilting Democrat" seats could only be regarded as safe for their incumbents in making these predictions.

I remain conficent in my assertion that, based on observable data today, Republicans can expect to gain 4-7 senate seats in the forthcoming elections, and that given observable trends in the key political issues out there, that situation will likely improve for Republicans over the next 18 months.

I also believe the most useful application of polling data is not so much their measured sampling distributions, as it is the trends over time in their findings. There are significant confidence interval/sampling error issues with both findings, but the sensitivities are generally more favorable for such trend inferences - as long as the sampling measures themselves don't change greatly.

3 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

At the same time, I believe you use the usually unfulfilled threat of revealing these reams of data as a bludgeon to diflect reasoned and often correct disagreement.

There's an easy way to find out whether the threat has force behind it, of course. Just ask.

Regarding the rest of your post, I accept the proposition that intuition can be relied upon. I rely upon my intuition all the time and it has served me well. It just leads to difficult conversations about politics online.

I put some time last night into thinking about all the various factors that we have in front of us - debt limit votes, new budgets, interactions between the House GOP and the Prez, and the upcoming election - and have come to the conclusion that it's not possible to accurately say what is going to happen, or what the public's reaction to it will be, based on previous trends. But I do feel quite strongly that a strong presidential ticket will be the key to victory for Republicans in the Senate, if they are to have victory. I just have an extremely hard time seeing them pick up a significant amount of seats, if there isn't a draw at the top of the ticket.

If the Republican candidate is so heavily influenced by the increasingly-Conservative base, and has little moderate appeal, it could be a bloodbath for Senate and House Republicans. If the economy improves significantly or even somewhat, it could be tough for these same senators. At the same time, if things fail to improve or if Obama is seen as churlish when dealing with the House, things could go equally bad for the Dems.

Given all the independent variables that could be considered, I do believe that historical trends of incumbency and of voting patterns in presidential re-election years are indeed useful. Indeed, in 1984, 1996 and 2004, the VAST majority of seats were defended successfully. In fact, unless a Senator retires, there's about a 95% chance historically (in the last 40 years) that the incumbent holds the seat - and that's more like 97% in presidential election years.

So I take the 'leaning' category with a giant grain of salt. Doesn't mean **** unless there is specific polling showing that the guy is in trouble.

On Edit: I thought, for a lark, I'd take a look at polling on this race.

Turns out that it may not be that bad for the Dems as they thought, if they can recruit the right candidate. Webb wasn't especially popular in VA, so PPP polled Allen vs... Tim Kaine, back in Nov. And Kaine was up by 9 points.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_VA_1116205.pdf

If the Dems can recruit Kaine, this could be a highly competitive race.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

However, that doesn't diminish my confidence in my analysis or intuition ... which have served me well for a long time.

Please, please somebody, tell me I'm mistaken in my belief that Gob is a professor of something or other.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I fully agree the future is not knowable (indeed that is a fundamental and provable mathematical principle), and that the current political situation offers lots of potential for surprise and newly emerging developments - on both sides of the political divide. My chief interest in this thread is to see different interpretations of what is unfolding, mostly to improve my own intuition. While I'm not a poll addicct, I do like RJB's dispassionate and fact based (to the extent facts are available) approach to the discussion. In your case I like the occasional insights and specifics more than the sweeping prognostications.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

JTT wrote:

Is that that "macaca" George Allen?

Yup. He's still quite popular amongst the mouth-breathing crowd down there.
Cycloptichorn

Just to give you all a bit of background on this story out of Virginia, where Failure Arts and I both happen to live.
Jim Webb is a former Secretary of the Navy and a former Republican. He defeated former Governor Allen in 2006 in an expensive contest in which Allen pretty much self-destructed.
Webb, it seems to me, never really enjoyed being a Senator. He went through the motions, co-sponsoring some significant legislation involving veterans' affairs in a state with a large military presence but he did not do much on the fund raising portion of the job.
Rothenberg had this seat as being a toss-up/tilt democrat race prior to Webb's announcement today. They might move it to toss-up and I wouldn't quibble with that. Allen could face a challenge for the Repub nomination from Jamie Radtke, a Tea Party movement activist with virtually no name recognition. That could be telling.
The problem for the Dems is finding a candidate. Former Governor Tim Kaine seems the most likely. He was on Obama's short list of VP candidates in 2008 and is now head of the DNC. As recently as a month ago, when rumors about Webb's possibly not running started circulating, he said he was not interested. I suspect he will be wooed and will agree to run.
The other name being mentioned is Tom Perriello who rode Obama's coattails in 2008, taking a House seat in 2008 in my traditionally Republican 5th District. He was defeated in 2010 despite a visit here in Cville from Obama. I suspect that the Dems will avoid a primary and agree on Kaine if he will accept.
Thanks for the nod, Georgeob, but I must disagree with you regarding the direction of Virginia. We are getting bluer. Part of it is due to the growth of the D.C. suburbs, the Richmond area, and the number of people from the north-east retiring to places like C'ville.
Cyclops' description of us as largely "mouth breathers" is amusing but not particularly accurate.
Anyway, now you know more than you ever wanted to know about the Senate race in my fair state. I would leave it where Rothenberg has it. The key to me will be the Republican primary.

(ps: I changed the macaca spelling to what was used in the media)

4 Replies

@realjohnboy,

Quote:

Cyclops' description of us as largely "mouth breathers" is amusing but not particularly accurate.

Rjb; I'm not talking about everyone in the state, of course. Don't self-select into the group.

George Allen distinguished himself through a history of using racial slurs; yet he's still very popular amongst the Republican crowd down there. Not exactly a sign of an upstanding person.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

In addition to Kaine and Perriello, Charlie Cook mentions Terry McAuliffe might also consider running ...

Quote:

Another name mentioned is Terry McAuliffe, a former DNC chairman who made an unsuccessful bid for the party's gubernatorial nomination in 2009. McAuliffe, though, seems focused on another run for Governor in 2013. Other names mentioned include former Rep. Rick Boucher, who also lost his seat in 2010, Rep. Gerry Connolly, former Lt. Gov. Don Beyer, 2009 Lt. Gov. nominee Jody Wagner, former state Rep. Shannon Valentine and state Sen. Chap Petersen. The situation will take some time to sort itself out, but Democrats are now faced with a much more competitive race, and another open Senate seat that they are in danger of losing.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

The truth is I don't have a lot of time to spend delving into the arcane details of someone else's interpretation of the results of polls whose questions and sampling methods are usually not well described. Frankly, I don't have the interest either.

You certainly seem to find the time to weave all manner of fanciful tale, Gob. Perhaps if you were to spend a little more time on research, that is after all what professors, even teachers do, then you wouldn't get caught out in so many lies.

Quote:

At the same time, I believe you use the usually unfulfilled threat of revealing these reams of data as a bludgeon to diflect reasoned and often correct disagreement.

If you think that Cy, or anyone hasn't the required backup, call them on it. Your comment above is just another lame attempt to cover your own buck naked butt, the disrobing of which was completely of your own doing.

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

Quote:

(ps: I changed the macaca spelling to what was used in the media)

Thanks, RJB. I was deathly afraid that that word would come up in my next spelling bee.

0 Replies

@Irishk,

McAuliffe, blech!

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I don't think Charlie really expects him to run. What he really thinks is that the president will personally ask Tim Kaine to run...and he will.

1 Reply

@Irishk,

Irishk wrote:

I don't think Charlie really expects him to run. What he really thinks is that the president will personally ask Tim Kaine to run...and he will.

Help us, Tim. You're our only hope!

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

I knew Webb at the Naval Academy. Interesting, but self-absorbed guy with little staying power. A little known fact is that Ollie North beat him in the finals of the 167 lb. weight class boxing finals in their third years there.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Now that is an interesting anecdote, Georgeob. I'm not sure that I can find a way to work that into conversation at the next dreadful wine and cheese fund-raising "party" I have to attend, though.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Another little known fact. Gob was Ollie's rub down man. That's what made Ollie so hard to beat but George, with his staying power found a way.

0 Replies

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know