• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,790 Excellent

About TobiasFunke

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

14,528 profile views
  1. There's a lot of course. North Carolina should probably be the center of attention for a number of reasons. And there's a handful of other big races that will decide control of the Senate, like the one you mention, New Hampshire, Indiana and Nevada. Although its probably worth noting that it's just gonna revert to the GOP in two years anyway. But other than beating back Trump, I can't think of anything Democrats would enjoy as much as they would savor knocking off Darrell Issa of California.
  2. It's true, by the way. Should play well in Ohio.
  3. Meanwhile, from someone vastly more representative of the Right than any of these people are of the Left, a man with whom the GOP candidate for president has met repeatedly, compliemented and promised that he would not "let down" ... link Please tell me more about the lunacy of a couple college kids and a Canadian professor, though.
  4. To be fair nobody is quite sure how things have proceeded since Colonel Sanders went teets-up.
  5. It's my understanding that this matter was already decided during the tri-annual meeting of The Pentaverate at The Meadows.
  6. Sometimes the Clinton campaign leaves me feeling a little flat. Other times they release a video of Pusha T interviewing Tim Kaine.
  7. @Rohn Jambo making a late push for MVP of the 2016 election threads.
  8. Good news and more good news from practice today: Anyone have any insight into the latter? Obviously fantasy implications in addition to the Skins-related implications.
  9. This kinda surprises me. When I do what I'd consider a "good" result for her I get to 340-198. That's giving her Florida, Ohio North Carolina and Nevada, none of which seems even close to a sure thing. She'd have to sweep those AND win another state where she's currently the underdog (Iowa, Arizona, Georgia) to get a 150 vote margin. Possible, sure, but I'm not sure about -160. I'd play the underdog if my book was offering that one.
  10. This link is a delight. We don't get enough of that particular brand of delusion around here. There are some reasons to think Trump has a chance at this, but I'm fairly certain facebook likes and yard signs aren't among them. And I'm even more certain that Trump is not going to win New York. I think that might be my favorite part- there are a number of comments from people who, instead of questioning the map because it has Trump winning New York, question it because it has Trump losing California.
  11. Didn't take you guys too long to turn into Boston, huh?
  12. Depends who you're talking about. The people who have supported Trump from the get-go, obviously not. But there are always people on the margins. If Trump loses by 2 points, I think a Trump-like candidate in the next GOP primary race would have an easier time consolidating support from otherwise hesitant Republicans and right-leaning independents than if Trump loses by 10 points. I also think if Trump loses by ten points, Trump-like candidates would be less likely to run in the future, and/or candidates would be less likely to adopt Trump-like positions and talking points. This isn't a huge deal or anything. Obviously a Trump loss is the most important result to obtain, every other concern pales in comparison to that. I'm just saying that I think votes always matter for reasons beyond who wins and loses an election, and that given the unique awfulness of Trump, I think that's even more true this election.
  13. Yes, but you said "I disagree with Tobias to the extent that I don't believe that any vote that is not for Hillary Clinton is a vote for Trump." When I say it's not just about the electoral votes, and I think impact on the margin of victory also should be taken into account, I don't think that is the same as saying "any vote not for Clinton is a vote for Trump." At least that wasn't my intention. #allvotesmatter
  14. FWIW I don't believe that at all. I'm simply pointing out that it's not as effective in preventing a Trump presidency (or discouraging future Trumps) as a vote for Clinton. Thought I'd made that pretty clear, but I guess not? Also I disagree with RHE to the extent I think he underestimates how much some of us love weed.