News In Delaware and it is funtime for elections

[airborne18]

I really don't follow politics, but this whole Tea Party targeting Delaware has been very entertaining. I am not from the state, so it has taken me time to get used to the odd politics in the state.

I remember this O'Donnell woman running against Joe Biden. I remember it was bizzare, because Joe Biden didn't even campaign. I think he put up some signs and I guess it was just to burn up money. The party gave her the nod because they needed a sacraficial canidate.

But now it is really wierd. O'Donnell is not really campaigning, and the rally's have more out of state people than Delawareans. The news coverage locally is not what I would normally classify as campaign coverage.

The last thing I saw was a weird group whose platform is based on the Birther stuff and anti-abortion. Oh and they want the first time buyer credit increased or something.

It would be amusing, except that money is being spent on this.

Oh and this is just as odd. Both major candiates from the Republican and Democrat party are already acting as if the primary were already done. And ignoring the O'donnell woman. It is just too weird for me.

 

[mheslep]

Appears O'Donnel may now beat the incumbent Castle in the R primary, I'm happy to see. O'Donnel is up by 3 points w/ 3 point margin of error, mostly notable because she was clearly behind until recently.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42049.html

 

[mheslep]

O'Donnell is not really campaigning,

and the rally's have more out of state people than Delawareans. .

Do you have a source for these two claims?

 

[airborne18]

Do you have a source for these two claims?

Yeah the legion rally was right behind my house on friday night.

You have to understand that delaware does not have a big population and it is not hard to know who the players are in any circle.

The tea party is actually not that big in Delaware, the 9/12 Patriots are the big group. I know the one organizer of the State Tea party and the problem is that Abortion is a big issue, and the Tea party does not have social issues on their agenda. That is why split from the Tea Party and built up the 9/12 Patriots.

The issue in delaware for conservatives is that they really cannot impact the general election. I live in southern delaware, and it is where the conseratives dominate. The problem is that most of the population is in northern delaware, and they are far from conservative.

Each election people don't even bother campaigning in lower delaware because it never really counts. It always goes republican, but there are not enough votes to impact the general election.

Now this is where O'Donnell will dominate. Sussex County, and I bet she does poll better than 50% against Castle. But again, she can get every vote in Sussex County and it will not impact the outcome. She has to get the northern vote. That is they only voting that counts.

That is why everyone questions polls in Delaware. If you ask the south, yeah I know it will go for O'donnell, but it only matters if she can impact the upper state.

Other than the tea party rallies, I cannot figure out where O'Donnell is campaigning. Castle either, but he is at least around. Most of the money is being thrown to the Philadelphia tv stations, because those are the tv stations Northern Delaware gets..

In Southern Delaware we get the Baltimore channels, and there is nothing from the O'Donnell campaign there. It makes sense, since she can count on the lower county.

I don't think it will be as close as the poll indicates. If the poll included lower delaware, then it is flawed.

 

[airborne18]

One thing that is odd, O'Donnell's contribtuions are 99.9% from out of state. Only a couple out of 200+ contributors were from Delaware.

That seems odd, considering she has such a huge backing by the poll.

 

[mheslep]

One thing that is odd, O'Donnell's contribtuions are 99.9% from out of state. Only a couple out of 200+ contributors were from Delaware...

I understand you are exaggerating (99.9) to make a point, but what source are you drawing on to make the general point about contributions? FEC? Looking out your back window won't get you a contributions list.

Edit:
Here for instance on the FEC's individual contrib list for O'Donnell there are 94 Del residents out of a total 264. And then there are 52 from just across the river in PA.
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/com_ind/C00449595/

 

[airborne18]

I looked at the FEC, not that site, but the FEC site directly for just this election. I think that is the difference.

http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/HSProcessContributorList.do

Do this for the 2010 elections, for o"donnell. And there are a handful from Delaware, but if you look at it you will see that the amount of money, it was nothing compared to out of state.

But even the number of donors this cycle from DE is nothing. The previous elections she did pull a fair number from in-state, I agree.

one of the local commentators in sussex county, he is the ultra conservative and is very involved in the 9/12 Patriots made a comment that Friday night he talked to O'Donnell at the rally. And they were all conceding that they would not win. ( wgmd radio, bill colley posted on their site about it ). So I wonder where the pollsters get this idea.

I looked in the news and O'Donnell is not touting it.

The general feeling is that O'Donnell is running to raise her national profile. She is on the National talk shows, and I keep getting automated calls with Palin asking for money. O'Donnell has debt, so there is general view that this is to raise money to pay her election debts and bills. And she is looking for a commenting job nationally.

 

[airborne18]

Shep.. I am not trying to throw rocks. But I am not a Tea Party follower. I do know them and a few of the 9/12 patriots. In Delaware they are not doing a good job. A fellow paratrooper I know is very involved with the 9/12 patriots, so I do know their platform in Delaware. Funny we just had a talk on the phone yesterday, and I told him how crazy they are in lower delaware.. ( he is in the north ). And he agreed, they are a little out there.

But he did seem to indicate that there is a sizable following upstate. So maybe there will be a nice run at it for her.

I know the 9/12 says there are 2600 members, and I would guess that it probably increased in the past week.

i thiink a large turnout tomorrow hurts O'Donnell. Honestly a lot of people didn't even know there was a Primary against castlle, but with all the attention it has made it a big deal.

It is all about New Castle County, that is where the voting battle is. I am a conservative and I always felt cheated, because Sussex county is never a factor, and very few campaigning ever occurs here. ( No respect ).

You cannot look at the 2008 election and work this from those numbers. She got 35%, but that is the people who always vote against Biden, or any democrat.

 

[mheslep]

I looked at the FEC, not that site, but the FEC site directly for just this election. I think that is the difference.

http://www.fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/HSProcessContributorList.do

Do this for the 2010 elections, for o"donnell. And there are a handful from Delaware, but if you look at it you will see that the amount of money, it was nothing compared to out of state.

<shrug>
Contributor total from that FEC itemized individuals site was $134k, 231 contributors. Of that,
DE ~$18k (13%), 43
PA ~$46k (35%), 56

 

[airborne18]

<shrug>
Contributor total from that FEC itemized individuals site was $134k, 231 contributors. Of that,
DE ~$18k (13%), 43
PA ~$46k (35%), 56

43 was more than I thought, so I stand corrected. It was low $$ amount that I suprised me. One thing I did see is that she raised another 26,000 since the tea party came to town. But that is not in the totals, so that might move it more to local donations.

I am not sure what the PA contributions have to do with it. Most of those donations are well before she started hitting the Philly TV stations. It is the large numbers from TX and CA that really hit me more than anything.

( Delaware and PA are apples and organges. Delaware actually has a grudge against PA. Delaware is tax free, and there is a whole bunch of shopping in DE just across the state line. PA wanted DE to tax PA residents who made purchases in DE. DE laughed in their face. DE does not even transfer traffic points to PA, that is how big the grudge is )

If you look at the map, the whole pennisula is called the Eastern Shore. DELMARVA. MD and DE have a close relatioship, but PA and DE do not.

Oh, and O'Donnell did do a bunch of interviews today on the networks, they apparently were at the WGMD studio. ( Wgmd is the major ultra conservative radio station. At least in the south.. I know it looks small, but that is the major talk station in the southern conservative part of the state. )

So that is a good source if you are following O'Donnell. It is the station that the 9/12 patriots follow like a relgion. But that will clue you in. ( Just to get an idea about the conservative part of the state.. you will see a White Supremist group is planning a march ).

The News Journal is the major paper in the state, though the conservatives hate, but it is out of the North. WBOC is the major TV station for local news. You should find some good local coverage.

I wish I lived up north, so I could actually see if turnout is big when I go to the polls.

This is actually an interesting problem for the conservatives. If O'Donnell wins tomorrow then the Democrats keep the Senate. She will never beat the Democrats in November. ( it is impossible, for any republican to win they must take a nice percentage of the democrats in the state. There is no way she can do it. At best she will be 8-10 points behind. ).

It still does not jive for someone who is polling ahead of the party canidate. the money flows.

 

[mheslep]

I am not sure what the PA contributions have to do with it. Most of those donations are well before she started hitting the Philly TV stations. It is the large numbers from TX and CA that really hit me more than anything.

( Delaware and PA are apples and organges. Delaware actually has a grudge against PA. Delaware is tax free, and there is a whole bunch of shopping in DE just across the state line. PA wanted DE to tax PA residents who made purchases in DE. DE laughed in their face. DE does not even transfer traffic points to PA, that is how big the grudge is ) [...]

A large fraction of the DE population is up by Wilmington, and many people over in south east PA are commuting or doing business in the Wilmington area and vice versa, including shopping as you suggest. It is for business motivations such as these, and not traffic tickets, that I suggest many people are going write a check for a neighboring US Senate campaign.

 

[airborne18]

A large fraction of the DE population is up by Wilmington, and many people over in south east PA are commuting or doing business in the Wilmington area and vice versa, including shopping as you suggest. It is for business motivations such as these, and not traffic tickets, that I suggest many people are going write a check for a neighboring US Senate campaign.

Well that logic does have some merit. A good part of the donations are from the Philly suburbs, which is close to Delaware. I personally never paid attention to Delaware politics when I lived in the philly burbs, but that is me.

Honestly most people in PA follow Jersey elections. Because they use the philly tv stations, and their races are down in the mud slugfests.. all of them. And the ads get so nasty it is like that old Al Franken skit on Second City.

 

[airborne18]

Shep.

Just got back from voting and there were actually people there. Most people will vote tonight in the next hour or so. Most of the polling places are in schools and people avoid voting early in the day.

on wgmd they posted that turnout is expected to be 30%.. that is actually very good. These are the votes that will pad it for Tea Party, since the northern part is where they need to fight for votes.

I also heard that the GOP is really pressing everyone to go vote. They are pulling out all the stops.

I think large turnout in the end will hurt the teaparty, but should be interesting. If you are following results, New Castle County is all that really matters. Sussex county is the tea party stronghold, so if they don't win that it should be a pretty good indicator. Sussex county will probaby report results fairly quickly.

 

[Gokul43201]

Just for fun, would you like to put down your prediction for the R primary (with % votes)?

On a related note, recent polling numbers show Coons favored over O'Donnell, but losing to Castle. My experience is that voter sentiment usually readjusts (significantly) after the Primary, so I don't put any weight on pre-primary polls for general election results.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_delaware_senate_race.html

 

[airborne18]

The race in Delaware that people outside of the state don't realize is the fight between the Republican house canidates. Rollins and Uqurart or whatever. Uquart is the 9/12 patriot candiate, so that should be interesting.

We only have one seat in the House. and that is a hot race for the state. And the Tea Party is not even backing the 9/12 nutcase.

( Funny thing is that the state offices that have primaries are where the highest turnout will be, here the people pay attention to the state issues. I will give them credit ).

I think Castle at around 58%. That is a guess really. O'Donnell was smart, she announced right at the cutoff for registering for the primary, that locked out the independents from registring. I think low turnout hurts Castle. But the state party is taking it serious and out dragging people to the primary. So I think Castle does not have an issue.

The big issue today, is that a lot of people want to vote in the Republican primary that can't, just to show O'Donnell that national commentators have no business in Delaware.

I would not count on any polls on the primary. They usually don't do them in Delaware. The problem is that the southern part of the state is hardcore right. But 80%+ of the state is up north, and they really are the ones that elect people in the state.

They can poll all they want in the two lower counties, but they are very slanted to the right. The canidates know this and never come down here, because it just never impacts the election.

It will matter for the primary, if the whole lower county votes, in a Primary. But that is not going to happen.

That is the thing. Republicans do not have a chance in the state, they need to take votes from the democrats to win the General Election. O'Donnell has no chance in the General Election, zero.

Castle is actually very well liked. All of the federally elected in Delaware served at the state level, or county level. You have to build support and have a track record.

That is the odd thing. O"Donnell could win a pretty high profile office in Sussex county and have waited an election cycle and then had some credibility.

It has been fun to watch. So we will see in an hour.

 

[airborne18]

This is what the 9/12 Patriots go around doing. this is why O'Donnell will lose..

http://gawker.com/5323938/meet-crazy-eileen-the-birther

 

[BobG]

How could she not win? I mean look at her stand on the issues:

O'Donnell on masturbation: “The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. So you can't masturbate without lust.”

O'Donnell on sending out pictures of herself in a bikini to attract voters: “I’m not concerned with the reason you vote for me as long as you vote for me.”

Yeah, baby! I can't wait to get my 8x10 of O'Donnell in a bikini so I can ... oh, wait ... Darn!

http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2092/1/

 

[Office_Shredder]

O'Donnell on masturbation: “The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. So you can't masturbate without lust.”

This is not a logical conclusion!

 

[Gokul43201]

This is not a logical conclusion!

If you grant that the finish was a slip of the tongue (i.e., she meant to say "you can't masturbate without committing adultery") then there is some semblance of logical reasoning (modulo an assumption or two), but such a statement would almost certainly be political poison.

 

[airborne18]

This is not a logical conclusion!

Personally I love how an unmarried woman is preaching to me about family values. Especially when she cannot take care of herself.

 

[airborne18]

Looks like O'Donnell won, apparenty that poll was pretty close. Wow.

There goes my career as a political commentator. But if I become a kook I can enter politics and get backing from the patriot group.

 

[lisab]

Looks like O'Donnell won, apparenty that poll was pretty close. Wow.

There goes my career as a political commentator. But if I become a kook I can enter politics and get backing from the patriot group.

Wow indeed, that's quite a surprise. Now I wonder if she'll move to the center for the general election.

 

[airborne18]

Wow indeed, that's quite a surprise. Now I wonder if she'll move to the center for the general election.

Well the groups that supported her are not really the compromise type. I actually tried asking questions that went beyond the bumper stickers to one of the groups and they just attack you.

very angry bunch. She has got an uphill battle, the Democrats only have to vote party lines and the Democrat will win. They outnumber republicans.

 

[lisab]

Well the groups that supported her are not really the compromise type. I actually tried asking questions that went beyond the bumper stickers to one of the groups and they just attack you.

very angry bunch. She has got an uphill battle, the Democrats only have to vote party lines and the Democrat will win. They outnumber republicans.

I bet a win like this makes lot of Republican campaign advisors want to breath into paper bags!

 

[airborne18]

I bet a win like this makes lot of Republican campaign advisors want to breath into paper bags!

Lol, they see a stampede of elephants.

Tomorrow I am going to meet with the campaign manager of the Democrat Coons.

 

[mheslep]

Well the groups that supported her are not really the compromise type. I actually tried asking questions that went beyond the bumper stickers to one of the groups and they just attack you.

very angry bunch. She has got an uphill battle, the Democrats only have to vote party lines and the Democrat will win. They outnumber republicans.

I would have thought your earlier attempts would have slowed down, if not retired, your predilection for predictions and mass characterizations.

 

[mheslep]

Wow indeed, that's quite a surprise. Now I wonder if she'll move to the center for the general election.

No chance, so say I. The only reason she has gotten this far is by making clear she is not another go-along-to-get-along pol like Castle, visibly the main issue driving the electorate. If she abandons that position her support will vanish.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

No chance, so say I. The only reason she has gotten this far is by making clear she is not another go-along-to-get-along pol like Castle, visibly the main issue driving the electorate. If she abandons that position her support will vanish.

And if she doesn't she won't carry the mainstream. Either way she's toast, which is why the Dems were celebrating.

Interesting that you would seemingly rate compromise and partisanship so low. It is the essence of Democracy.

 

[mheslep]

And if she doesn't she won't carry the mainstream. Either way she's toast, which is why the Dems were celebrating.

By so stating you make your own assumptions about the make up and the opinions of the 'mainstream'. Though I doubt she'll win, I think you are mistaken about that makeup. We'll see.

Interesting that you would seemingly rate compromise and partisanship so low. It is the essence of Democracy.

Good, then the D's can try it come January instead of claiming the opposition consists solely of bigots and subservients, lives only to exploit fear and ignorance, are closet fascists, and has a secret handshake with Fox and talk radio. Many things are the "essence of a Democracy", but in any case a decision by the electorate (not legislators) to choose one distinct political and economic point of view over another murky one that blows with the wind has nothing to do with compromise and partisanship on the part of Delaware voters, or mine.

 

[CRGreathouse]

By so stating you make your own assumptions about the make up and the opinions of the 'mainstream'. Though I doubt she'll win, I think you are mistaken about that makeup. We'll see.

I think Ivan was simply referring to Black's theorem.

 

[Gokul43201]

I think Ivan was simply referring to Black's theorem.

With the degree of polarization in the electorate today, I wouldn't be surprised if the best 1-dim approximation of voter philosophy shows a bimodal distribution. I believe the Palin effect on the McCain campaign (lost more independents/moderates than gains in extreme right wing) is argument against this, but I also believe we are more polarized today than we were 2 yrs ago.

 

[Office_Shredder]

It doesn't matter what the distribution is. What matters is that anybody whose more extreme than you will still vote for you rather than the person whose on the other side of the spectrum. This doesn't take into account voter participation rates which is what decides elections as much as anything else it seems

 

[Gokul43201]

It doesn't matter what the distribution is. What matters is that anybody whose more extreme than you will still vote for you rather than the person whose on the other side of the spectrum. This doesn't take into account voter participation rates which is what decides elections as much as anything else it seems

And it is essentially via the voter turnout that I think the distribution matters. If you model voter turnout as suppressed in proportion to the politico-philosophical "difference" between the candidate and the voter, then one can easily find bimodal distributions where a more extreme candidate may fare better. See, for example, the second hypothetical distribution in the figure below (x-axis is political philosophy, with the left end being the liberal end; arrows represent positions of 3 hypothetical candidates: D=Dem, R=Rep, T=Tea):

On the other hand, unless there is an (IMO unphysical) inverse relationship between ideological compatibility and voter enthusiasm, there is no way that T fares better than R in distribution #1.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Of course in the example Gokul gives above, the key point is the difference between the primary and the final election, because they have different electorates. The tea party candidate may swing the median Republican without capturing the median voter.

On the other hand, unless there is an (IMO unphysical) inverse relationship between ideological compatibility and voter enthusiasm, there is no way that T fares better than R in distribution #1.

If you're saying that the distribution must be bimodal for the Tea Party candidate to defeat the Republican (assuming a single axis on which the Tea candidate is to the right of the Republican), I disagree.

 

[Office_Shredder]

And it is essentially via the voter turnout that I think the distribution matters. If you model voter turnout as suppressed in proportion to the politico-philosophical "difference" between the candidate and the voter, then one can easily find bimodal distributions where a more extreme candidate may fare better. See, for example, the second hypothetical distribution in the figure below (x-axis is political philosophy, with the left end being the liberal end; arrows represent positions of 3 hypothetical candidates: D=Dem, R=Rep, T=Tea):

On the other hand, unless there is an (IMO unphysical) inverse relationship between ideological compatibility and voter enthusiasm, there is no way that T fares better than R in distribution #1.

The theorem being discussed only compares two candidates in an election, and why being more extremist tends to be a disadvantage in general elections.

 

[Gokul43201]

If you're saying that the distribution must be bimodal for the Tea Party candidate to defeat the Republican (assuming a single axis on which the Tea candidate is to the right of the Republican), I disagree.

No, I'm not saying that. There are two significant differences between that statement and what I am saying:

1. I am talking not about the outcome of the primary, but rather, the possible outcomes in the general election. My contention is that R would fare better against D than T would.

2. Assuming the positions are fixed as shown, I assert that T can not fare better than R could have (assuming also that turnouts do not act counter-intuitively, as described previously) for any symmetric bell-shaped distribution (or more generally, for any symmetric distribution which increases monotonically from x=extreme liberal to x=mid-point moderate).

The reason I went with a bimodal distribution is that I think that may be a more likely reflection of reality than say, a unimodal distribution with mean to the right of the position of T. I think we will probably end up with a House that is no more than 52% R and a Senate that is no more than 50% R, so my 2 example distributions were chosen to be symmetric.

 

[Gokul43201]

The theorem being discussed only compares two candidates in an election, and why being more extremist tends to be a disadvantage in general elections.

The theorem also applies only to unimodal distributions.

 

[lisab]

No, I'm not saying that. There are two significant differences between that statement and what I am saying:

1. I am talking not about the outcome of the primary, but rather, the possible outcomes in the general election. My contention is that R would fare better against D than T would.

2. Assuming the positions are fixed as shown, I assert that T can not fare better than R (assuming also that turnouts do not act counter-intuitively, as described previously) for any symmetric bell-shaped distribution (or more generally, for any symmetric distribution which increases monotonically from x=extreme liberal to x=mid-point moderate).

The reason I went with a bimodal distribution is that I think that may be a more likely reflection of reality than say, a unimodal distribution with mean to the right of the position of T. I think we will probably end up with a House that is no more than 52% R and a Senate that is no more than 50% R, so my 2 example distributions were chosen to be symmetric.

I like your bimodal distribution, it seems to fit my view of how things are in the country now.

But the analysis you draw from it assumes that the left and right distributions will vote in equal proportions, and that's clearly not so. In 2008, the left was fired up; in 2010 the right is. So, while I still don't think a T can beat a D, it may be closer that we think.

What's going to save the Ds is the independents - I don't see them going for a T at all. If you were to superimpose them over your distribution I think they'd be a narrow normal distribution.

 

[Gokul43201]

But the analysis you draw from it assumes that the left and right distributions will vote in equal proportions, and that's clearly not so.

No, I do not assume this. In fact, this is exactly what I talk about in the part about voter turnout. The distributions in the figure are only meant to reflect political views and are not scaled by voter enthusiasm. My argument about how a T might have a better chance than a R is based on taking that raw distribution and scaling it by some modulation for voter turnout.

 

[Office_Shredder]

The theorem also applies only to unimodal distributions.

No, it doesn't. You're just interpreting too much from the picture. Given any distribution of voters along a single dimension, if voters vote for the person amongst two candidates who is closer to them on the axis, then the optimal strategy for each candidate is to take a position exactly in the median of the distribution. It doesn't matter what the distribution looks like

 

[CRGreathouse]

1. I am talking not about the outcome of the primary, but rather, the possible outcomes in the general election. My contention is that R would fare better against D than T would.

That's fine, and is the conclusion of Black's theorem under our working assumptions. But this has nothing to do with the shape of the distribution -- it requires only that T is to the right of R.

2. Assuming the positions are fixed as shown, I assert that T can not fare better than R could have (assuming also that turnouts do not act counter-intuitively, as described previously) for any symmetric bell-shaped distribution (or more generally, for any symmetric distribution which increases monotonically from x=extreme liberal to x=mid-point moderate).

You don't need all of those extra assumptions!

 

[CRGreathouse]

No, it doesn't. You're just interpreting too much from the picture. Given any distribution of voters along a single dimension, if voters vote for the person amongst two candidates who is closer to them on the axis, then the optimal strategy for each candidate is to take a position exactly in the median of the distribution. It doesn't matter what the distribution looks like

You beat me to it. Yes, this is quite correct. This of course leads to law[/url]: both parties move toward that median voter.

 

[Gokul43201]

No, it doesn't. You're just interpreting too much from the picture. Given any distribution of voters along a single dimension, if voters vote for the person amongst two candidates who is closer to them on the axis, then the optimal strategy for each candidate is to take a position exactly in the median of the distribution. It doesn't matter what the distribution looks like

Oops, that is correct. Sorry, I got a little off-track in my previous response.

The theorem, however, assumes voter turnout is flat across the spectrum. My argument is based on the rationale that it is not, and specifically on the expectation that your likelihood of showing up at a polling station increases with the proximity of a candidate's position to your own.

 

[CRGreathouse]

The theorem, however, assumes voter turnout is flat across the spectrum. My argument is based on the rationale that it is not, and specifically on the expectation that your likelihood of showing up at a polling station increases with the proximity of a candidate's position to your own.

Under those assumptions, though, and with a distribution like your second, T could fare better against D than R.

 

[Gokul43201]

That's fine, and is the conclusion of Black's theorem under our working assumptions. But this has nothing to do with the shape of the distribution -- it requires only that T is to the right of R.
You don't need all of those extra assumptions!

For some reason, it seems that I am conveying that my arguments are based on Black's Theorem, while in fact, they are not. My argument is based on the principle that underlies BT as well as a distribution that accounts for voter enthusiasm (assumed to be uniform in BT).

 

[Gokul43201]

Under those assumptions, though, and with a distribution like your second, T could fare better against D than R.

This is EXACTLY what I'm saying. Have I been that inarticulate?

 

[CRGreathouse]

This is EXACTLY what I'm saying. Have I been that inarticulate?

Well, either you're inarticulate or I'm unable to properly interpret others.

 

[mheslep]

Nice discussion, but makes an over generous assumption about the nature of the domain space (ordinal) in my view. I believe that many voters entering the process this year see the issue as entrenched, self serving, business as usual politicians versus those unconnected with traditional party machines and media glad handing. On such a 'political & medial machine' graph, D&R are closely grouped, while the T candidates are way out there, as in that space political 'right' and 'left' have little (no?) meaning.

Most importantly, the M voter is not between the D & R points in such a view, it's close to T. On many issues, I grant the D,R, and T distribution is as Gokul indicates, with T to the right of R on most issues and the median between D & R. So, if a T candidate makes the (faulty) assumption that the electorate is operating with an M between D & R calculus and moves toward D&R on the political issues, simultaneously she would seen as moving back to the traditional 'machines and media' D&R on my graph, moving away from M, when in reality the dominant M issue was all along close to T, then support will likely vanish.

(above somewhat rambling I know, but got to go)

 

[airborne18]

I would have thought your earlier attempts would have slowed down, if not retired, your predilection for predictions and mass characterizations.

Lol. Oh I will admit when I am wrong. Like I said, so much for my future as a commentator. I should really leave the house more.

I can't wait to see the state polling now that she has won. Most of the tracking polls were Castle/Coons. The state Democrat party does have an advantage in numbers, but have the moderates all moved into the "against status quo". I think she needs the republican base, plus the independents and some democrats to move to her side.

I ruled out any chance of her beating coons, but that was before yesterday. So she could have a chance. She apparently has money for the election.

I hope she doesn't win, but I can't argue with that result. What is key is that it was a record turnout, which I would have thought favored the party machine. ( I know I was WRONG ).

Shep, You can rub this in for a while and I will accept my punishment.

I do apologize for being so cynical about the whole thing. Apparenlty there are rainbows, kittens, and puppies.

 

[Office_Shredder]

Nice discussion, but makes an over generous assumption about the nature of the domain space (ordinal)

I should have known you were an anti-Choice loon

Spoiler

I'm talking about the axiom of choice of course