Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I don't think you guys understand West Virginia.
West Virginia is full of Dixiecrats and extremely Democrat.
They almost always vote a Democrat for Senator.
edited 10th May '17 7:53:07 PM by MadSkillz
I'm guessing he'll easily survive a primary.
edited 10th May '17 7:10:26 PM by TheRoguePenguin
Here's some more info on them:
West Virginia's chambers were both Democrat for 84 years. So until 3 years ago.
So yeah, WV is full of old school Democrats who prefer Republican presidents and Blue Dog Democrat everything else.
edited 10th May '17 7:53:29 PM by MadSkillz
![]()
In the sense that you have to actively parrot the Republican line on social issues instead of insisting that they are a distraction, yeah. Might just be possible as well. Of course, I'm just some skeptic with a dim view about how the rest of the country will react to that.
Basically, they would go for Democratic economic policy, but that would involve admitting that people who aren't pasty white or have differing sexual habits from theirs are people. So Republican it is.
edited 10th May '17 7:27:03 PM by Krieger22
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot![]()
That doesn't really clash with what Mad Skillz said.
Edit: That being said, her chances of winning aside, is there any reasons to believe she'd be bad as a Senator? I've only started looking but I'm not seeing any particularly nutty policy ideas yet.
edited 10th May '17 7:28:21 PM by LSBK
She isn't really one anymore now that she's in the Senate.
She might just be an opportunist.
Or she just bases her actions on her constituency.
Stop it.
Gillibrand was always to the left of her constitutency, even when representing a conservative, upstate New York district and your whole "she's an opportunist" omits her support for single payer running in a red House district in 2006, and every politician being an opportunist to some degree or another. As a Senator, she has been very liberal and progressive and has not only been steadfast in resisting Trump and co-sponsored every bill proposed by Sanders since the election.
She took on sexuala ssault in the military, put forth a bill to give 9/11 first responders free healthcare and, again, supported Universal Healthcare running in a conservative district. Knock it off with this DINO stuff.
If I'm correct going by the scale you just offered, you do agree that a Sanders-esque Democrat is unlikely to get elected in West Virginia?
The Senate has issued formal demands for some of Flynn's documents.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39879749
@Madskillz: My point is that you cherrypicked the numbers-what you posted and bolded states that the Democrats enjoyed success until 1992-two years before the Democrats lost their grip of the House. Since 2000, WV has been red, red, red-and that is not likely to change, with the other fact you mentioned-dyed in the wool Evangelicals increasing in proportion, who will not vote for a pro-choice candidate, to say nothing of one with equality as a platform. Look at the hoops Manchin has to jump through.
I suggest that the Dixiecrats you mentioned have mostly died off or been rendered passive by age over the last 23+ years, and have been replaced by their children-who lack the background that led their parents to vote blue most of their lives.
edited 10th May '17 7:38:31 PM by ViperMagnum357
@Karkat If the candidate was progressive on the domestic front and conservative on social issues, sure.
I think the J Ds are putting in someone who is progressive on both fronts which makes her odds unlikely. But they're also putting in someone relatable so I suppose that helps.
edited 10th May '17 8:01:56 PM by MadSkillz
But I didn't. I just quoted wikipedia.
WV is a purplish state atm outside presidential elections. It's definitely something you can turn around.
Both West Virginian chambers were blue until 2014. That was only 3 years ago.
The current governor of West Virginia is blue btw.
Never said he wasn't but I don't know his background.
edited 10th May '17 7:52:43 PM by MadSkillz
There isn't anything wrong with her from what I saw.
All the outrage is based on the fear that she'll win against Manchin and lose to a Republican.
edited 10th May '17 7:58:20 PM by MadSkillz

I'm not really sure what they're looking to gain from something like outing Joe Manchin.
I admit I haven't looked into the politics of WV very thoroughly but my understanding is that at present it is considered a VERY conservative state. CNN had an exit poll admittedly from a decade ago that showed 52% of voters were evangelical christians.
So to me the fact a Democrat was able to be elected at all when many republican voters are liable to instinctually hate anyone with a "D" next to their name is a big deal.
It's not that he doesn't have some awful politics or history on some voting issues, but you can't win with the same platform in every state because every state has a different culture and ethos. You have to make do with what you have.