(11-16-2022 11:10 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 08:54 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:26 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Congratulations, House control is hugely significant and you've won it! Have fun, we'll be in the other chamber making judges and giggling while the woefully inadequate for the task "my Kevin" McCarthy begs the horse-faced Georgian to let him be Speaker. And don't forget that an average modern midterm would have delivered 30 seats to the GOP last Tuesday alone, let alone a midterm with poor POTUS approval ratings and economic challenges like we face today.

Even if Walker wins and Manchin flips? He has a re-election in 2 years in a state that is 2 to 1 Republican.

and while mcconnel is a tool, he has said he is targeting manchin to either flip or face massive financial opposition in his next campaign.

Manchin either flips, or retires. He knows he cannot win WV as a democrat these days. He got played by the Democrats on the Anti Inflation deal and the resulting shafting of his state on carbon issues like no one in recent history. You have to go back to Arlen Specter to see someone get played that badly.

Manchin runs as a D in '24 he is a dead man in the election. He knows it. Its either swap parties to continue or retire.

There wont be any need to do a 'face massive financial opposition' to remove him in '24.

Senator Collins on Line 1 for you Tanq-

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/po...e-1373932/

There is a difference between 'being played', and not being up on the items you are supposed to be legislating on.

Collins was Phi Beta Kappa and Magna *** Laude -- having been in the Senate 5+ terms, I find it hard to believe that she did not understand the comments that she relayed to her as oh-so misleading.

If we are to take Senator Collins' statement as to what was said and the overturning of Roe by Dobbs as contrary to that -- Senator Collins must be apoplectic that we live in a society where Brown v. Board of Education is the law.

There is no judge standing, and no attorney standing, that can say 'Precedent means ironclad adherence'. Only a legal, and political, neophyte could ever claim that the preceding quote has any grounding in reality.

Or, Collins is building a sandbag around the issue politically for herself in the article. No lawyer (which she is not), nor any 5+ term Senator would believe the items that she said were noted by the two were what she claims.

Nice try though.

Specter still takes the cake. He really took it in the keister following his defection and one important vote. The D's used him like the Hell's Angels uses a groupie for that half year, then reneged everything they promised him.

(11-16-2022 10:15 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:01 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  [
The fetus has a parasitic relationship to the mother. At what point is the fetus viable outside of the womb?

Or if you insists it is life, why does the GOP turn its back after birth? It is not pro-life. It is pro birth & anti choice.

Ah..the old tried and true bait and switch argument. Obviously that's a false narrative but you guys bring it out with regularity.

Conservatives care deeply about children after birth, about adolescents, teenagers, and adults. The difference is conservative don't choose the same solutions you do solve problems.

Liberals think that if someone doesn't approve of the government solving all problems well, they must not care. Nothing is further from the truth. I'd wager the personal sacrifice, time , effort among conservatives to help those in need far exceeds the personal investment of liberals. Thousands of churches, private entities, etc supported and manned by conservatives do far more than most know. There are literally millions of conservatives taking care of needy children, feeding and clothing those in need, taking care of the elderly every day. Most Liberals say the government should do these things. Conservatives do it from their heart and own sweat...but, most conservatives don't toot their horn when they do good deeds. It's not in their nature to virtue signal and get attention for their actions like a smarmy Hollywood celebrity.

Although not all Christians are conservatives, it's taught that helping others should be from the heart and not for vanity's sake.

The numbers show that the "uncaring" Republicans give more per income to charity than the "spend other people's money" Democrats.

(11-16-2022 10:01 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:57 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:46 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:27 PM)boss man Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Congratulations, House control is hugely significant and you've won it! Have fun, we'll be in the other chamber making judges and giggling while the woefully inadequate for the task "my Kevin" McCarthy begs the horse-faced Georgian to let him be Speaker. And don't forget that an average modern midterm would have delivered 30 seats to the GOP last Tuesday alone, let alone a midterm with poor POTUS approval ratings and economic challenges like we face today.

Congrats on keeping the Senate under rat-faced Shumer. Be sure to keep the highly frustrated Manchin and rational Sinema in line.....LOL.

The Republicans will do better in 2024 with 21 Dem and 2 Ind. Senators running and only 10 Repubs.

Indeed, the Senate map in 2024 is far less favorable for us than the one last week. Lots of variables may help us like POTUS level turnout, Trump as the potential GOP nominee and putting reproductive rights on the ballot in every state that allows for ballot initiatives. But 2024 is absolutely a map with great potential for the GOP, if you can avoid some of your traditional candidate quality problems.

Manchin is fine, most Democrats understand that he is and has to be a WV Democrat to have any chance at winning in 2024. He is the last member of an otherwise extinct species, and when for whatever reason he is done that seat will be red foreseeably forever. And secretly I think a lot more Democrat Senators than we know often agree with his concerns, and appreciate when he puts the brakes on things. It doesn't hurt either that he is a friendly and likeable man who has good relationships with his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Sinema on the other hand, is just weird IMO. If you really want to flip a Senator, she's the one to target. I think she is and should be toast in the 2024 Democratic primary, other Democrats can potentially win in the Grand Canyon state unlike Manchin in WV. Her idiosyncrasies don't make sense like Manchin's concerns do - if not for her we'd have raised taxes higher on corporations and the wealthy as Manchin and every other Democrat wanted to. I'm not a fan of litmus tests, but when you aren't for raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy you're a very unique Democrat and I'm not sure who your base is.

Speaking of "reproductive rights" aren't you concerned with the rights of the unborn?

The fetus has a parasitic relationship to the mother. At what point is the fetus viable outside of the womb?

Or if you insists it is life, why does the GOP turn its back after birth? It is not pro-life. It is pro birth & anti choice.

Liberals often tend to point out the European countries' health care systems... All of the major European countries ban abortion after 14 weeks. Seems like a good place for us as well.

(11-17-2022 02:13 AM)memtigbb Wrote:  All of the major European countries ban abortion after 14 weeks. Seems like a good place for us as well.

Just one of several issues where democrats are left of Europe.

(11-17-2022 12:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 11:06 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:45 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 08:33 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 08:18 PM)MemTigers1998 Wrote:  The Dems couldn’t get anything done with 60 in the senate under the Kenyan. Now, idiot Lamenole thinks they’ll be confirming judges.

I'm not sure what rock you've been under, but you don't seem to know much about politics in the last few years so you may want to study up before calling others names. Granted, I wish we'd gotten more done while we had 60 Senate votes under President Obama, but you may recall a little thing called the Affordable Care Act/Obamacare? You know, the one your party campaigned on repealing for years and then turned out to have no idea what they wanted to replace it with.

And we will continue confirming judges, as we have been for the past two years. President Biden has seen more judicial nominees confirmed in his first two years than even President Trump did, who significantly outpaced many past presidents. And the filibuster no longer applies to any nominees, so we don't need any more votes than the 50 we've had and already have won in the next Congress. If Senator Reverend Warnock wins we'll have 51 and it'll be even easier, then we can afford to lose a Manchin, Sinema, or someone else who takes issue with a particular nominee.

https://news.yahoo.com/senate-democratic...16163.html

I’m plenty aware of politics. I know that your side F’s up every single thing they touch and that can’t be disputed

Being aware that politics exist, and having an opinion as to which side is competent and which side is not, is not at all the same as understanding how politics actually work. From your post earlier it appears that you may have been under a rock and missed the past twelve years or so of events -

"The Dems couldn’t get anything done with 60 in the senate" - the Affordable Care Act//Obamacare passed in 2010. This was apparently significant enough for the GOP to center every campaign around through 2016, despite having no actual plan to replace it

"under the Kenyan" - You are many lies behind, even the Great Pumpkin abandoned birtherism way back in 2016

"idiot Lamenole thinks they’ll be confirming judges" - Indeed they will, as they have been at a rate faster than under Trump, Obama or W. Senator Reid & Democrats abolished the filibuster for all nominees except the Supreme Court in 2013, while Senator McConnell & Republicans abolished the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees as well in 2017 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster...since_2005

When you feel like being a jerk, and sometimes we all do, I assure you that you'll enjoy it more if you have your facts straight and don't leave yourself open to being made to look ignorant so easily.

So how does 84 in 2 years beat 234 in 4? I just skimmed the article, but it looks like it was another liberal arts Dem major who can't do math.

It does say in there that Biden has more in the first 2 years than Trump did, but I don't see them actually state the totals. It's an August article as well, so it is possible that Democrats slowed down in the past couple of months and Trump actually had more at this point in his term than Biden does. Assuming it is accurate we still need to pick up the pace in the next 2 years to beat 234 for the term, which should be very doable if Majority Leader Schumer properly focuses on judicial confirmations once most legislation becomes impossible in January. One thing Mitch McConnell showed us all is that leaving judges on the table when your party control is political malpractice (and to his credit, he showed us by NOT doing that). At present there are 89 federal judicial vacancies with only 45 nominees so both the White House and the Senate have some work to do -

https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeshi...-vacancies

(11-17-2022 12:09 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 11:10 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:48 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 08:54 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:26 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Even if Walker wins and Manchin flips? He has a re-election in 2 years in a state that is 2 to 1 Republican.

and while mcconnel is a tool, he has said he is targeting manchin to either flip or face massive financial opposition in his next campaign.

Manchin either flips, or retires. He knows he cannot win WV as a democrat these days. He got played by the Democrats on the Anti Inflation deal and the resulting shafting of his state on carbon issues like no one in recent history. You have to go back to Arlen Specter to see someone get played that badly.

Manchin runs as a D in '24 he is a dead man in the election. He knows it. Its either swap parties to continue or retire.

There wont be any need to do a 'face massive financial opposition' to remove him in '24.

Senator Collins on Line 1 for you Tanq-

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/po...e-1373932/

There is a difference between 'being played', and not being up on the items you are supposed to be legislating on.

Collins was Phi Beta Kappa and Magna *** Laude -- having been in the Senate 5+ terms, I find it hard to believe that she did not understand the comments that she relayed to her as oh-so misleading.

If we are to take Senator Collins' statement as to what was said and the overturning of Roe by Dobbs as contrary to that -- Senator Collins must be apoplectic that we live in a society where Brown v. Board of Education is the law.

There is no judge standing, and no attorney standing, that can say 'Precedent means ironclad adherence'. Only a legal, and political, neophyte could ever claim that the preceding quote has any grounding in reality.

Or, Collins is building a sandbag around the issue politically for herself in the article. No lawyer (which she is not), nor any 5+ term Senator would believe the items that she said were noted by the two were what she claims.

Nice try though.

Specter still takes the cake. He really took it in the keister following his defection and one important vote. The D's used him like the Hell's Angels uses a groupie for that half year, then reneged everything they promised him.

Good points tanq, I think your Arlen beats my Susan. I favor the bolded explanation, but perhaps that is because I like Senator Collins and prefer to think she is playing politics rather than ignorant. You're absolutely right about precedent, and wise Senators will learn from Collins in the future and carefully heed exactly what judicial nominees say. Those who said they lied during confirmation were wrong, I never heard any of them say they wouldn't overturn Roe or agreed with its reasoning. They said it was precedent or precedent upon precedent, that they respected Court precedent, and that it was the law of the land. All of which can be true without meaning that you wouldn't vote to overturn the decision in a heartbeat, given the chance.

Brown vs. Board is also a great example of why we should all be glad that we live in a country where the Supreme Court CAN discard past precedent when they see fit. The one reform I'd like to see there is requiring at least an equivalent number of votes to the number received when the precedent was originally established, if precedent is to be overruled. It would protect both sides from losing cherished rights to a bare 5-4 majority that as we've seen over the past few years, can be assembled quickly and controversially when circumstances allow. In the case of Roe, it would still be the law of the land as the original decision came down 7-2.

A nit pick --- Roe v. Wade can be read as a (4-1-1-1) v. (1-1) opinion.

Stewart, Burger, and Douglas write concurrences that deviated strongly from the Brennan main opinion based on the scope, and source, of the abortion right at issue. And said within their concurrences that 'fine, we'll just go along with Brennan'.

That amalgamation of a decision underlies the very specious ground it was based on, and the grounds on why it ultimately fell.

In all honesty, as a policy, I am a supporter of a 'window' in which one can have the action performed. And policy wise, there should obviously be exceptions for rape and incest.

As a right, it was a mangled attempt to stitch together a policy as a right. Not just a right, but a fundamental right. I cannot stand 'results based jurisprudence', which RvW truly is the apex example. But that is more properly left as a policy decision, and not one rooted as some Frankenstein monster of a fundamental right that was crafted to meet the policy onus of a court.

In short, the parallels between RvW and Dred Scott are large. And those two decisions alone should stand for why a court, any court, should be textualist in their work, and not policy-based.

Secondly, I am not on Board with your idea that something has to be overruled by a 'better vote'. The case that Brown overruled, Plessy v Ferguson, was itself a 7-1 decision. Nothing that bad should require an 8-0, 8-1, or 9-0 to get sunk. Plessy was simply *really bad* law.

As another example, the Dred Scott case was *another* 7-1 case. And Korematsu (the Japanese internment case) was a 6-3 case. None of those should be afforded a shield to be overturned, nor should they be afforded an advantage above their value as precedent.

(11-16-2022 10:01 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:57 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:46 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:27 PM)boss man Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  Congratulations, House control is hugely significant and you've won it! Have fun, we'll be in the other chamber making judges and giggling while the woefully inadequate for the task "my Kevin" McCarthy begs the horse-faced Georgian to let him be Speaker. And don't forget that an average modern midterm would have delivered 30 seats to the GOP last Tuesday alone, let alone a midterm with poor POTUS approval ratings and economic challenges like we face today.

Congrats on keeping the Senate under rat-faced Shumer. Be sure to keep the highly frustrated Manchin and rational Sinema in line.....LOL.

The Republicans will do better in 2024 with 21 Dem and 2 Ind. Senators running and only 10 Repubs.

Indeed, the Senate map in 2024 is far less favorable for us than the one last week. Lots of variables may help us like POTUS level turnout, Trump as the potential GOP nominee and putting reproductive rights on the ballot in every state that allows for ballot initiatives. But 2024 is absolutely a map with great potential for the GOP, if you can avoid some of your traditional candidate quality problems.

Manchin is fine, most Democrats understand that he is and has to be a WV Democrat to have any chance at winning in 2024. He is the last member of an otherwise extinct species, and when for whatever reason he is done that seat will be red foreseeably forever. And secretly I think a lot more Democrat Senators than we know often agree with his concerns, and appreciate when he puts the brakes on things. It doesn't hurt either that he is a friendly and likeable man who has good relationships with his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Sinema on the other hand, is just weird IMO. If you really want to flip a Senator, she's the one to target. I think she is and should be toast in the 2024 Democratic primary, other Democrats can potentially win in the Grand Canyon state unlike Manchin in WV. Her idiosyncrasies don't make sense like Manchin's concerns do - if not for her we'd have raised taxes higher on corporations and the wealthy as Manchin and every other Democrat wanted to. I'm not a fan of litmus tests, but when you aren't for raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy you're a very unique Democrat and I'm not sure who your base is.

Speaking of "reproductive rights" aren't you concerned with the rights of the unborn?

The fetus has a parasitic relationship to the mother. At what point is the fetus viable outside of the womb?

Or if you insists it is life, why does the GOP turn its back after birth? It is not pro-life. It is pro birth & anti choice.

Is this what your Mother thought of you?

If this comment is mainstream then we as a society are already doomed. This is the same dialogue of reasoning Stalin and Hitler used to exterminate the unwanted or those who dissented.

There must be a really black place in your heart where Satan rests. Hope you don't leave this life in the same place you are now.

Some kids are "Parasites" on their parents for the kid's entire life. Pure Evil. Prove me wrong.

It's early yet for predictions, but this looks like a pretty good one to me...

"Quote of the Day
November 17, 2022 at 10:41 am EST By Taegan Goddard 65 Comments

“The House Republican Conference will have the barest majority, rendered ungovernable by the lunatic likes of Matt Gaetz and Majorie Taylor Green. The self-sabotage of an ungovernable Republican majority will all but guarantee that Democrats take back the House in 2024.”

— Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), quoted by Vanity Fair."

https://politicalwire.com/2022/11/17/quo...-day-3382/

(11-17-2022 10:46 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Some kids are "Parasites" on their parents for the kid's entire life. Pure Evil. Prove me wrong.

Democrats are parasites for life

(11-17-2022 11:23 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  It's early yet for predictions, but this looks like a pretty good one to me...

"Quote of the Day
November 17, 2022 at 10:41 am EST By Taegan Goddard 65 Comments

“The House Republican Conference will have the barest majority, rendered ungovernable by the lunatic likes of Matt Gaetz and Majorie Taylor Green. The self-sabotage of an ungovernable Republican majority will all but guarantee that Democrats take back the House in 2024.”

— Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), quoted by Vanity Fair."

https://politicalwire.com/2022/11/17/quo...-day-3382/

So we just flip flop who controls the house and senate

Right now RCP has it 218-210. 5 CA seats are still uncalled. Somehow, the 3 the Republicans lead have a lower % counted than the called and the Democrat lead districts. One is still below 50%.

Alaska the Dem leads, but two Republicans combined have over 50%, so it will go to ranked choice. Broebert still leads narrowly in Colorado.

At least there is a mechanism to stop some garbage legislation.

Doesn't stop garbage EOs and judgeships.

(11-17-2022 07:10 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 02:13 AM)memtigbb Wrote:  All of the major European countries ban abortion after 14 weeks. Seems like a good place for us as well.

Just one of several issues where democrats are left of Europe.

Progressive ghouls.

(11-17-2022 12:58 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  At least there is a mechanism to stop some garbage legislation.

Doesn't stop garbage EOs and judgeships.

Republicans have learned, after being led by their Demo brethren, that lawfare is a fantastic weapon to use on EOs.

We are watching the 'lets forgive student debt' monster being smothered stillborn in its crib in this manner.

(11-16-2022 11:16 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 08:23 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 08:03 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:55 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Don't be an ass just because you're so good at it. I knew you weren't what you presented yourself as, namely a rational and reasonable democrat. How did I know? because there is no longer any such animal.

All of those are dead….

billy dazzle didn't last long ... this place can be hardcore ... that's a shame ... he was actually one of the last ol' blue dogs that I liked ... #irony

This place is more "Lord of the Flies" than anything else.....

And yet here you are, Piggy.

lol … he wants to be Ralph, and had my child been born with a pecker, I was going to name him, Jack … lol

@simonSays

(11-16-2022 11:19 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 11:01 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:53 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 10:01 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  At what point is the fetus viable outside of the womb?

Or if you insists it is life,

Being viable isnt life? That is a very false choice.

I assume you think persons on respirators are not alive?

Viability outside and environment, any environment, and 'life' are two separate issues. Its best if you keep them straight.

Hey now brah, it's 2022.... let them decide for themselves.

Who, the unborn child? Now they have a say in whether they live or die?

Joke, head, over.

(11-16-2022 07:26 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:04 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 06:44 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Since the last thread turned into a partisan pissing contest, as usual, let's start with this.

The Rs just formally won control of the House with 218 seats secured, with CA Repub Mike Garcia being declared a winner tonight.

Projections, if the remaining leads hold, are 221 R total, in the end, so a 7 seat majority, most likely.

If that's the case, Republicans will have gained 22 seats during the past two election cycles.

Congratulations, House control is hugely significant and you've won it! Have fun, we'll be in the other chamber making judges and giggling while the woefully inadequate for the task "my Kevin" McCarthy begs the horse-faced Georgian to let him be Speaker. And don't forget that an average modern midterm would have delivered 30 seats to the GOP last Tuesday alone, let alone a midterm with poor POTUS approval ratings and economic challenges like we face today.

Even if Walker wins and Manchin flips? He has a re-election in 2 years in a state that is 2 to 1 Republican.

And he’s already has an R challenger who sounds pretty legit.

Not an endorsement of Yertle, but he’s been working on getting Manchin to swap for years now.
If he managed to pull that off to stop this insanity on his way out, I’d chip in 10 bucks for a statue in City Hall.

No, I really would.


At the very least taking the House ends the 87,000 more bureaucrats rummaging through normal peoples trash cans and such. They’ve been a weaponized dishonest agency for decades now, we certainly don’t need any more of that.

(11-16-2022 07:46 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:27 PM)boss man Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:11 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:04 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 06:44 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Since the last thread turned into a partisan pissing contest, as usual, let's start with this.

The Rs just formally won control of the House with 218 seats secured, with CA Repub Mike Garcia being declared a winner tonight.

Projections, if the remaining leads hold, are 221 R total, in the end, so a 7 seat majority, most likely.

If that's the case, Republicans will have gained 22 seats during the past two election cycles.

Congratulations, House control is hugely significant and you've won it! Have fun, we'll be in the other chamber making judges and giggling while the woefully inadequate for the task "my Kevin" McCarthy begs the horse-faced Georgian to let him be Speaker. And don't forget that an average modern midterm would have delivered 30 seats to the GOP last Tuesday alone, let alone a midterm with poor POTUS approval ratings and economic challenges like we face today.

Congrats on keeping the Senate under rat-faced Shumer. Be sure to keep the highly frustrated Manchin and rational Sinema in line.....LOL.

The Republicans will do better in 2024 with 21 Dem and 2 Ind. Senators running and only 10 Repubs.

Indeed, the Senate map in 2024 is far less favorable for us than the one last week. Lots of variables may help us like POTUS level turnout, Trump as the potential GOP nominee and putting reproductive rights on the ballot in every state that allows for ballot initiatives. But 2024 is absolutely a map with great potential for the GOP, if you can avoid some of your traditional candidate quality problems.

Manchin is fine, most Democrats understand that he is and has to be a WV Democrat to have any chance at winning in 2024. He is the last member of an otherwise extinct species, and when for whatever reason he is done that seat will be red foreseeably forever. And secretly I think a lot more Democrat Senators than we know often agree with his concerns, and appreciate when he puts the brakes on things. It doesn't hurt either that he is a friendly and likeable man who has good relationships with his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Sinema on the other hand, is just weird IMO. If you really want to flip a Senator, she's the one to target. I think she is and should be toast in the 2024 Democratic primary, other Democrats can potentially win in the Grand Canyon state unlike Manchin in WV. Her idiosyncrasies don't make sense like Manchin's concerns do - if not for her we'd have raised taxes higher on corporations and the wealthy as Manchin and every other Democrat wanted to. I'm not a fan of litmus tests, but when you aren't for raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy you're a very unique Democrat and I'm not sure who your base is.

What’s your back of the napkin math guess on how much corporations pay in taxes?

The real answer may surprise you…

So what happened? Here's an analysis:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl...48483.html
"...1) The first is simply that candidates do matter. In the past decade, and especially after Trump’s win in 2016, it has become fashionable among pundits (including myself) to wave away candidate issues. This cycle, though, candidate quality seems to have made a comeback. This fits the data nicely: Vance running behind DeWine (who was seen as governing in a more bipartisan manner than perhaps he deserved); Walker running behind Kemp; Masters running behind Lake. In the House there were scores of candidates who lost in swing districts that they probably should have won, and as you list the names you start to see why: Joe Kent, J.R. Majewski, Karoline Leavitt, Vega, and so forth. Even Lauren Boebert came remarkably close to losing.

That many of these candidates were concentrated in swing seats didn’t help the Republicans’ cause, while better Republican candidates in bluer seats didn’t quite get the push they needed....

2) The second is that the Democrats’ “Biden +10 levee” held. All cycle long I referred back to the chart below, which shows the distribution of seats. Each bar is sized by the number of seats where Joe Biden received a certain job approval at each level. The red line reflects seats where Biden won 52% of the vote – roughly his national average. As you can see, there are just five seats there. But as Biden’s vote share improves, a large “levee” forms. At 55% Biden (roughly Biden +10 overall) there are a substantial number of seats available. Thus, if the national environment gets bad enough, a bunch of seats would fall rather quickly....

3) Finally, and perhaps most importantly, we don’t live in a nation with a system of government that guarantees proportional representation. ..."