2017: Whither Democrats?

In response to the pics of Beto in a band, someone found a picture from Ted Cruz’s high school yearbook:

But everyone loves mimes, right? They’re not at all creepy, somewhat like Ted Cruz?

But have you seen Cruz’ glorious portrayal of a mime? That’s worth at least 10 points for cruz right there.

Yeah, that’s a good strategy by the TX GOP. It’ll definitely secure the Gen X vote for Beto. Though I can’t vote in TX, it has inspired me to pull out my James CDs.


The ratio on that tweet is absolutely spectacular.

Last poll showed beto down 1, and I’d bet if the election were held today, Cruz would win by a 1-2 point margin.

To have a ratio, wouldn’t that tweet need at least one pro-Cruz reply? What a slaughter.

Looks like Cruz has Beto beat on the band-front.


He’s running …

OK, that’s funny. Since he’s wearing slacks and regular shoes, a staged photo op no doubt. Still, the man looks damned good for 75, especially after all he’s been through. BTW, I’ve had the pleasure of meeting him. One hell of a nice guy.

I liked Ted Cruz in that episode of The Office where he cuts the face off the CPR dummy and wears it like a mask.


The usual caveat that it’s just one poll but wow:

Fivethirtyeight has Dems at 80% to win the House now.

The interesting thing about that graph is that, at first glance, it doesn’t looks as bad as you might expect for the Republicans, but when you look closer, you notice that it is MUCH more likely that the Dems game gain >80 seats than that the GOP gain even a single seat.

We still have two months to go. Stop with all the optimism, it burns!

There’s still time to start a war or two. Hang in there Gordon.

This is … I don’t know what the correct adjective is.

Super-environmentalists are defined as people who identify the environment as one of their top priorities in surveys conducted by EVP. Whether or not you voted is a matter of public record. So, in the modern digital era, using “cutting-edge data analytics and predictive modeling tools,” as EVP does, it’s fairly straightforward to find non-voters and poll or survey them.

It turns out that some 15.8 million super-environmentalists were registered to vote in the 2014 midterm elections, but didn’t. Even in the 2016 presidential election, some 10.1 million didn’t vote

To dampen the optimism a bit, I heard Josh Baro make a great comment about the Dems having an 80% chance of taking the House: those are approximately the same odds as Russian Roulette (he was paraphrasing Nate Silver).

Definitely too early to relax. ;)

Even if the Dems win the House, the margin will be narrow. And we still have an insane person in the White House and, soon, an arch-conservative, activist Supreme Court. No reason for optimism.

If there are 100 million “superenvironmentalists”, then I would use “encouraging”.

If there are 20 million, then “disappointing”.

But since the EVP doesn’t bother to tell us how many superenvironmentalists there are, the correct adjective is “meaningless”.