The number of commercials for those two in CO was insane. Maybe the most I've ever seen. Can't imagine how much money they both spent. She was definitely trying to make herself seem not as liberal.dreyOO said:TAMUallen said:
Might be a House seat flip in Colorado?!?Holy shlit.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 9, 2024
Republican Gabe Evans just overtook the Democratic incumbent in Colorado's 8th district.
This could end up being a flip for the House GOP.
Trifecta for Trump imminent! pic.twitter.com/WSX3jxxdpH
That's incredible. They've been showing commercials like crazy and it was clear his opponent was distancing herself from the party on immigration especially. Let's go Colorado!!!
*****OFFICIAL 2024 ELECTION DAY THREAD*****
1,102,907 Views |
8901 Replies |
Last: 2 hrs ago by AtticusMatlock
The Dems in AK went BSC and won't write her in anymore. That's why they put in RCV.
Drahknor03 said:
The Dems in AK went BSC and won't write her in anymore. That's why they put in RCV.
They put in RCV to get an actual Democrat elected. They will vote for Murkowski over a Trump candidate.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Murkowski's team (w/ McConnell money) funded the RCV initiative.
Have any of your electoral predictions proven to be true this cycle?
nortex97 said:
Murkowski won't be able to run for/win re-election now, in Alaska (her term expires in 2028). It will be fun to see who Trump endorses there in late 2026 or so to primary her.Ranked choice went down to defeat in AZ, SC, and . . . ALASKA where it was repealed!
— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchwe94560) November 8, 2024
Great news. Let the commie states implement ranked choice.
She doesn't need ranked choice to win. She will run as a write in and Dems will cross over to vote for her like they did last time.
With different Senate leadership and a good candiate its not as simple as you seem to think, this election showed that. She is going to loseTeslag said:nortex97 said:
Murkowski won't be able to run for/win re-election now, in Alaska (her term expires in 2028). It will be fun to see who Trump endorses there in late 2026 or so to primary her.Ranked choice went down to defeat in AZ, SC, and . . . ALASKA where it was repealed!
— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchwe94560) November 8, 2024
Great news. Let the commie states implement ranked choice.
She doesn't need ranked choice to win. She will run as a write in and Dems will cross over to vote for her like they did last time.
In addition; between the sinaloa cartel, the mormons, and the deadbeat mCcain clan Kari Lake is enemy #1. Those 3 clans occupy a significant power (influence) base in AZ. These entities also likely helped defeat Mark Lamb in the Primaries.UntoldSpirit said:Not giving her any money, while supporting the loser Hogan in Maryland is also a big factor. McConnell is thankfully getting replaced.Ag06Law said:Captn_Ag05 said:
The last Maricopa makes the math a lot harder. It also shows how much she is lagging behind Trump.That 100k Maricopa batch that just dropped.
— The AZ - abc15 - Data Guru (@Garrett_Archer) November 9, 2024
Trump +11
Lake +2
Really highlights what a bad candidate she was. She'll go down in the long history of senate seats republicans have lost by running terrible candidates.
“You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me.”
- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Nothing wrong with ranked choice. It's the jungle primary that's the issue.nortex97 said:
Murkowski won't be able to run for/win re-election now, in Alaska (her term expires in 2028). It will be fun to see who Trump endorses there in late 2026 or so to primary her.Ranked choice went down to defeat in AZ, SC, and . . . ALASKA where it was repealed!
— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchwe94560) November 8, 2024
Great news. Let the commie states implement ranked choice.
samurai_science said:With different Senate leadership and a good candiate its not as simple as you seem to think, this election showed that. She is going to loseTeslag said:nortex97 said:
Murkowski won't be able to run for/win re-election now, in Alaska (her term expires in 2028). It will be fun to see who Trump endorses there in late 2026 or so to primary her.Ranked choice went down to defeat in AZ, SC, and . . . ALASKA where it was repealed!
— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchwe94560) November 8, 2024
Great news. Let the commie states implement ranked choice.
She doesn't need ranked choice to win. She will run as a write in and Dems will cross over to vote for her like they did last time.
In any other state I'd agree but Alaskans are weird about politics and they like her and her family name. She already won as a write in before when she lost the primary.
That's because Mitch basically refused to back the nominee over her. I think he felt loyalty to the family, first, but at this point I expect her to actually flip to join the Democrats.Quote:
In any other state I'd agree but Alaskans are weird about politics and they like her and her family name. She already won as a write in before when she lost the primary.
She's not popular at all among Alaska republicans, but has relied multiple cycles on Democrats voting for her to win. She says she will 'work with' Trump this time (but has never voted for him) where she wants credit for his policies (oil and gas drilling) but it will only/always be when her vote doesn't matter.
She's been in the Senate since 2002. Nobody needs to be there that long.
Susan Collins has held her seat since 1997. It's the definition of career politician.
Susan Collins has held her seat since 1997. It's the definition of career politician.
Quote:
That's because Mitch basically refused to back the nominee over her. I think he felt loyalty to the family, first, but at this point I expect her to actually flip to join the Democrats.
Wrong election.
Murkowski won a write in campaign in 2010 against Republican Joe Miller.
If you get the bold, why care the italics - where she cast her single vote. There may be full-on Democrat Hill members willing to do the same. That will suffice.nortex97 said:That's because Mitch basically refused to back the nominee over her. I think he felt loyalty to the family, first, but at this point I expect her to actually flip to join the Democrats.Quote:
In any other state I'd agree but Alaskans are weird about politics and they like her and her family name. She already won as a write in before when she lost the primary.
She's not popular at all among Alaska republicans, but has relied multiple cycles on Democrats voting for her to win. She says she will 'work with' Trump this time (but has never voted for him) where she wants credit for his policies (oil and gas drilling) but it will only/always be when her vote doesn't matter.
Took in only about 1/3, but offering to pay off Dems debts.
JUST IN: President-elect Donald Trump offers to help the Democrats pay remaining campaign debts for the sake of "desperately needed unity"
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 9, 2024
"They are being squeezed by vendors and others." pic.twitter.com/Q0XCc13647
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
jt2hunt said:
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
It's a slap in the face.. he's not being benevolent
Humble taunt
jt2hunt said:
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
Trump buying democrats to sell them second hand.
X was born on October 28, 2022 and should be a national holiday.
Might be worth a gesture if directed to those that didn't act like Schiff and Pelosi types. Reward any who might have voted with, or even just called for more time or reductions before passing some bad law. In short, any that may have acted like they were thinking of America rather than their wallet or manufactured grievance.jt2hunt said:
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
Aggies1322 said:jt2hunt said:
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
It's a slap in the face.. he's not being benevolent
Agreed. He's trolling them. No Dem will take him up on that.
Trump will fix it.
techno-ag said:Aggies1322 said:jt2hunt said:
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
It's a slap in the face.. he's not being benevolent
Agreed. He's trolling them. No Dem will take him up on that.
The borrower is the slave of the lender and the Democrats know it. Even the devil can quote the scriptures.
It's lose/lose for the Dems.
Take the money and you get made fun of for taking money from a guy you have been calling Hitler for almost a decade.
Refuse the money and be called out for not accepting his olive branch…
Take the money and you get made fun of for taking money from a guy you have been calling Hitler for almost a decade.
Refuse the money and be called out for not accepting his olive branch…
Also might be an FEC violation, I think.
Aggies1322 said:jt2hunt said:
**** that. There won't be any unity you could fuind their whole ****ing campaign and they're still wouldn't be any unity. They only care about one thing and that's ****ing winning by any means necessary.
It's a slap in the face.. he's not being benevolent
Yep, this is classic Caesar mentality. Make them indebted to you.
Yall…that was "Trump" for "your liberal media can't help itself but give me free advertising, so thanks…"
FireAg said:
Yall…that was "Trump" for "your liberal media can't help itself but give me free advertising, so thanks…"
Kinda.. earned media in this sense likely refers to podcasts/alternative media. He's saying that going on Rogan has a significantly better ROI than your 3,000,000th political ad on TV.
It looks like Kari Lake’s path has dwindled to almost zero with the latest Maricopa drop.
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 9, 2024
We will keep watching, but I don’t see it. It is commendable she made it this far.
Maricopa County posted 15,491 votes in the US Senate contest. This is how they broke:
— The AZ - abc15 - Data Guru (@Garrett_Archer) November 9, 2024
Gallego 53.4
Lake 43.9
Gallego net 1,481 and now leads Lake by 33,898
There are 350k estimated outstanding ballots in the county.
It was a bad drop, but a relatively small one, so too early to call her dead.
Most of this batch was from Gallego's congressional district.
— The AZ - abc15 - Data Guru (@Garrett_Archer) November 9, 2024
We are also dealing with a lot of in-person early voting, hence the clustering.
Still, Lake's problem is a lot of these later voters are coming from less friendly regions of the county. https://t.co/yKs4tXg7iw
Strange deal where there are tens of thousands more votes for the Green party in the Senate race than the Presidential race or the combined House races.
Hey ‘Data guru’ can you explain this anomaly? https://t.co/fX5sMeB1j0
— #MAHA 🌸🩸 (@Cat2222F) November 9, 2024
Featured Stories
See All
A&M at risk of undercut when undertaking trip to underrated Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
48:02
10h ago
3.0k
5:59
7h ago
1.2k
16:53
11h ago
2.6k
Captain Hindsight 20/20
WTF is Texas Aggies United doing with this post….
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
65