Tecmo Super Bowl III: Final Edition is about the most real title you can think of. Yes, it's the final edition of the trilogy for the SNES. They actually did make one for the PlayStation, which I haven't physically played but it didn't sell well so maybe look into that for how it is? Anyway, the third edition for Tecmo is honestly the best of the three and it is also the best of the football games on SNES. That may not seem like much, given how lackluster I felt about the Madden 96 review, but the Tecmo game is probably the highest of the video games for football that I could rate. That's going based on a lot of different factors. However, there are a lot of flaws with this game as well. How did I feel about it?
Positives:
1. Nearly all players listed: Now there are some players not on here. But that's because of personal preference. This game had the NFL license. Same with Madden, NFL QB Club and others, but it still was up to the player to reject it. It became a thing more with the PS1/N64 and other platforms to get your name on the game. So due respect as it was.
2. Some teams are perfectly put on the game: It's weird, but roll with me. Some teams are perfectly built here. Dallas, San Francisco, and GB were the three best teams in the NFC in 1995 and played like it. Detroit was a playoff team and played like it. Cleveland was a legit Super Bowl contender (if they didn't move) and played like it. Others like Houston were bad and played like it. There is a catch to this however and I will dive on that.
3. Ability to sign/trade: The final edition got this right. Though I didn't trade or sign anyone, you can definitely do so if you wanted. If you wanted a stacked Browns team, you could. Or more stacked Dallas team, you could. Just give it a go and see what you could do in terms of Free Agency or trading players all around.
4. Improved graphics: This is more of a comparison to the other two, but the third has the best graphics to make it a realistic enough feeling for what the super Nintendo would have in terms of a football game. It's obviously something the PS1 and other consoles do better on but this game probably is the best in terms of graphics with the SNES for football.
Negatives:
1. Not all teas are perfectly put: Yep, like I said I would have a catch to this. GB was a formidable Super Bowl contender (lost to Dallas in the NFCCG in the 1995 season) but Seattle and Oakland were not and they were in the title game, which Seattle was in the Super Bowl. Seattle's QB was Rick Mirer. However, they had a decent defense so that's not the bad thing.
2. Good luck playing defense: Yes the NFL is a guessing game, but you can be better than like 15 percent of guessing plays on defense. On top of that, even if you guess right the players on this game may not even play the defender correctly. This was enormously frustrating throughout and thought this was a downgrade actually from the second Tecmo game. There were many shootouts to say the least.
3. How Godly the Browns were: Okay, how on Earth did they not win it all in my simulation? Not sure because when the time I played them, they were all jacked it seemed on stats and attributes. Look, the Browns in 1995 were screwed by their owner moving the team and announcing it mid-season. Maybe Tecmo wanted to make sure they got what they deserved (a likely Super Bowl effort) in spite of that? It's possible. But holy cow, I should have played as the Browns because everyone is insanely good.
Comparisons to the second Tecmo game:
To compare to the first is very unfair, as the third is better all around. So we'll compare to the second game.
1. Defensively, it goes to the second game. You can play defense on that game better.
2. Graphically, the third is the best of all the SNES football games, so the third gets it.
3. Fluidity of game-play goes to the third game as well. It's less choppy though the second is quite fine at game-play as well
So how does this game rate? Well it's easily the best of the games on the SNES for football. As far as overall rating, it's probably an 8.2 or so. However, it barely gets into the top 100 of games on SNES. There are plenty more sports games overall better on the SNES than Tecmo III. I would put it maybe 98 or 99 on the list. However, this is the best of the games for football on the SNES.
Saturday, February 2, 2019
Saturday, January 12, 2019
SNES Game Review: Madden NFL 96
There was a time that Madden wasn't the best video game for football on the market, or really the only game on the market. Way back when, say oh the 90's, there were a LOT of video games for Sega and the system that I have, the SNES. That also went to Playstation and PS2 for some extent but primarily going to focus on the SNES, as you can clearly see the title of the review. This is technically the fourth of six games for the SNES that deals with the Madden series (John Madden Football, followed up with Madden's 94-98.) That in mind, the games did have it's share of partners with EA Sports in their endeavors. This was with Visual Concepts. To put this modestly, it has a lot of ups and downs. So how does this game turn out? Let's see below.
Positives:
1. The running game is powerful enough to get to the Super Bowl for you in this game. Yes, there's a specific reason and yes I will highlight it below. But the running game is good for you in this facet.
2. At the end of games, you get to see a highlight of a different game if you want, with the exception of the playoffs. It's kinda neat that they have that sorta game break in there kind of like the FOX Sports thing in real life.
3. More features than most games around this time. It has sign a player (free agency sort of), trade players, create a player, combine (sort of) and more. It is only combined with Tecmo Super Bowl III about the features that come along for the games.
4. The playbook is expansive, yet simple to understand. There isn't terminology that is overtly confusing and the diagram essentially helps the player out.
Negatives:
1. The passing game is awful, minus screen plays, so you have to rely on the running game. This really isn't fixed on Madden 97 either as I play it now. It's an honest shame that they didn't get this sorted at the time or the game would be miles better.
2. Anytime you throw a pass and it isn't completed, you have a quagmire of players in a mess so this was something that hampered the game. Also about every other pass is batted down at the line of scrimmage.
3. Realism of game is very shoddy. The Cardinals didn't do better than 8-8 at this time, but they were in the divisional playoffs. The Packers easily can win the Super Bowl. So yeah, it's not a very realistic game in terms of difficulty.
4. You can get by on about 4-5 defensive plays.. in a season. Yeah.. that's not really a great thing so another negative.
In all, this game is at best average, at worst below average. It isn't terrible, but in all honesty, the three Tecmo games are better in addition to at least 2-3 other games, including both NFL QB Club games. There are some things to like but not enough to give it a good/great rating.
Final rating: 5.5/10. If I threw a number out there overall, 400th would make sense.
Positives:
1. The running game is powerful enough to get to the Super Bowl for you in this game. Yes, there's a specific reason and yes I will highlight it below. But the running game is good for you in this facet.
2. At the end of games, you get to see a highlight of a different game if you want, with the exception of the playoffs. It's kinda neat that they have that sorta game break in there kind of like the FOX Sports thing in real life.
3. More features than most games around this time. It has sign a player (free agency sort of), trade players, create a player, combine (sort of) and more. It is only combined with Tecmo Super Bowl III about the features that come along for the games.
4. The playbook is expansive, yet simple to understand. There isn't terminology that is overtly confusing and the diagram essentially helps the player out.
Negatives:
1. The passing game is awful, minus screen plays, so you have to rely on the running game. This really isn't fixed on Madden 97 either as I play it now. It's an honest shame that they didn't get this sorted at the time or the game would be miles better.
2. Anytime you throw a pass and it isn't completed, you have a quagmire of players in a mess so this was something that hampered the game. Also about every other pass is batted down at the line of scrimmage.
3. Realism of game is very shoddy. The Cardinals didn't do better than 8-8 at this time, but they were in the divisional playoffs. The Packers easily can win the Super Bowl. So yeah, it's not a very realistic game in terms of difficulty.
4. You can get by on about 4-5 defensive plays.. in a season. Yeah.. that's not really a great thing so another negative.
In all, this game is at best average, at worst below average. It isn't terrible, but in all honesty, the three Tecmo games are better in addition to at least 2-3 other games, including both NFL QB Club games. There are some things to like but not enough to give it a good/great rating.
Final rating: 5.5/10. If I threw a number out there overall, 400th would make sense.
Lambeau Field: Always Historic
When you think Lambeau Field, you think history. You think of Lombardi and of the duels of snow and cold in November and December. Of Hornung and Taylor running through Cleveland in a mud and snow slogged field in 1965. You think of NFL Films with John Facenda and Harry Kalas. You think the Ice Bowl. The greatest block in NFL history (Jerry Kramer on Jethro Pugh in said Ice Bowl) to help Green Bay win a record three straight NFL championships. You think of massive winning streaks with Brett Favre in weather under 32 degrees (kinda ironic since he was from a warm state.) You think of Majik in 1989. Of Hail Marys that were full of grace from Aaron Rodgers in playoff games. Also, related note, they have their Hall of Fame on the premises so that's another reason for the history. I had gotten the chance a few times in the past to go to Lambeau Field and I wrote at the time about it, but this probably goes more in-depth because I like to explain everything seemingly.
Alright, so where to start? Let's start with the fact that the two games I went to were the Falcons and.. well the freaking Cardinals game (that one where Mike McCarthy was fired, yes.) Word to the wise, do not park on grass in rain/snow conditions, that pretty much blows. Save the 20 or more bucks and just park on the street somewhere for free. Aside from the absolutely god awful performance of the team against Arizona, the stadium was in okay shape given the fact that the weather really didn't match what the forecasts were saying. The only gripe I would have with the stadium is there really is no drainage in the rows so the water stands. I suspect the reasoning for that is it presents a hazard, also the stadium layout plays a role in it as well but it is something to lay out so you aren't stepping in every puddle ever. Also, it was funny to laugh at all the drunk buffoons not know how to engage a step. For the Atlanta game, there weren't many qualms but the one thing I will say is there isn't a lot of space to navigate when with about 80,000 people in the stadium. That isn't something new considering most stadiums are like that. More or less just the norm.
So what's good about Lambeau? Like I said, history. The moment you get there, you feel a part of that history. The fan shop is gigantic in the atrium with a lot of different stuff you can get. The atrium itself is actually warm (thank you for allowing us to warm up and dry out in that Arizona game) and has a ton of televisions so you can watch the games going on. Also, the bathrooms have the radio broadcast so you aren't too far behind. The food is pretty good, with plenty of choices. That same can be said for whatever drink you'd like to choose. Also, when the stadium district is finished, it'll look super awesome. So is there anything that isn't good?
If I were to throw something up and say improve these things at Lambeau it is these, make the food better quality, as while good it isn't mind-blowing good. Same goes with waiting for bathrooms. The lines can be super long really at any point it seemed when I went both times. Also, better Wi-Fi access. Yes, fans like being on their phones checking probably fantasy football and since this isn't a baseball game with batted balls to look out for in terms of safety, there's almost no reason not to combine with a internet company to have strong enough Wi-Fi for 80,000 plus people. All in all though, not too many qualms with Lambeau.
I would always, 100 percent recommend going to Lambeau. If you are around it, just take a picture of it. It's always a good time to be at the field and being around so many fans. It's a unique place, in a unique atmosphere. But always one I cherish every single time I go up to Green Bay. There is a lot to behold with it but overall, yes do visit Lambeau Field to go to a game.
Alright, so where to start? Let's start with the fact that the two games I went to were the Falcons and.. well the freaking Cardinals game (that one where Mike McCarthy was fired, yes.) Word to the wise, do not park on grass in rain/snow conditions, that pretty much blows. Save the 20 or more bucks and just park on the street somewhere for free. Aside from the absolutely god awful performance of the team against Arizona, the stadium was in okay shape given the fact that the weather really didn't match what the forecasts were saying. The only gripe I would have with the stadium is there really is no drainage in the rows so the water stands. I suspect the reasoning for that is it presents a hazard, also the stadium layout plays a role in it as well but it is something to lay out so you aren't stepping in every puddle ever. Also, it was funny to laugh at all the drunk buffoons not know how to engage a step. For the Atlanta game, there weren't many qualms but the one thing I will say is there isn't a lot of space to navigate when with about 80,000 people in the stadium. That isn't something new considering most stadiums are like that. More or less just the norm.
So what's good about Lambeau? Like I said, history. The moment you get there, you feel a part of that history. The fan shop is gigantic in the atrium with a lot of different stuff you can get. The atrium itself is actually warm (thank you for allowing us to warm up and dry out in that Arizona game) and has a ton of televisions so you can watch the games going on. Also, the bathrooms have the radio broadcast so you aren't too far behind. The food is pretty good, with plenty of choices. That same can be said for whatever drink you'd like to choose. Also, when the stadium district is finished, it'll look super awesome. So is there anything that isn't good?
If I were to throw something up and say improve these things at Lambeau it is these, make the food better quality, as while good it isn't mind-blowing good. Same goes with waiting for bathrooms. The lines can be super long really at any point it seemed when I went both times. Also, better Wi-Fi access. Yes, fans like being on their phones checking probably fantasy football and since this isn't a baseball game with batted balls to look out for in terms of safety, there's almost no reason not to combine with a internet company to have strong enough Wi-Fi for 80,000 plus people. All in all though, not too many qualms with Lambeau.
I would always, 100 percent recommend going to Lambeau. If you are around it, just take a picture of it. It's always a good time to be at the field and being around so many fans. It's a unique place, in a unique atmosphere. But always one I cherish every single time I go up to Green Bay. There is a lot to behold with it but overall, yes do visit Lambeau Field to go to a game.
Wednesday, December 5, 2018
Fiserv Forum: Absolutely Incredible
Yes, I am lacking in the remote idea of a creative title these days. Yes, I realize I should be better than what I am in that department. However, I would be smitten if I didn't state that this title is pretty self explanatory. I finally (okay the area only has been operable since September, but given I went in mid-November, it seemed like years) got to go to the new Fiserv Forum. Most will remember this as the new Bucks arena in Milwaukee. For myself, it's the new ray of hope that kept the Bucks from going to Seattle (Seriously NBA, just give that city a stupid expansion team and quit the stupid relocation idea for every team.) I was on board with a new arena right from the off and was so glad that they got the arena. Below is what I think of the arena itself, the Bucks product, the concessions, and a feature of the arena district.
The arena from the outside seems like a great concept. Much ado about the roof about this arena was made but no one could tell it from the outside. From the outside, you look at a brightly lit arena with a very cool exterior. As you get closer to it, you see a masterwork in construction. The inside however, it can be a bit confusing to start if you haven't been there. You have to go different places to get to the upper level but it is easy as time goes on. The arena itself, it's much wider than the old Bradley Center. This is such a better idea because I didn't have to act small to get through a line anywhere (and yes that'll be a complaint I have for Lambeau Field.) I am glad for the wide concourses. So this is a massive plus to me. Now what do I think of the food/drinks?
The food is massively so much better than anything the Bradley Center had to offer. I personally had chicken, fries, ice cream and a hamburger through the game and it is so much better than anything the Bradley Center had. Yes it may have been with a slightly higher price but I am willing to pay for that with a better product, which is evident with the Fiserv Forum food. The drinks vary with what you want, but it is typically Coke products and it has a vast array of different alcoholic stands for those drinks. However, do expect regular arena prices for any of that. Now was about the product on the court itself?
The Bucks played Chicago on this Friday night, which was nationally televised by ESPN. The Bucks started very poorly, with Chicago getting as much as a 22-point lead in the first half. However, the Bucks in the second half turned the script on the Bulls and ended up winning by 20 plus points. The Bucks starting in the Fiserv Forum is made to happen as this is a place that the Bucks want to bring basketball back to high marks in the city of Milwaukee and to where they can compete for a championship. It has been a good year thus far to start for Milwaukee and they intend to keep it going for years to come. But the arena comes with one more separate twist, and that is outside.
The arena district is a bunch of different stores, restaurants and bars along with corporate space to do this with the arena around. This is similar to what Green Bay has going on, what St. Louis did with the Cardinals and what others are now doing around the nation. The Bucks came with the idea, which has stuck with the public and will look amazing when it is full with businesses and people. I think it is a fantastic idea for the people of Milwaukee to have things all year round and when there is a concert, Bucks game, Marquette game or different things going on to be able to see all around the arena and the district around this. I feel this is a very important part to the growth of Fiserv Forum going forward.
All in all, the Bucks and the city of Milwaukee has struck gold with Fiserv Forum. This will be a huge boom for the Bucks on the court and the fans because of the amount of amenities and the ability to be part of the process for the Bucks, or a concert or different things. It's a huge part to the downtown area because of the district that will be terrific when it is full. I feel Milwaukee and the Bucks should feel amazing going forward with this new arena and should be very glad that this got done.
The arena from the outside seems like a great concept. Much ado about the roof about this arena was made but no one could tell it from the outside. From the outside, you look at a brightly lit arena with a very cool exterior. As you get closer to it, you see a masterwork in construction. The inside however, it can be a bit confusing to start if you haven't been there. You have to go different places to get to the upper level but it is easy as time goes on. The arena itself, it's much wider than the old Bradley Center. This is such a better idea because I didn't have to act small to get through a line anywhere (and yes that'll be a complaint I have for Lambeau Field.) I am glad for the wide concourses. So this is a massive plus to me. Now what do I think of the food/drinks?
The food is massively so much better than anything the Bradley Center had to offer. I personally had chicken, fries, ice cream and a hamburger through the game and it is so much better than anything the Bradley Center had. Yes it may have been with a slightly higher price but I am willing to pay for that with a better product, which is evident with the Fiserv Forum food. The drinks vary with what you want, but it is typically Coke products and it has a vast array of different alcoholic stands for those drinks. However, do expect regular arena prices for any of that. Now was about the product on the court itself?
The Bucks played Chicago on this Friday night, which was nationally televised by ESPN. The Bucks started very poorly, with Chicago getting as much as a 22-point lead in the first half. However, the Bucks in the second half turned the script on the Bulls and ended up winning by 20 plus points. The Bucks starting in the Fiserv Forum is made to happen as this is a place that the Bucks want to bring basketball back to high marks in the city of Milwaukee and to where they can compete for a championship. It has been a good year thus far to start for Milwaukee and they intend to keep it going for years to come. But the arena comes with one more separate twist, and that is outside.
The arena district is a bunch of different stores, restaurants and bars along with corporate space to do this with the arena around. This is similar to what Green Bay has going on, what St. Louis did with the Cardinals and what others are now doing around the nation. The Bucks came with the idea, which has stuck with the public and will look amazing when it is full with businesses and people. I think it is a fantastic idea for the people of Milwaukee to have things all year round and when there is a concert, Bucks game, Marquette game or different things going on to be able to see all around the arena and the district around this. I feel this is a very important part to the growth of Fiserv Forum going forward.
All in all, the Bucks and the city of Milwaukee has struck gold with Fiserv Forum. This will be a huge boom for the Bucks on the court and the fans because of the amount of amenities and the ability to be part of the process for the Bucks, or a concert or different things. It's a huge part to the downtown area because of the district that will be terrific when it is full. I feel Milwaukee and the Bucks should feel amazing going forward with this new arena and should be very glad that this got done.
Wednesday, November 14, 2018
Election 2018: The Aftermath
Amidst the continuing 9 House of Representative races still unbeknownst of a call for either a Democrat or Republican, we can essentially say the Democrats will win the House of Representatives and the Republicans the Senate unless all sorts of post-election chaos happened i.e.: A post-apocalyptic world. So how do we summarize one of the more important mid-term elections in recent history? Well take a gander with me here my friends and we'll go through it step by step!
1. A chance lost or a lost chance?- This might be Senate Democrats question in ways as they lost three Senate seats on Election Night in the states of Missouri, Indiana and North Dakota. They fielded candidates that won those seats in 2012, only for one reason or another to find their luck ran dry in this election. That is most noted with Claire McAskill from Missouri. In 2006, she eked out a win over Jim Talent. In 2012, she benefited from Todd Akin being.. well.. dumb. This time, Josh Hawley didn't have a significant drop-off of Republicans and he wasn't completely controversial and it paid off beating McAskill. Joe Donnelly was succumbed to the political nature of Indiana, same with Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota. That, along with likely Bill Nelson's defeat in Florida, will have Democrats rue this mid-term on the Senate side for a while.
2. A door opened or an already opened door?- On the flip side however of that, the Democrats took down Dean Heller in Nevada and won a senate seat in Arizona. That is significant because even if Florida goes to Republican Rick Scott and the Mississippi run-off goes to the Republican as well, the worst the Democrats will be is 53-47 down going to the 2020 elections. With likely only one or two embattled Democrats on the ticket in 2020, and one is Doug Jones from Alabama, the stage is set to try to get a +5 advantage of the likely 7-8 battleground seats in the Senate in 2020. The Republicans had the turf advantage this go round. However, it's the Democrats who own the field possession two years from now, and there are many embattled Republicans on the docket. If the Democrats can field a strong field of Senators for 2020, this could change hands very quickly in four years.
3. Great Escapes- So this election season saw some impressive escapes. Assuming Rick Scott pulls it out over Bill Nelson, he would have escaped a massively narrowing margin that was favoring Nelson towards the end. Ditto Bruce Poliquin in Maine's Second House District, who has been deadlocked with Jared Golden most of that campaign. Same can also be said for Rob Woodall if he holds the Seventh District in Georgia. But none may compare to Democrat Jon Tester in Montana who was losing through the night to Matt Rosendale only to pull it out on Wednesday afternoon in an escape to stay in the Senate for six more years.
4. Voting Rights- Okay I have to lay a gavel hammer down here. I am so sick of the idea that a nation has to have a government try to restrict voting rights. It's infuriating, and in all honesty it should be unconstitutional every single second of every day of the week. I am also sick of seeing people wait 2-6 hours in line. I applaud judges for the ability to tell people to vote and stay in line, but this shouldn't have to go like this in a country as advanced as the United States. This is on states as well. It's not just the federal government. The states need to be accountable to make sure polling places are up to date, are ADA compliant, and if not then to get them to be by means possible. Closing polling places does nothing to help the fabric of the institutional right to vote in this country. It's actually horrid that this conversation has to be put in, but damnit I am tired of people still in 2018 fighting for their exercised right to vote in this country. End the stupid discussion, and let those eligible to vote then vote and stop with the blasphemous garbage to try to prevent them from doing so.
5. The Presidential Field?- Okay, okay this was going to be the overarching story but I seriously hate posting this because I was more excited about what actually happened on Election Night and the days that have followed. Obviously, the GOP person is likely Trump, unless there is a massive overreach of the power of the GOP to get him out. The tricky scenario is who is the Democrats leader? Is it Beto O'Rourke? Andrew Gillum? Joe Biden? Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, or someone else? We have two years to figure this all out.
6. The House is a disaster for the Republicans- Okay, okay I am blasting Republicans it seems here, and I PROMISE it'll get better (maybe?) but this is honestly point forward. So the House was in Republican control, and in a fell swoop on Election Night, that was gone. There were surprises, like NY-11, OK-5 and SC-1. There were expected seats, like all in Pennsylvania, some in California, and Florida. However, of the toss-ups, no one expected nearly all the California toss-ups to go to the Democrats. No one also expected all but one of the toss-up VA seats to go to the Democrats. The rough range was likely 224-226 for the Democrats. They are going to surpass the 230 mark. How far over is still uncertain. But they still could take UT-04, NJ-3 (Tom McArthur's seat) and a couple more. If it weren't for likely a data entry error, GA-7 is possible to the Democrats as well. And that isn't saying for much on Chris Collins and Duncan Hunter, who are likely to go to prison for their legal issues. All of this.. is also during an age where there is extreme gerrymandering in many states. The Republicans held 33 governor seats prior to the 2018 midterms so they held a lot of the re-districting rights. Now.. the Republicans couldn't hold seats they likely could have won. And they suffered the ultimate defeat for it because now the Democrats can do a lot of work in a House they not only have a majority in, but likely lead by thirty seats.
7. What a night in Gubernatorial Races- First to the Republican side, they kept popular governors there, Charlie Baker, Larry Hogan, Phil Scott in the Northeast. There likely won't be much that gets done in redistricting there as it'll be tough since all three of those states are widely Democratic anyway. However, that doesn't all do it for Republicans. Mike DeWine beat Richard Cordray in Ohio, beating a powerful Democrat that could have sent another major shockwave. Ron DeSantis appears to be willing to hold off Andrew Gillum in Florida, preventing a major shockwave again. And it appears Brian Kemp could hold off Stacey Abrams from a run-off election in December..
8. However.. that is about the extent of the Republicans success: The major successes of the night happened on the flip side of this for gubernatorial races. Starting up the coast in Maine, Janet Mills flipped that to Democrat. Ned Lamont held off a fierce Republican challenge to win Connecticut after very deeply unpopular Dannel Malloy left office. Toward the Midwest, it got bad for Republicans really, really quickly. J.B. Pritzker ran away with the Illinois race, an expected rout for the Democrats. Gretchen Whitmer won in Michigan, after a deeply unpopular Republican Rick Snyder was term-limited. Out west, New Mexico took Michelle Grisham to the Governor's Mansion in another flip. In Nevada, Steve Sisolak upset Adam Laxalt to retake the Democrats control in that Gubernatorial race. However, the two shockwaves happened in the Midwest. Laura Kelly beat Kris Kobach in Kansas and Tony Evers upset Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Kelly's win was significant due to the hostility of what Kobach represented. The Evers' upset represented how much more coordinated the Democrats have become in four years in the state.
9. Women bust records but so do LGBTQ+ candidates: Women are no longer just the backmarker in politics, and given how men have operated the White House the last couple of years and essentially Congress forever it might not be a bad idea for a massive change. Women have set high markers in the House this mid-term and by 2020 should set more markers in the Senate. The all-time highs can also be attributed to the state houses and senates across the nation. However, LGBTQ+ candidates on Election Night and afterward had a terrific night. Openly gay Democrat Jared Polis was elected governor of Colorado, openly gay Senator Tammy Baldwin was re-elected. However, openly gay Sharice Davids won a House race in Kansas of all places. Bisexual candidates Katie Hill and Kyrsten Sinema won their races in California and Arizona respectively. This also goes with different ethnic groups winning for the first times ever. Native Americans, Latinas and Somali-Americans will be introduced to Congress as House members for the first time, and oh yeah they are women too. Women won Gubernatorial races as well. The aforementioned Grisham, Whitmer, Kelly and Mills and Iowa Republican Kim Reynolds join the fray. Ditto with Kate Brown in Oregon, Kay Ivey in Alabama, and Kristi Noem in South Dakota. Like I said, if men cannot do the job, then women should be capable of doing a better job.
10. The Heartbreak stories: Without Election Night, there would be no Cinderella stories in politics (see really most of the above for that, plus some others I didn't mention) but then there wouldn't be the heartbreak stories that can evolve over a campaign. There are many but none bigger than Beto O'Rourke. The Texas Democrat who represented El Paso in the House of Representatives spent the better part of a year in every county, 254 to be exact, traveling to different people in the state. Some are more likely than others to vote for him. However, he was determined and fired up. In the second debate against Ted Cruz, he was fiercely aggressive to the point that the next day he apologized for that. When the votes were tallying up, he was in a dead heat a lot of the night against Cruz. But with about 80 percent of the vote in the state, it was announced that Cruz would win. It was a brutal reminder that sometimes these stories are buried.
If I missed anything, let me know! Before we know it, 2020 is around the corner and those damn political ads will be at it again!
1. A chance lost or a lost chance?- This might be Senate Democrats question in ways as they lost three Senate seats on Election Night in the states of Missouri, Indiana and North Dakota. They fielded candidates that won those seats in 2012, only for one reason or another to find their luck ran dry in this election. That is most noted with Claire McAskill from Missouri. In 2006, she eked out a win over Jim Talent. In 2012, she benefited from Todd Akin being.. well.. dumb. This time, Josh Hawley didn't have a significant drop-off of Republicans and he wasn't completely controversial and it paid off beating McAskill. Joe Donnelly was succumbed to the political nature of Indiana, same with Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota. That, along with likely Bill Nelson's defeat in Florida, will have Democrats rue this mid-term on the Senate side for a while.
2. A door opened or an already opened door?- On the flip side however of that, the Democrats took down Dean Heller in Nevada and won a senate seat in Arizona. That is significant because even if Florida goes to Republican Rick Scott and the Mississippi run-off goes to the Republican as well, the worst the Democrats will be is 53-47 down going to the 2020 elections. With likely only one or two embattled Democrats on the ticket in 2020, and one is Doug Jones from Alabama, the stage is set to try to get a +5 advantage of the likely 7-8 battleground seats in the Senate in 2020. The Republicans had the turf advantage this go round. However, it's the Democrats who own the field possession two years from now, and there are many embattled Republicans on the docket. If the Democrats can field a strong field of Senators for 2020, this could change hands very quickly in four years.
3. Great Escapes- So this election season saw some impressive escapes. Assuming Rick Scott pulls it out over Bill Nelson, he would have escaped a massively narrowing margin that was favoring Nelson towards the end. Ditto Bruce Poliquin in Maine's Second House District, who has been deadlocked with Jared Golden most of that campaign. Same can also be said for Rob Woodall if he holds the Seventh District in Georgia. But none may compare to Democrat Jon Tester in Montana who was losing through the night to Matt Rosendale only to pull it out on Wednesday afternoon in an escape to stay in the Senate for six more years.
4. Voting Rights- Okay I have to lay a gavel hammer down here. I am so sick of the idea that a nation has to have a government try to restrict voting rights. It's infuriating, and in all honesty it should be unconstitutional every single second of every day of the week. I am also sick of seeing people wait 2-6 hours in line. I applaud judges for the ability to tell people to vote and stay in line, but this shouldn't have to go like this in a country as advanced as the United States. This is on states as well. It's not just the federal government. The states need to be accountable to make sure polling places are up to date, are ADA compliant, and if not then to get them to be by means possible. Closing polling places does nothing to help the fabric of the institutional right to vote in this country. It's actually horrid that this conversation has to be put in, but damnit I am tired of people still in 2018 fighting for their exercised right to vote in this country. End the stupid discussion, and let those eligible to vote then vote and stop with the blasphemous garbage to try to prevent them from doing so.
5. The Presidential Field?- Okay, okay this was going to be the overarching story but I seriously hate posting this because I was more excited about what actually happened on Election Night and the days that have followed. Obviously, the GOP person is likely Trump, unless there is a massive overreach of the power of the GOP to get him out. The tricky scenario is who is the Democrats leader? Is it Beto O'Rourke? Andrew Gillum? Joe Biden? Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, or someone else? We have two years to figure this all out.
6. The House is a disaster for the Republicans- Okay, okay I am blasting Republicans it seems here, and I PROMISE it'll get better (maybe?) but this is honestly point forward. So the House was in Republican control, and in a fell swoop on Election Night, that was gone. There were surprises, like NY-11, OK-5 and SC-1. There were expected seats, like all in Pennsylvania, some in California, and Florida. However, of the toss-ups, no one expected nearly all the California toss-ups to go to the Democrats. No one also expected all but one of the toss-up VA seats to go to the Democrats. The rough range was likely 224-226 for the Democrats. They are going to surpass the 230 mark. How far over is still uncertain. But they still could take UT-04, NJ-3 (Tom McArthur's seat) and a couple more. If it weren't for likely a data entry error, GA-7 is possible to the Democrats as well. And that isn't saying for much on Chris Collins and Duncan Hunter, who are likely to go to prison for their legal issues. All of this.. is also during an age where there is extreme gerrymandering in many states. The Republicans held 33 governor seats prior to the 2018 midterms so they held a lot of the re-districting rights. Now.. the Republicans couldn't hold seats they likely could have won. And they suffered the ultimate defeat for it because now the Democrats can do a lot of work in a House they not only have a majority in, but likely lead by thirty seats.
7. What a night in Gubernatorial Races- First to the Republican side, they kept popular governors there, Charlie Baker, Larry Hogan, Phil Scott in the Northeast. There likely won't be much that gets done in redistricting there as it'll be tough since all three of those states are widely Democratic anyway. However, that doesn't all do it for Republicans. Mike DeWine beat Richard Cordray in Ohio, beating a powerful Democrat that could have sent another major shockwave. Ron DeSantis appears to be willing to hold off Andrew Gillum in Florida, preventing a major shockwave again. And it appears Brian Kemp could hold off Stacey Abrams from a run-off election in December..
8. However.. that is about the extent of the Republicans success: The major successes of the night happened on the flip side of this for gubernatorial races. Starting up the coast in Maine, Janet Mills flipped that to Democrat. Ned Lamont held off a fierce Republican challenge to win Connecticut after very deeply unpopular Dannel Malloy left office. Toward the Midwest, it got bad for Republicans really, really quickly. J.B. Pritzker ran away with the Illinois race, an expected rout for the Democrats. Gretchen Whitmer won in Michigan, after a deeply unpopular Republican Rick Snyder was term-limited. Out west, New Mexico took Michelle Grisham to the Governor's Mansion in another flip. In Nevada, Steve Sisolak upset Adam Laxalt to retake the Democrats control in that Gubernatorial race. However, the two shockwaves happened in the Midwest. Laura Kelly beat Kris Kobach in Kansas and Tony Evers upset Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Kelly's win was significant due to the hostility of what Kobach represented. The Evers' upset represented how much more coordinated the Democrats have become in four years in the state.
9. Women bust records but so do LGBTQ+ candidates: Women are no longer just the backmarker in politics, and given how men have operated the White House the last couple of years and essentially Congress forever it might not be a bad idea for a massive change. Women have set high markers in the House this mid-term and by 2020 should set more markers in the Senate. The all-time highs can also be attributed to the state houses and senates across the nation. However, LGBTQ+ candidates on Election Night and afterward had a terrific night. Openly gay Democrat Jared Polis was elected governor of Colorado, openly gay Senator Tammy Baldwin was re-elected. However, openly gay Sharice Davids won a House race in Kansas of all places. Bisexual candidates Katie Hill and Kyrsten Sinema won their races in California and Arizona respectively. This also goes with different ethnic groups winning for the first times ever. Native Americans, Latinas and Somali-Americans will be introduced to Congress as House members for the first time, and oh yeah they are women too. Women won Gubernatorial races as well. The aforementioned Grisham, Whitmer, Kelly and Mills and Iowa Republican Kim Reynolds join the fray. Ditto with Kate Brown in Oregon, Kay Ivey in Alabama, and Kristi Noem in South Dakota. Like I said, if men cannot do the job, then women should be capable of doing a better job.
10. The Heartbreak stories: Without Election Night, there would be no Cinderella stories in politics (see really most of the above for that, plus some others I didn't mention) but then there wouldn't be the heartbreak stories that can evolve over a campaign. There are many but none bigger than Beto O'Rourke. The Texas Democrat who represented El Paso in the House of Representatives spent the better part of a year in every county, 254 to be exact, traveling to different people in the state. Some are more likely than others to vote for him. However, he was determined and fired up. In the second debate against Ted Cruz, he was fiercely aggressive to the point that the next day he apologized for that. When the votes were tallying up, he was in a dead heat a lot of the night against Cruz. But with about 80 percent of the vote in the state, it was announced that Cruz would win. It was a brutal reminder that sometimes these stories are buried.
If I missed anything, let me know! Before we know it, 2020 is around the corner and those damn political ads will be at it again!
Saturday, November 3, 2018
Election 2018: Senate Races
To conclude the Election 2018 triple-header is the Senate races. To prelude this, the Senate will start at 51 Republicans, technically 47 Democrats and 2 Independents, but those Independents are technically labeled as Democrats as they caucus with them. Also to prelude more, the Independents (Bernie Sanders and Angus King) are in no way in any in danger of losing their seats in Vermont and Maine. There are a lot of seats that I will cover, regardless of if they are changing or not. The GOP is more in favor of keeping their majority, as a lot of seats are being contended on their turf which is something they can't say come 2020 or 2022. With that, here is what to look for in Tuesday's Senate elections.
Florida: Was there ever really a surprise when so many House races are up for grabs here and the state is also in a Governor's race that is also very heated in literal and figurative senses that this would also be front and center in a very hotly contested Senate race? Bill Nelson is trying to keep this seat for the Democrats against Rick Scott, current Republican governor of the state. This race will likely very much mirror the Governor's race in this state. To put it nicely, this race has been brutal, but without the race factor like the Governor's race. Both have been chided for different issues, but both have also been credited by their own people for doing well to keep with the bases. This will be a race that goes long, long into the night. I would not be surprised if by early morning, this race is not called.
Result: I feel this all depends on the Governor's race and the contested House races as well. Typically I don't align either with a Senate race, but with a state as polarized in politics as Florida is, and as much as the state is divided, this could come down to those factors. I wouldn't be surprised as well if automatic recounts happen in this race as well. I feel Nelson holds this seat by the skin of his teeth, somewhere around 20,000 votes after a recount is automated.
Missouri: If Florida is the one to watch, Missouri may be the second to watch here. Republican Josh Hawley is looking to finally take down Democrat Claire McAskill. The Democrat beat out Jim Talent in 2006 due to, ironically, a blue wave that swept the country and held onto the seat in 2012 due to Todd Akin being a twit. Hawley hasn't made a controversial, hot-button remark in recent weeks which helps him in this race. McAskill has been someone who is a virtue of luck in two straight elections. However, it is possible that McAskill voting no to Judge Kavanaugh costs her this seat (more on that in North Dakota.) However, it doesn't appear this may be as much of a factor as different outliers do in this state. It has progressively gone more red in the last decade, to where it wasn't even really too close to call in 2016 and rather it was to Trump easily while the Senate was more too close to call most of the night. This will be another race that is too close to call one would suspect.
Result: This is almost assuredly going to automatic recall with the way it has been nearly deadlocked all the way through. Unless one candidate in the last couple of days massively screws up and says something that makes people just drop off the map, this will be a tale of four areas: St. Louis, Columbia, Kansas City, and then the rest of the state. Democrat turnout needs to be massively high in the first three areas, and for the Republicans, it needs to be high everywhere else to win. If I had to flip a coin, I would say Hawley wins this, but by less than 10,000 votes and that might be a generous number.
Arizona: With the map that is playing out for the election, the Democrats will have to hope to switch four seats and Arizona is one of those. Democrat Kyrsten Sinema is a rising political star in this state and she takes on Republican Martha McSally. When the GOP primary was going on, Sinema was cruising to the lead as well as having a ground game that is second-to-none that continues today. This would be a big blow to the GOP if they lose it, who have held this seat for a long, long time. McSally emerged as the victor in that absolutely brutal primary. She has come back to make this a very competitive race. Some of the other factors come to play here, but the overarching theme will be how does the Latino/Hispanic vote come forward here for the Democrats or the Republicans. It will come down to that and how strong the turnout is in the heavily Democrat and heavily Republican areas.
Result: I think this seat will be too close to call as well all night. I also think with as gruesome and brutal this race has been in terms of character slandering, it brings out a lot of the party's voters and some voters that may switch parties. I think after this being too close to call all night that Sinema outlasts McSally by around 15,000 votes this time in round to flip this seat to Blue.
Nevada: This has been the seat the Democrats have frothed at the mouth since 2017. They have wanted to take out Dean Heller since they failed to in 2012. This time though, they have a chance with Jacky Rosen, who is also a rising star like Sinema. However, Heller has held tough in this election campaign despite the heavy pressure. He might be the Republican version of McAskill, where he possesses the massive luck material to get through difficult challenges in any election battle. However, as noted above, I have McAskill falling to Hawley in Missouri. Can Heller get the Republican turnout in a year that the Democrats really want to flip this?
Result: Much like McAskill, this likely is the end of the line regardless for Heller. He likely wouldn't survive in 2024 in a Presidential year. He also may run out of luck come Tuesday night anyway. The playbook for Rosen should be one that Catherine Cortez-Masto used in 2016 in a narrow win in the Senate. However, in a possible Democrat year, this likely will be less than 10,000 votes and that's also likely being generous.
North Dakota: To put it short and easy, Heidi Heitkamp is not going to keep this seat to the Democrats unless there is a massive controversy for Republican Kevin Cramer. Heitkamp will be a one-term Senator. The Republicans will switch this to their column.
Indiana: Joe Donnelly got by in 2012 thanks to a GOP primary that gave Richard Mourdock a shot at him rather than Richard Luger. The Democrat got Mike Braun this time in round and either way, whoever it would have been, it would be a struggle bus to say the least. Donnelly will need huge turnout in Democrat heavy areas and Braun will need to probably pull away some moderate Democrats from the Donnelly crowd to win this election. It will be a race that is too close to call most of the night anyway.
Result: If Gary, Indy and places like Fort Wayne and South Bend go for the Democrat in healthy margins, then Braun needs to get heavy turnout in rural areas. I think Donnelly gets a couple percentage points of a win in the end and escapes this election the winner.
Montana: Jon Tester faces another good haired fellow, Republican Matt Rosendale. The difference here may be whether voters still hold the no vote of Judge Kavanaugh over the head of Tester or not. He's been a popular senator since his election in 2006, but he could meet a solid matchup in Rosendale. Rosendale is popular with the Trump administration, and he could be favorable in the state which heavily went for him two years ago. However, the state went pretty well for the Republican Mitt Romney in 2012 and Tester won then too. The big cities and populous counties will need to come in for Tester in healthy numbers. If he does, he likely holds the seat. If not, Rosendale can score the upset here.
Result: I believe, like others, Tester escapes this narrowly. A lot of these too close to call elections will be very tight all night. This likely will not be called on the night of Election night and may go until sometime on Wednesday before a true winner is declared. I may not stretch it to recall territory, but it will be one that will be within 10,000 votes (and the only reason I don't say recall is Montana is a much less populous state than others listed above.)
Tennessee: This race between Republican Marsha Blackburn and Democrat and former governor Phil Bredesen has attracted a lot of attention both politically and in the music world with Bredesen getting endorsed by Taylor Swift. This race is probably a shot in the arm for Democrats who otherwise wouldn't be in this race if not for the popular Bredesen. He's more of a moderate Democrat than a liberal or ultra-liberal. Blackburn has been using her support for Trump as a calling card in a state that is Trump-friendly. Will that be the difference? We'll see. Big city turnout for Bredesen will be key to him keeping it close. And he'll have to hope for some rural support on him as well, especially more in the Eastern part of the state. If he gets that, it's more favorable for Bredesen to pull the upset and pick up a seat for the Democrats.
Result: While Bredesen gets support in cities like Nashville and Memphis, he doesn't get it elsewhere most likely due to the Republican nature of the state. Bredesen could get support in the Memphis and Nashville suburbs but it has to work deeper in the state than that. I think Blackburn wins by 4-6 percentage points and this seat is one that the Republicans will be happy to keep.
Texas: This really shouldn't be a contest due to the nature politically of the state and the fact that Ted Cruz had been very much a popular figure here for a while. However, Beto O'Rourke has made this a race. He's likely not to win the state, but he has started to change the face of the Democrats in this state in a way that could see them win later on down the road in different elections. However, the best way this stays close is huge turnout for O'Rourke in college cities in west/southwest Texas as well as Corpus Christi in addition to heavy turnout in Dallas/Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Houston for him to give him a chance. Cruz will likely take this state, but O'Rourke has built something the Democrats can take forward at least.
Result: Expect Cruz to win anywhere from 5-7 percentage points. It'll be closer than usual elections and much closer than the Governor's race in this state.
Other states to watch just for watching sake: Virginia to see how much Tim Kaine wins by, Ohio and Wisconsin as those Senate margins will be much more than the Gubernatorial races, and the special election in Mississippi to see how that goes between all the candidates.
Florida: Was there ever really a surprise when so many House races are up for grabs here and the state is also in a Governor's race that is also very heated in literal and figurative senses that this would also be front and center in a very hotly contested Senate race? Bill Nelson is trying to keep this seat for the Democrats against Rick Scott, current Republican governor of the state. This race will likely very much mirror the Governor's race in this state. To put it nicely, this race has been brutal, but without the race factor like the Governor's race. Both have been chided for different issues, but both have also been credited by their own people for doing well to keep with the bases. This will be a race that goes long, long into the night. I would not be surprised if by early morning, this race is not called.
Result: I feel this all depends on the Governor's race and the contested House races as well. Typically I don't align either with a Senate race, but with a state as polarized in politics as Florida is, and as much as the state is divided, this could come down to those factors. I wouldn't be surprised as well if automatic recounts happen in this race as well. I feel Nelson holds this seat by the skin of his teeth, somewhere around 20,000 votes after a recount is automated.
Missouri: If Florida is the one to watch, Missouri may be the second to watch here. Republican Josh Hawley is looking to finally take down Democrat Claire McAskill. The Democrat beat out Jim Talent in 2006 due to, ironically, a blue wave that swept the country and held onto the seat in 2012 due to Todd Akin being a twit. Hawley hasn't made a controversial, hot-button remark in recent weeks which helps him in this race. McAskill has been someone who is a virtue of luck in two straight elections. However, it is possible that McAskill voting no to Judge Kavanaugh costs her this seat (more on that in North Dakota.) However, it doesn't appear this may be as much of a factor as different outliers do in this state. It has progressively gone more red in the last decade, to where it wasn't even really too close to call in 2016 and rather it was to Trump easily while the Senate was more too close to call most of the night. This will be another race that is too close to call one would suspect.
Result: This is almost assuredly going to automatic recall with the way it has been nearly deadlocked all the way through. Unless one candidate in the last couple of days massively screws up and says something that makes people just drop off the map, this will be a tale of four areas: St. Louis, Columbia, Kansas City, and then the rest of the state. Democrat turnout needs to be massively high in the first three areas, and for the Republicans, it needs to be high everywhere else to win. If I had to flip a coin, I would say Hawley wins this, but by less than 10,000 votes and that might be a generous number.
Arizona: With the map that is playing out for the election, the Democrats will have to hope to switch four seats and Arizona is one of those. Democrat Kyrsten Sinema is a rising political star in this state and she takes on Republican Martha McSally. When the GOP primary was going on, Sinema was cruising to the lead as well as having a ground game that is second-to-none that continues today. This would be a big blow to the GOP if they lose it, who have held this seat for a long, long time. McSally emerged as the victor in that absolutely brutal primary. She has come back to make this a very competitive race. Some of the other factors come to play here, but the overarching theme will be how does the Latino/Hispanic vote come forward here for the Democrats or the Republicans. It will come down to that and how strong the turnout is in the heavily Democrat and heavily Republican areas.
Result: I think this seat will be too close to call as well all night. I also think with as gruesome and brutal this race has been in terms of character slandering, it brings out a lot of the party's voters and some voters that may switch parties. I think after this being too close to call all night that Sinema outlasts McSally by around 15,000 votes this time in round to flip this seat to Blue.
Nevada: This has been the seat the Democrats have frothed at the mouth since 2017. They have wanted to take out Dean Heller since they failed to in 2012. This time though, they have a chance with Jacky Rosen, who is also a rising star like Sinema. However, Heller has held tough in this election campaign despite the heavy pressure. He might be the Republican version of McAskill, where he possesses the massive luck material to get through difficult challenges in any election battle. However, as noted above, I have McAskill falling to Hawley in Missouri. Can Heller get the Republican turnout in a year that the Democrats really want to flip this?
Result: Much like McAskill, this likely is the end of the line regardless for Heller. He likely wouldn't survive in 2024 in a Presidential year. He also may run out of luck come Tuesday night anyway. The playbook for Rosen should be one that Catherine Cortez-Masto used in 2016 in a narrow win in the Senate. However, in a possible Democrat year, this likely will be less than 10,000 votes and that's also likely being generous.
North Dakota: To put it short and easy, Heidi Heitkamp is not going to keep this seat to the Democrats unless there is a massive controversy for Republican Kevin Cramer. Heitkamp will be a one-term Senator. The Republicans will switch this to their column.
Indiana: Joe Donnelly got by in 2012 thanks to a GOP primary that gave Richard Mourdock a shot at him rather than Richard Luger. The Democrat got Mike Braun this time in round and either way, whoever it would have been, it would be a struggle bus to say the least. Donnelly will need huge turnout in Democrat heavy areas and Braun will need to probably pull away some moderate Democrats from the Donnelly crowd to win this election. It will be a race that is too close to call most of the night anyway.
Result: If Gary, Indy and places like Fort Wayne and South Bend go for the Democrat in healthy margins, then Braun needs to get heavy turnout in rural areas. I think Donnelly gets a couple percentage points of a win in the end and escapes this election the winner.
Montana: Jon Tester faces another good haired fellow, Republican Matt Rosendale. The difference here may be whether voters still hold the no vote of Judge Kavanaugh over the head of Tester or not. He's been a popular senator since his election in 2006, but he could meet a solid matchup in Rosendale. Rosendale is popular with the Trump administration, and he could be favorable in the state which heavily went for him two years ago. However, the state went pretty well for the Republican Mitt Romney in 2012 and Tester won then too. The big cities and populous counties will need to come in for Tester in healthy numbers. If he does, he likely holds the seat. If not, Rosendale can score the upset here.
Result: I believe, like others, Tester escapes this narrowly. A lot of these too close to call elections will be very tight all night. This likely will not be called on the night of Election night and may go until sometime on Wednesday before a true winner is declared. I may not stretch it to recall territory, but it will be one that will be within 10,000 votes (and the only reason I don't say recall is Montana is a much less populous state than others listed above.)
Tennessee: This race between Republican Marsha Blackburn and Democrat and former governor Phil Bredesen has attracted a lot of attention both politically and in the music world with Bredesen getting endorsed by Taylor Swift. This race is probably a shot in the arm for Democrats who otherwise wouldn't be in this race if not for the popular Bredesen. He's more of a moderate Democrat than a liberal or ultra-liberal. Blackburn has been using her support for Trump as a calling card in a state that is Trump-friendly. Will that be the difference? We'll see. Big city turnout for Bredesen will be key to him keeping it close. And he'll have to hope for some rural support on him as well, especially more in the Eastern part of the state. If he gets that, it's more favorable for Bredesen to pull the upset and pick up a seat for the Democrats.
Result: While Bredesen gets support in cities like Nashville and Memphis, he doesn't get it elsewhere most likely due to the Republican nature of the state. Bredesen could get support in the Memphis and Nashville suburbs but it has to work deeper in the state than that. I think Blackburn wins by 4-6 percentage points and this seat is one that the Republicans will be happy to keep.
Texas: This really shouldn't be a contest due to the nature politically of the state and the fact that Ted Cruz had been very much a popular figure here for a while. However, Beto O'Rourke has made this a race. He's likely not to win the state, but he has started to change the face of the Democrats in this state in a way that could see them win later on down the road in different elections. However, the best way this stays close is huge turnout for O'Rourke in college cities in west/southwest Texas as well as Corpus Christi in addition to heavy turnout in Dallas/Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Houston for him to give him a chance. Cruz will likely take this state, but O'Rourke has built something the Democrats can take forward at least.
Result: Expect Cruz to win anywhere from 5-7 percentage points. It'll be closer than usual elections and much closer than the Governor's race in this state.
Other states to watch just for watching sake: Virginia to see how much Tim Kaine wins by, Ohio and Wisconsin as those Senate margins will be much more than the Gubernatorial races, and the special election in Mississippi to see how that goes between all the candidates.
Friday, November 2, 2018
Election 2018: Does the House turn Blue?
This will be part two of three. The finale of this comes in during the weekend as well. This will be a breakdown of states that races can swing the House in one way or another. Will the Democrats be able to pick up the 23 seats needed to take back the House? With that, here are the states that will prove pivotal for the Democrats to take back the House, or the Republicans holding it. At the end, I'll give my rough estimate of how I think the final tally will be.
California: This is no surprise. This has been one of the top Democrat targets all season, dating back to the election season of 2017. The favor for the Democrats? 12 districts in play and only two features an incumbent Democrat (the 24th and 7th, both of which they are likely to win) and ten they could flip Democrat if the cards play right. It's more likely of those ten, they take five which is a significant amount regardless. The House could still be up in the air by California, so keep an eye to see how well the Democrats are holding or how well the Republicans are holding.
Florida: No surprise here, as the state this election season is getting very, very serious down the stretch. There's a senate race that is closely watched, as well as a Governor's race in Florida. So how do you also equate the House? How about nine of the districts up for grabs as well? Yes, Florida is going to be the most adventurous of the states on this night. The Dems are hoping to keep the two they have, plus flip at least three of the remaining seven. Those would be the 15th, 26th and 27th. Those three are very much up for grabs late in the campaign.
Pennsylvania: Another state that is huge for the Democrats. However, this one is due to redistricting and it benefits the Democrats more so going forward. There are nine seats up for grabs. While they'll lose one (The 14th) they may be alright with that if they can hold their other seat and sweep taking the other seven seats. It'll likely not happen, but they are favored in four of those seats to take over already.
New Jersey: The Democrats are looking to hold one of the competitive districts in this state while also looking to flip four from red to blue. This is a lot of defense coming from the GOP early in these, a trend you'll see a lot. The Democrats are favored to win three of those four, with the 3rd district squarely in toss up territory.
Iowa: This will be a key-bearer test for the Democrats to see what inroads they have made since the disastrous 2016 campaign. They are competitive in all four districts. However, they are slated to hold onto the one they have plus pick up two. The biggest test is can they somehow unseat Steve King in IA-4? If so, that'll send a shocking wave to a lot of Republicans this campaign.
Kansas: Another state that could be a bellweather for the Democrats. From 2016, where they didn't come within 10 points of any race, to this moment where they can pick up two seats in this state speaks volumes for their House bid and how much the Republicans are lacking a clear voice in their party at the current outstanding moment.
New York: New York has seven competitive districts, and really it could be just three to look at on Tuesday night. Those are the 19th, 22nd and really pick a choice between the 1st, 11th and 27th. The Democrats could flip three, though two may be more satisfactory in this election cycle. It's also one that they wouldn't mind having in their back pockets.
Virginia: Virginia has at least one seat going from GOP to Democrat, and three more could follow as they are in toss-up territory. Barbara Comstock was always very vulnerable in the 10th district and Jennifer Wexton may finally put the nail in the coffin for her. Also to look for: The 2nd, 5th and 7th districts. The Dems want two of those three in their column, and they have them squarely in toss-up range.
Minnesota: Minnesota has eight districts, five of which are being looked at on Election Night. Democrats are playing defense in the 8th district, and are likely to lose this seat. However, they want desperately to hold the 1st and 7th districts while taking the 2nd and 3rd districts. It could be a wash in this state for Democrats on Election Night if they lose the 1st and 7th. Or if they kept those two and took the others, a great escape perhaps?
Honorable Mentions to look at: Ohio, Texas, Washington, Colorado, Arizona, Alaska, Montana and Utah.
With that, as I eluded to at the top of the column, the Democrats need to flip 23 seats to take the house. With projections already, they are at a net gain of 13 and putting them at 203, meaning they need to hold their five currently in toss-up range and take 10 from the toss-up range to get a majority in the house. There have been wild numbers floating around as to the number they take back in the House. However, I'll guess with the races in toss-up territory that are red seats already (31) and I believe based on the polling that the Democrats could take 16 of those. Therefore, I suspect the end result will be 224-211 for the Democrats in this House election.
California: This is no surprise. This has been one of the top Democrat targets all season, dating back to the election season of 2017. The favor for the Democrats? 12 districts in play and only two features an incumbent Democrat (the 24th and 7th, both of which they are likely to win) and ten they could flip Democrat if the cards play right. It's more likely of those ten, they take five which is a significant amount regardless. The House could still be up in the air by California, so keep an eye to see how well the Democrats are holding or how well the Republicans are holding.
Florida: No surprise here, as the state this election season is getting very, very serious down the stretch. There's a senate race that is closely watched, as well as a Governor's race in Florida. So how do you also equate the House? How about nine of the districts up for grabs as well? Yes, Florida is going to be the most adventurous of the states on this night. The Dems are hoping to keep the two they have, plus flip at least three of the remaining seven. Those would be the 15th, 26th and 27th. Those three are very much up for grabs late in the campaign.
Pennsylvania: Another state that is huge for the Democrats. However, this one is due to redistricting and it benefits the Democrats more so going forward. There are nine seats up for grabs. While they'll lose one (The 14th) they may be alright with that if they can hold their other seat and sweep taking the other seven seats. It'll likely not happen, but they are favored in four of those seats to take over already.
New Jersey: The Democrats are looking to hold one of the competitive districts in this state while also looking to flip four from red to blue. This is a lot of defense coming from the GOP early in these, a trend you'll see a lot. The Democrats are favored to win three of those four, with the 3rd district squarely in toss up territory.
Iowa: This will be a key-bearer test for the Democrats to see what inroads they have made since the disastrous 2016 campaign. They are competitive in all four districts. However, they are slated to hold onto the one they have plus pick up two. The biggest test is can they somehow unseat Steve King in IA-4? If so, that'll send a shocking wave to a lot of Republicans this campaign.
Kansas: Another state that could be a bellweather for the Democrats. From 2016, where they didn't come within 10 points of any race, to this moment where they can pick up two seats in this state speaks volumes for their House bid and how much the Republicans are lacking a clear voice in their party at the current outstanding moment.
New York: New York has seven competitive districts, and really it could be just three to look at on Tuesday night. Those are the 19th, 22nd and really pick a choice between the 1st, 11th and 27th. The Democrats could flip three, though two may be more satisfactory in this election cycle. It's also one that they wouldn't mind having in their back pockets.
Virginia: Virginia has at least one seat going from GOP to Democrat, and three more could follow as they are in toss-up territory. Barbara Comstock was always very vulnerable in the 10th district and Jennifer Wexton may finally put the nail in the coffin for her. Also to look for: The 2nd, 5th and 7th districts. The Dems want two of those three in their column, and they have them squarely in toss-up range.
Minnesota: Minnesota has eight districts, five of which are being looked at on Election Night. Democrats are playing defense in the 8th district, and are likely to lose this seat. However, they want desperately to hold the 1st and 7th districts while taking the 2nd and 3rd districts. It could be a wash in this state for Democrats on Election Night if they lose the 1st and 7th. Or if they kept those two and took the others, a great escape perhaps?
Honorable Mentions to look at: Ohio, Texas, Washington, Colorado, Arizona, Alaska, Montana and Utah.
With that, as I eluded to at the top of the column, the Democrats need to flip 23 seats to take the house. With projections already, they are at a net gain of 13 and putting them at 203, meaning they need to hold their five currently in toss-up range and take 10 from the toss-up range to get a majority in the house. There have been wild numbers floating around as to the number they take back in the House. However, I'll guess with the races in toss-up territory that are red seats already (31) and I believe based on the polling that the Democrats could take 16 of those. Therefore, I suspect the end result will be 224-211 for the Democrats in this House election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)