Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

OscarGuy wrote:I wouldn't be. Doug Mastriano is a stinker of a candidate. That's the problem with these Trump sycophants and wannabes. They might poll well in MAGA country, but in more mainstream areas they won't. I also forgot to mention the strange opportunity that Ohio might present a chance for a Dem pickup as well.

I'll be honest, OG, and state that I hadn't realized the poll result I saw was for the Republican Primary and I wasn't reading closely and assumed it was a general race poll.

Sabin wrote:

Big Magilla wrote
Don't count out Conor Lamb.

I’m trying to find the most recent polling data but Fetterman leads Lamb but forty points.

Fetterman leads Lamb by 31% in the latest poll with 22% undecided despite heavy endorsements from leading Democrats, which seems insurmountable but he's beaten the odds before.

I really don't care who wins as long as it's a real Democrat not a Republican who calls himself a Democrat like Manchin.

I'm also keeping my fingers crossed for Tim Ryan, who is currently 1% ahead of JD Vance, to win in Ohio, and that Catherine Cortez Mastro in Nevada and Raphael Warnock in Georgia hold onto to their seats. The other Democrats up for reelection, including Mark Kelly in Arizona, seem safe. However, it will all be for naught if the Dems loss the House.

Big Magilla wrote
Don't count out Conor Lamb.

I’m trying to find the most recent polling data but Fetterman leads Lamb but forty points.

OscarGuy wrote
I also forgot to mention the strange opportunity that Ohio might present a chance for a Dem pickup as well.

I wouldn’t count on it. Vance may be an unusual candidate (like Oz) but this seat hasn’t been held by a Democrat since 1992 and Ohio is so red these days. Unless the fight for Roe transforms the electorate which is possible (I think it’ll stay the economy) we’re honestly looking at a fall where it’s possible both Dr. Oz and J.D. Vance are in the Senate. I mean, this is Idiocracy territory.

OscarGuy wrote
We could also conceivably pick up a seat in North Carolina or Wisconsin, and if disgraced former MO governor is nominated, we could have a puncher's chance at Missouri.

Ron Johnson seems designed in a lab to be the most unpleasant Republican alive. He combines all of the Tea Party’s least popular economic policies with COVID conspiracies (this past week he said it might cause AIDS), election fraud, and a leading member of the Sedition Caucus. How did Russ Feingold lose to this guy twice? This guy should be so beatable, and yet…

Okri wrote
I think I'm more worried about the Governor's race in Pennsylvania, to be honest.

I am as well. Doug Mastriano is a MAGA poster boy. His campaign slogan may as well be “I led the coup.” Although this is probably good news for Fetterman (or whomever the Dem nominee is) because Mastriano is such a horror that it’ll probably boost turnout against him, making it easier for voters to hold their noses and vote Fetterman.

I wouldn't be. Doug Mastriano is a stinker of a candidate. That's the problem with these Trump sycophants and wannabes. They might poll well in MAGA country, but in more mainstream areas they won't. I also forgot to mention the strange opportunity that Ohio might present a chance for a Dem pickup as well.

I think I'm more worried about the Governor's race in Pennsylvania, to be honest.

Don't count out Conor Lamb.

https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/editor ... 20508.html

OscarGuy wrote
I would agree, but we're likely to pick up a seat in Pennsylvania this year with a fire-breathing liberal who just so happen has a biker aesthetic.

"Biker aesthetic" is a polite word for John Fetterman. I'm not convinced he's going to win. He's polarizing to say the least. A Fetterman vs. Oz matchup is as close to Sanders vs. Trump as we're likely to see. I do not feel good about it, although I'll admit to being curious to see how it plays out. Unlike if Conor Lamb was the nominee (which would be far more down party lines), it’ll basically be two candidates running against the Democratic Party, but it's a midterm and Democrats are unpopular so... maybe?

NOTE: I realize that it's inappropriate to hide my major concern when it comes to Fetterman. He held a black person at gunpoint several years ago, mistaking him for someone who stole his bike. He's never apologized. He's largely ducked confrontation about it. Whoever wins Pennsylvania is going to have to mobilize African-American voters in Philadelphia. It's a real question as to whether Fetterman can do that. His only strength is his appeal to flip rural voters from voting Republican, which is no sure thing. I would say it would be impossible if Dr. Oz wasn't such a weird candidate. He doesn't even live in Pennsylvania and generally speaking Fetterman polls well with rural voters who consider him one of them. To be honest, it's an uphill battle for either Lamb or Fetterman. I just get a real sense of chaos-bringer with Fetterman. Beyond simply having the seat, I can't imagine there's a world where we ever say "I'm glad that guy's in the Senate."

Sabin wrote: 1. The kids today are too self-righteous and judgmental.
2. The Democratic Party is corrupt and uninspiring.
3. Donald Trump wasn’t nearly as bad as everyone said.
4. I miss the good old days.

This is the exact same thing that's happening in the Philippines: Replace "Democratic party" with "Liberal Party"/"Dilawans"/"Aquinos"/"Leni Robredo" and Donald Trump with "Marcos and it's the same.

I would agree, but we're likely to pick up a seat in Pennsylvania this year with a fire-breathing liberal who just so happen has a biker aesthetic. We could also conceivably pick up a seat in North Carolina or Wisconsin, and if disgraced former MO governor is nominated, we could have a puncher's chance at Missouri. Once we have 52 votes, Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema would have less power and we might be able to get a few things done.

Sabin wrote:Millennials in my life are divided into the disappointments that I've discussed above and those who have been so activated by Trump and the right-wing's attack on civil liberties that they are blue no matter who for life. That number should be substantially higher and that is what is so frustrating.

I totally agree.

OscarGuy wrote:A lot of what forms a person's political identity is formed in their teens and twenties. They don't magically change as they age. I think this myth is a byproduct of the fact that we've mostly seen the last of the boomers who've realigned politically because they were always a touch racist, but it wasn't until the last quarter century or so where their racism has been rejected by Democrats and thus they find no home in the Dem party any longer. That's why people like Trump and others of his ilk have switched party affiliations, not because they became more conservative, but that the Dems have become less tolerant of casual racism and are more willing to call people out on that bull shit than they used to be.

That's true to a degree but it also applies to the longtime Republicans who became MAGA Republicans.

Most people in this country are Democrats or Democrat leaning Independents. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean much when the MAGA Republicans control the small population states that elect small-minded Republicans to the Senate which keeps the Democrats from exercising control thanks to the Jim Crow era filibuster that still reigns supreme in their chambers.

I've read many people who say that people get more conservative as they age, but in practice, that isn't really true. A lot of what forms a person's political identity is formed in their teens and twenties. They don't magically change as they age. I think this myth is a byproduct of the fact that we've mostly seen the last of the boomers who've realigned politically because they were always a touch racist, but it wasn't until the last quarter century or so where their racism has been rejected by Democrats and thus they find no home in the Dem party any longer. That's why people like Trump and others of his ilk have switched party affiliations, not because they became more conservative, but that the Dems have become less tolerant of casual racism and are more willing to call people out on that bull shit than they used to be.

Magilla, I'm not going to respond to your post point for point. I'll just say I'm observing different things than you are. I'm observing a lot of grievance from the Millennials (towards Zoomers and towards the world at large) I know both in Los Angeles and Arizona, both first hand and in my feed. It really concerns me. Are they all going to vote Republicans in 2024? No. But the first of them began to do so in 2016 and 2020 in my life and it's shocking me.

I'll also add something that I really should have added to my original post and it's the only thing that gives me hope: the Millennials in my life are divided into the disappointments that I've discussed above and those who have been so activated by Trump and the right-wing's attack on civil liberties that they are blue no matter who for life. That number should be substantially higher and that is what is so frustrating.

Sabin, how do you get another Trump term out of the article you're referencing?

J.J. McCullogh is a Canadian You-Tuber and satirist. He is talking about millennials turning conservative in a decade or two down the road when they're in their 50s and beyond. That may be, but they're not going to vote for Trump in sufficient enough numbers to put him back in the White House in 2024.

I never heard anyone of any age use any of those four phrases, not even the old coots I know in their 80s and 90s, and certainly not millennials.

1. Who are the kids today who are too self-righteous and judgmental? That's something I would ascribe to a good portion of the middle-aged me-too movement, not the "kids".

2. Many people believe that all politicians are corrupt and uninspiring. Most Republicans and some Democrats prove that every day.

3. Donald Trump is worse than most people think.

4. People have always had nostalgia for the past, but few would give up the advances in medicine, technology, and other things we have today to return to "the good old days". That's a pre-World War I phrase, not something anyone has used in the last 100 or more years.

This is something I've been experiencing from those around me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... t-wingers/

This guy gets it right. I encounter so many people who parrot exactly these phrases, with special emphasis on the fourth one (which I definitely hold most culpable).

1. The kids today are too self-righteous and judgmental.
2. The Democratic Party is corrupt and uninspiring.
3. Donald Trump wasn’t nearly as bad as everyone said.
4. I miss the good old days.

My question is whether this is a movement or a moment. I'm praying it's a moment and there are plenty of boogie-men this cohort, including but not limited to fading from the zeitgeist. Issue for issue, the Millennials I speak to remain center-left to left-wing. It's just that everything has been consumed by personality not principle and it's easier to participate in culture war bullshit. Assuming that the republic will persist beyond another Trump term (and most days I do), they'll swing back into the fold once they experience the inevitable financial toll that 8-12 years of Republican policy will wreak on their wallets in the end. To put it another way, they're all very lucky to be too young to have experienced the fullest effects of George W. Bush's policies on their wallet as well as too nostalgic for their youth under Bush to carry the lesson they saw but did not feel with them forward in life. To which I say: good, fuck 'em.

Heksagon wrote:How high are the odds that Marcos will finish his entire term?

I'm hearing some rumors that there's a very distinct possibility that he may not even start it. Sara Duterte (daughter of Rodrigo Duterte) is currently leading as Vice President (VP is voted separately here). There are pending disqualification cases against Marcos in the Commission on Elections and the courts. It's wholly possible that he would be disqualified and as the winning VP, Sara Duterte would take over as President. Over here, Presidents get only one six-year term. But if this happens to Sara, she could run for re-election and get another six-year term and she could be president for as long as 12 years. This might have been the plan all along.