Dating i Nebraska

Election Prediction Thread

2020.10.26 13:31 jegopan Election Prediction Thread

The second and last presidential debate has finished and there is less than two weeks to Election Day. Hence, we are opening up a prediction thread for the Election 2020 results. This is how you can participate.
In order to participate, you will have to make a comment in this format.
  1. Your prediction for Biden’s electoral vote count and Trump’s electoral vote count
  2. States that are flipped from 2016
  3. Biden’s and Trump’s percentage of the vote, not counting 3rd party votes (sorry, it’ll be too complicated with that). The numbers must have 2 decimal places and we will see who has the closest number.
  4. Just in case there is still more than one person who accurately predicts the election, please write down what date you think the election will be called and the time of the call, using Eastern Time.
Here’s a sample (and totally impossible) prediction comment:
Biden’s Electoral Vote Count: 269
Trump’s Electoral Vote Count: 269
States Flipped:
Washington DC
Wyoming
Biden’s Percentage of Vote: 50.00%
Trump’s Percentage of Vote: 50.00%
31 December 2020 (12pm ET)
Since Nebraska and Maine's electoral votes are split up by districts, please remember to include the districts that you think will flip. Note: if you think both a district and the state as a whole will flip, please write down both off them.
The prize for winning this event will be a Gold Award
Finally, these are the winning spaces for the 2nd Presidential Bingo:
  1. Trump brags about his great genes
  2. Trump saying the vaccine is almost here
  3. Trump allows Biden to speak
  4. AOC is mentioned
  5. Trump brushes Covid off as not a big deal
  6. Trump rants about Hunter Biden
  7. Biden calls Trump an old-fashioned slang
  8. Obama is mentioned
  9. Sanders is mentioned
  10. Trump alludes that Biden has dementia
  11. Trump suggests that the primaries were rigged against Sanders
  12. Trump calls Biden a socialist
If you have a bingo, please link your original comment in the comments.
Hope you all have fun participating
submitted by jegopan to PresidentialRaceMemes [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 08:34 Niccolo_PagaNANI I put the first paragraph of the wiki article of cock and ball tourture and got quite the interesting read. A round history it talks about the greatest mad lad who never lived.

Cock and ball torture (CBT), penis torture or dick torture is a sexual activity involving application of pain or constriction to the penis or testicles. This may involve directly painful activities, such as genital piercing, wax play, genital spanking, squeezing, ball-busting, genital flogging, urethral play, tickle torture, erotic electrostimulation, kneeing or kicking.[1] The recipient of such activities may receive direct physical pleasure via masochism, or emotional pleasure through erotic humiliation, or knowledge that the play is pleasing to a sadistic dominant. Many of these practices carry significant health risks.[2] Terminology [ edit ] Cock and ball torture is commonly practiced by BDSM practitioners of all types, from rope bondage, leather cuffs and whips to piercing and penetrating, with a number of specific techniques depending on the preferred equipment, the rules and the sex of the participants. Some, but not all, forms of CBT involve the application of painful stress-enhancing techniques. In one, the ball is flogged in a circular motion around the testicle; another involves more intense or extreme stress on the balls with the use of a whip, paddles, bullwhip, rope or leather. Another form uses more intense stimulation by both partners in an attempt to break the testicles.[3][4][5][6] Usage [ edit ] Examples of use of cock and ball torture include genital piercing or piercing, deliberate breaking or stretching of the testicles, testicle whipping (the term used varies depending on context) or bullwhip ball-breaking, or the torment of sexual arousal.[1] It can be a safe but intense form of BDSM that can be pleasurable or traumatising.[1] Practitioners consider it a sport, competition or torture. There is also an athletic discipline of CBT, "battling balls", which involves using the maximum of 1,000 joules of electrical current.[7] Methods [ edit ] In some cases a CBT technique may simply result in the testicles being stretched to dangerous lengths or increased discomfort. In other cases the testicles may be ripped or torn out or may be gagged and bound together. Many techniques are often practiced under the guise of masochism or sadomasochism, with the partners secretly preferring one method over another. In fact, very few actually involve pain as a goal. Most involve pain or discomfort, but the use of pain or discomfort as an end result is rare, although it may be what is preferred by one or both parties. Common practice in CBT is to inflict significant stress on the testicles without causing injury. However, some techniques are severe enough to cause pain to the testicles and sometimes do. This is almost always dangerous, but may be desirable for the sadist.[8] Some injuries and fatalities can occur because the balls may be gagged, tied together or entwined with another body part, such as the penis. More severe injuries and deaths have been attributed to cock and ball torture in which the testicles are ruptured or exploded.[8] Most injuries are caused by the direct impact of the injury on the testicles, not the severity of the technique. History [ edit ] French physician Frédéric Cuénod is believed to be the first to perform CBT on a human (though he may have used the words "fucking" or "pounding"),[9] which is listed in his 1967 book The Black Book of Sexual Decay, co-authored with Gérard Aubert.[10][11] The book, published as a manual on sexual deviance, describes both deliberate breaking of the testicles (of unknown, legal or medical purpose) and research studies that have been performed, which include bringing a rabbit's scrotum to the full-size scrotum and describing what happened.[11] Stressing the testicles is believed to have started in the Middle Ages. The tradition may have started in Spain,[12] and was later brought to France and the rest of Europe by gypsies.[13][14] Similar practice was common in Central and South America,[13] particularly among indigenous peoples such as the Mayans and the Caribbean Maroons.[15][16] James H. Fetzer, author of Masturbating to Birth Control,[17] attributes the practice to a Mayan prophet named Kabili, who supposedly said that if his people strangled the testicles of a female infanticide victim, she would not fall in love and bear him a child. Fetzer suggests that in the process of strangling the victim, the testicles became cut or bruised and ruptured, and eventually collapsed.[18] Yemeni medical researcher Ahmad Al-Alawi and his colleagues claim that in the Islamic era, genital mutilation of Yemeni girls was performed, causing "squeezing of the testicles or tearing out of them".[19][20] Cock and ball torture [ edit ] Chester Spatt, a newspaper editor, invented CBT in 1938.[4][9][21] It is a variation of international ball torture.[9] During the 1930s, Spatt practised CBT with the consent of his wife. She later described their practice in an interview with Spatt's biographer, Ruth Wedgwood, in 1964. Spatt explained the choice of the practice as a natural progression of his sadism, having experimented with light BDSM, and wanted to challenge his own physical capabilities with extreme forms of pain. He then decided to try out CBT as an experiment to "prove its desirability and, if possible, the plausibility of its treatment. Spatt likened the feeling of CBT to a "tormented spermatozoon in the waiting-room of life".[22] Spatt claimed he discovered the technique by accident, when he was trying to kill a fly with a screwdriver and was left with a hole in his hand. He decided to experiment on himself by putting the screwdriver near his testicles, but not in, and the tool produced a spasm of pain. He then waited for a few days before trying CBT.[23] Spatt began experimenting with CBT after deciding to stop practising BDSM. CBT represented a "redundant pleasure" which gave him "one more element of titillation to add to the competition of sexual stimulation."[23] Spatt said he tried to make it as severe as possible. One of his early experiments involved breaking one testicle and crushing the other into the scrotum.[24] He tried to prevent CBT from causing the excessive pain associated with strangulation and asphyxiation. Spatt said, "In practice this has been somewhat haphazard."[24] His wife, Naomi, apparently had no interest in the practice and did not participate. Spatt kept a jar of urine in the kitchen and a bucket of water by the bed and would use the liquid to spray the testicles, filling the jar with warm urine each time. Spatt was sometimes accompanied by three women who would watch the ball torture.[23] Spatt went on to try CBT on more than 600 people, and claimed he always came out of the ordeal unscathed, although this is disputed.[25] In a later interview Spatt said, "I was sure I would never die...and if I died it would be an amusing way to go. The aim, I believe, was that I would avoid the boredom of death by going by some appalling route."[26] Spatt described the feeling of pain he got in the testicles as "sensation as if [he] were being squeezed between great weights. There is a feeling of immense tension in the body and it is as if the innards are being crumpled up. I feel, at any rate, I go to sleep after a while. [...] The physical effects are there, but it is the mental effect which I experience."[24] Spatt stated that because the testicles cannot be squeezed through a hole in the scrotum, they must be squeezed by passing through the urethra. He did not wear underwear, except for the socks, and they would sag down to his knees during his CBT sessions.[23] Spatt gave his method to the Middle East, where he eventually practised CBT for 10 years.[27] He published a book, Bondage and Beyond, in 1960.[27] Spatt said of CBT, "It is painful, it is horrible, it is unforgettable. It has no class distinction. If I am going to kill myself it will be in this way. That is why I think it is worthy of contemplation."[28] Donald Marshall reported the same method by Spatt in his book, BDSM: "This 'buttock pinch', in which the victim's testicles are pinched by the attacker with the fingers, is known as 'Chester Spatt's Cock and Ball Torture', though it is a long way from the original idea of male homosexuality."[29] Marshall quoted Spatt as saying "This new art was to replace the old one of male homosexuality and was more satisfactory to many who had become disturbed by it...The technique is impracticable to practise on just one person, but the ability of a skilled slave to do it, and of their master to enjoy the display, added greatly to its appeal to many."[29] Marshall also reported that the technique is referred to in the BDSM literature as "Spatt's Flush", "Chester Spatt's Baffle" or simply "Spatt's Torture". In his book, Not in the Business, Daley Richards related the technique of "Spatt's Torture", mentioning "I used to squeeze his balls as hard as I could. He would use an electric bicycle to give the pain the most out of bounds. He had a lot of hair in there so it was quite easy to grasp the testicles and really make him squeal, giving me plenty of time to do what I wanted to do."[30] In 1956, Spatt attempted to explain why there was no way to play the game without the ability to injure the testicles. He described the evolution of CBT in his article "Bondage and its concomitants". Spatt wrote, "It was not possible for the Master to play the game without inflicting the injury to the victim, and since this injury hurt him it was all right. "We discovered that he has two or three balls", I said. "These balls are his most private part of his anatomy; and we could not leave them undefended. They were thus impossible to contain in the fiddle. Therefore we devised the proper toy, which allowed us to use the testicles as we chose".[31] In his essay "The Leisure Hour" Spatt wrote about the difficulties of the field, especially explaining the game. He wrote, "Since none of the syndicates will admit to what they are doing, it is no use trying to teach people to play the game. It is necessary for me to show by strict demonstrations that the role of the man as slave, as distinguished from that of the male as human being, is possible, and that, once mastered, the rules of the game can be used to bring out the player's natural attributes, without trampling on his dignity".[32] By the 1960s Spatt's private practice was in decline. A&E Television Networks (ATN) and Mid-America Television Broadcasting (MATV) hired Spatt as a consultant for videotaped training, mainly for their experiment programs. Spatt appeared as a guest on TV shows and in numerous instructional articles, such as "The Kama Sutra in Action" for the Beach Boys and Billy Vaughn's instructional TV series.[33][34] On 18 May 1968, Spatt appeared on an episode of The Merv Griffin Show in New York City, and discussed his secret technique of penis massage. He was accompanied on the program by Stanley Stoller, one of his former students, to demonstrate the technique.[35] Griffin's positive response to the penis massage technique enabled Spatt to move forward with public performances of penis massage. These were performed in his apartment by his nurse, Shirley Mills, wearing a green tuxedo, and for which he charged $5 per ticket. Spatt eventually performed up to six shows per week at various theatres in New York City. By 1972, Spatt earned an income of $6,500 per week performing the massages, but the act of massaging his patients during the performance cost him $50 per hour.[36] Nunzio Quaresmi, one of Spatt's former students, stated that the act of massaging in Spatt's apartment was very intimate, and that Spatt typically asked his students "to conduct intercourse" with his clients. Quaresmi also stated that Spatt had "a peculiar technique of kneading" and that Spatt "is a sculptor", adding "I have never seen anybody in the art of massage do so much motion."[37] Death and legacy [ edit ] Spatt died in March 1973 of a brain hemorrhage at the age of 61. Spatt had requested that he be cremated and his ashes scattered at sea, rather than interred in a cemetery, and that he be buried wearing an eighteenth-century (clean-shaven) leather costume.[38][39] According to Quaresmi, the last known article written by Spatt was dated May 1974, in the Philadelphia police log for the night of his death.[40] However, a New York police department report states that Spatt died on March 18, 1973.[41] Quaresmi added that, according to Spatt's nurse, Shirley Mills, Spatt had always hoped to be buried in a cockfighting costume, and had recently purchased a cockfighting mask in lieu of a coffin.[37] The works of Spatt are divided into three main sections: "His Patents and Illustrations", "Science and Science Methods" and "Characteristics of Man".[42] Notable students [ edit ] Spatt had two major international students during his lifetime: Nunzio Quaresmi, a science teacher at Richard Stockton High School in New Jersey,[43] and Richard Sloan, a dentist who taught at Maine School of Technology. Spatt also trained women in his practice. In 1968, he taught future U.S. Representative Ellen Tauscher of California.[44] Spatt's second wife was Lois Ludwig. Legacy [ edit ] On April 15, 1977, the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, along with the University of Miami and the University of South Florida, established the "Adolph Spatt Award" to honor Spatt's contributions to the teaching of science, especially in relation to athletics. The awards are given yearly, by the President of the Association for Experiment Teaching in Engineering Education.[45] Spatt's brother, George, wrote an account of the life of Adolph Spatt entitled An Appeal to the Masters of the Body, in 1991.[46] A new Adolph Spatt building was built at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, to provide students and clinicians in the medical field with improved opportunities to perform procedures involving the groin, as this was an area of expertise in Spatt's practice.[47] Possibly the most famous penis massage technique is the "chicken wing" method of massage created by Tom Voegtlin.[citation needed] In 1999, The Red Pen, a journal focusing on the practical use of yoga in business, published an article by a University of New Mexico student whose dissertation was about the penile-rejuvenation technique taught by Spatt. The student identified Spatt as one of three men who influenced him in his life. Other men were Abraham Lincoln and Alfred Hitchcock.[48] The film Kama Sutra: A Touch of the King, starring Jean-Claude Van Damme, deals with the culture of sexual pleasure and mastery practiced by Spatt in his private practice. In the comic book series Skin&Earth, Spatt's followers are classified as "Urban Knights", those who want to know about the "Kama Sutra".[49] Spatt is mentioned in the 2005 film The Big Wedding.[citation needed
submitted by Niccolo_PagaNANI to aigeneratedmemes [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 19:23 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Seventh Step (Third Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series. In October 2020, I provided a final comprehensive review of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies to pursue for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter, I provided a final update on the general standing of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle.
 
This step will provide a final update on the competitive state house and state senate districts that lie within or near the 30 congressional districts that this series is either targeting or defending. These state legislative districts are grouped by state, and were then listed in the order of the related congressional districts’ overall priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support and the overall competitiveness of the congressional districts in question. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters. In this step’s first quarter, a list of competitive state legislative districts located in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York was provided. The second quarter examined target legislative districts situated in Oklahoma, Utah, South Carolina, and New Mexico.
In this third quarter, key districts in Texas, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, and Indiana will be examined. Every state legislative district listed in this post will include its current controlling party (D or R), incumbent’s name (or an OPEN indication if said incumbent is retiring), experimentally calculated Cook PVI, the CNalysis rating given at the time of this writing, and the congressional districts that it overlaps with. The Democratic nominee’s campaign website and latest fundraising numbers will also be provided, as well as the latest fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent. At the end of each state’s group of legislative districts, a summary of the status of our campaigns there will be delivered.
Some candidates are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the twentieth step of this series.
 
Texas:
SD-19 (R, Peter Flores, D+4, Lean D): TX-21, TX-23
Roland Gutierrez (+): $1,199,210, https://rolandfortexas.com/ GOP: Peter Flores: $1,972,033
HD-26 (R, OPEN, R+10, Tossup): TX-22
L. Sarah DeMerchant (+): $356,860, https://www.democratdemerchant.com/ GOP: Jacey Jetton: $703,757
HD-45 (D, Erin Zwiener, R+6, Lean D): TX-21
Erin Zwiener (+): $703,996, https://www.erinforyall.com/ GOP: Carrie Isaac: $543,805
HD-47 (D, Vikki Goodwin, R+6, Lean D): TX-10, TX-21
Vikki Goodwin (+): $408,857, https://vikkigoodwin.com/ GOP: Justin Berry: $749,230
HD-65 (D, Michelle Beckley, R+6, Lean D): TX-24
Michelle Beckley (+): $378,698, https://www.michellebeckley.com/ GOP: Kronda Thimesch: $484,657
HD-92 (R, OPEN, R+11, Tossup): TX-24
Jeff Whitfield (+): $693,026, https://www.whitfieldfortexas.com/ GOP: Jeff Cason: $581,581
HD-108 (R, Morgan Meyer, R+5, Tilt D): TX-24
Joanna Cattanach (+): $823,593, https://joannafortexas.com/ GOP: Morgan Meyer: $1,290,242
HD-121 (R, Steve Allison, R+10, Tilt R): TX-21
Celina Montoya: $619,387, https://www.celinamontoya.org/ GOP: Steve Allison: $769,032
HD-132 (D, Gina Calanni, R+8, Tilt D): TX-10
Gina Calanni (+): $491,402, https://www.ginacalanni.com/ GOP: Mike Schofield: $383,387
Summary: Roland Gutierrez is raising an extraordinary amount for his SD-19 run, but is still getting outraised by the district’s GOP incumbent Peter Flores, according to the 30 Days Before General reports. The State House races are very remarkable in itself, as every single Democratic nominee in the above listed races have surpassed the $290,000 fundraising mark as of the 30 Days Before General reports, which is generally what winning State House campaigns raise for the entire cycle, if past trends in Texas races hold. However, the Democrats in HD-26, HD-47, HD-65, HD-108, and HD-121 are being outraised by their GOP opponents. All in all, we have made an outrageous amount of progress over the past two years to have a decent chance of winning all of the above Texas state legislative races. Truly a sight to behold.
Ohio:
HD-27 (R, Tom Brinkman Jr., R+9, Tilt R): OH-01
Sara Bitter (+): $241,221, https://sarabitter.com/ GOP: Tom Brinkman Jr.: $606,793
HD-28 (D, Jessica Miranda, R+1, Lean D): OH-01
Jessica Miranda (-): $414,397, https://jessicaforohio.com/ GOP: Chris Monzel: $219,163
Summary: According to the pre-general reports, the Democratic nominees in the two listed State House races in Ohio have broken the $230,000 fundraising marks, which is generally the baseline for a winning State House campaign in Ohio to achieve. However, the Democratic nominee in HD-27, Sara Bitter, is still being outraised by the GOP incumbent, Tom Brinkman Jr. More volunteer support to Sara Bitter’s campaign in the last few weeks would help improve our chances of flipping this State House district to blue. Ohio is in short another state where we are in excellent condition in the listed state legislative races.
Illinois:
HD-111 (D, Monica Bristow, R+5, Lean D): IL-13
Monica Bristow (+): $1,476,975, https://bristowforrep.com/ GOP: Amy Elik: $276,911
Summary: The Democratic incumbent in the sole State House race highlighted for Illinois, Monica Bristow, has posted exceptionally strong fundraising numbers as of the D-2 Quarterly reports for the Q3 period. Other than that, there is really nothing to see here.
Florida:
HD-59 (D, OPEN, R+2, Tilt D): FL-15, FL-16
Andrew Learned (+): $327,992, https://andrewlearned.com/ GOP: Michael Owen: $405,385
HD-60 (R, Jackie Toledo, R+4, Tilt D): FL-15, FL-16
Julie Jenkins (+): $272,477, https://votejuliejenkins.com/ GOP: Jackie Toledo: $584,900
HD-72 (D, OPEN, R+4, Tossup): FL-16
Drake Buckman (+): $175,662, https://buckmanforfl.com/ GOP: Fiona McFarland: $474,495
Summary: The October 16 reports show that Democratic nominee Andrew Learned in HD-59 has passed the $310,000 fundraising mark in his campaign, which is generally a goal that a winning State House campaign in Florida should achieve. All three Democratic nominees listed in this section, however, are getting outraised by their GOP opponents. HD-72, in particular, should receive our attention and donation. The financial gap between the Democratic nominee there, Drake Buckman, and his GOP opponent Fiona McFarland is large, but not impossibly so. A flood of last minute donations there would allow Drake Buckman to run a stronger campaign and can distinguishably improve our chances of victory in this particular State House race.
Indiana:
SD-30 (R, John Ruckelshaus, D+3, Lean D): IN-05
Fady Qaddoura (+): $575,080, https://www.fady4indiana.com/ GOP: John Ruckelshaus: $820,011
HD-35 (D, Melanie Wright, R+14, Tilt R): IN-05
Melanie Wright (-): $91,150, No website yet, but has a Facebook campaign website: https://www.facebook.com/votemelaniewright/ GOP: Elizabeth Rowray: $224,132
HD-36 (D, Terri Austin, R+3, Lean D): IN-05
Terri Austin (-): $87,041, No website yet, but has a Facebook campaign website: https://www.facebook.com/StateRepresentativeTerriJAustin GOP: Kyle Pierce: $123,606
Summary: According to the 2020 pre-election reports, Fady Quaddoura has raised an extraordinary amount in his SD-30 campaign, but is still running slightly behind the district’s GOP incumbent John Ruckelshaus in that department. The two State House races listed for Indiana is rather strange, as I cannot find official campaigns website for the Democratic incumbent for these two districts. HD-36 is the sole race to focus here, as Democratic incumbent Terri Austin is currently being outraised by her GOP opponent Kyle Pierce. A large amount of last minute donations would highly benefit our odds of holding this State House district.
 
And thus we come the end of this step’s third quarter. After that, the final quarter will cover competitive districts in California, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 09:16 myauntandmydad My dad (39M) and my aunt (45F) have been having an affair for 4+ years. They have no idea I (20F) know about it, but I caught them together last night.

Long time lurker, first time poster. Sorry in advance for length; I have a lot to get off my chest.
A little background info cause our family situation is pretty weird: my mom went to college a few hours away from her hometown in 1999 and met my dad. My parents were together very briefly (like a month) and my mom got pregnant with me. She moved back to her hometown after getting pregnant, and my dad followed so he could be involved in my life. My mom died the day after I was born due to childbirth complications, but my dad stayed in her hometown to raise me. He’s not close to his family at all, so my mom’s family has pretty much become his adoptive family. My maternal grandparents practically see him as a son at this point (and vice versa) and my mom’s two sisters see him as a brother (or so they say).
Now a little background on my mom’s oldest sister: she’s been married since before she met my dad in 1999, but she’s despised her husband for as long as I can remember. No one in the family likes him either for reasons I won’t get into. She always says she’ll leave him but they’ve been married for 22 years and she still hasn’t. She has no children. She and I aren’t super close but we’re also not estranged or anything.
Background info on my dad: He had a couple long-term girlfriends when I was much younger, but he hasn’t had one in at least 10 years. He claims it’s because he “likes being single and having fun”. Everyone sort of just views him as a womanizer who doesn’t want to settle down. He’ll occasionally tell me he has “a date” but I’ve never seen any proof of this. I’m extremely close to him, but I don’t ask him about his love life cause that would be weird.
Outwardly, my aunt and my dad aren’t super close. They see each other when we all get together as a family (which is often), but they’ve never openly hung out one on one or anything like that. When we’re all together, they just act like siblings. However, I’m a very intuitive and inquisitive person, and when I was about 13 I started getting suspicious of them. The weirdest thing was there was never any proof or evidence that something was going on between them. It was just a gut feeling I had; something in the way they looked at each other and spoke of each other.
I started to theorize about the technicalities; wondering how and when they’d be meeting up if they were. I wondered if they were secretly meeting up when I was at school or at my grandparent’s (when I was younger I used to spend the night at their house at least four times a month just because I wanted to, and sometimes my dad would ask them to keep me because he had to “work late”). But, like I said, there was never any proof or evidence, so my theories were no more than occasional passing thoughts.
Fast forward to when I was 16. My dad owns a store, and when I first got my license, curiosity took over me and I started driving by his store on the nights he was “working late” to see if he was actually there. He always was, but one time my aunt’s car was there, too. (My dad has a pull-out couch in his office. He doesn’t know that I know this – the only reason I do is because I looked at it really hard one day and figured it out. It’s one of those couches that looks completely normal but turns into a bed.) Seeing her there confirmed my suspicions. I decided to leave it at that and stop prying because I already felt weird and nosy enough.
The whole situation really haunted me for a while, and it honestly still does. I sobbed all the way home and all night long after confirming my suspicions. I always viewed my dad as someone with amazing morals, and the thought of him having a long-term affair with a married woman (not just any married woman but my own aunt) really messed with my head. And on top of that, I couldn’t tell anyone about it. It’s confirmed this has been going on for at least four years but I suspect it’s been way, WAY longer than that. Like I mentioned earlier, my dad hasn’t had a girlfriend in over 10 years. I suspect his relationship with my aunt is the reason. There was also an instance in 2018 where my aunt and my dad both “coincidentally” went out of town and came back at the exact same time. My aunt claimed to be in New York visiting a friend and my dad claimed to be in Nebraska for a business convention but I think they may have actually taken a trip together.
I’ve been walking on eggshells for the past four years, and living in constant fear that I’ll be caught in an awkward situation and/or accidentally see something I’m not supposed to; something much worse than just a car at his office. And then....my fears finally came true a few hours ago.
I'm doing college from home right now, living with my dad. Tonight we had a miscommunication. He thought I was spending the night at my boyfriend's, but I was really planning to come home. I got home at about midnight, and figured it was safe because my aunt's car wasn't there or anything. I also was under the impression that my dad knew I was coming home, so he wouldn't have her over. But when I walked in, my aunt and my dad were just sitting on the couch watching a movie, all cuddled up. I went in through the game room door, which is the room they were in, so I walked right in on them. THANK GOD they were only watching a movie, but it was still pretty traumatizing considering they have no idea I've known about their relationship for years now. We all just kind of froze for a second, then my dad said "I didn't know you were coming home" and I said "I told you I was". Then in a weird freaked out state, I ran back to my car and went back to my boyfriend's.
I'm still at my boyfriend's (he knows everything btw, he's the only one who does) and I haven't heard from my dad since. It's 3 AM and I've been waiting for a text or a call but I haven't gotten one, which I think is super weird considering we're close and usually have great communication. I haven't reached out to him either because I don't know what to say.
Obviously we're inevitably going to have to address this (probably tomorrow) and I'm so freaked out I can't sleep. Do I wait for him to reach out to me first, or do I text him if he hasn't texted me by morning? Do I tell him I've known the whole time? If he says they were "just hanging out", or it "was a one time thing" (which I feel like he might), do I pretend to believe him?
TL;DR: My dad and my maternal aunt (who's married) have been having an affair for at least four years. They have no idea I've known the whole time, but I came home and caught them together last night (just watching TV all cuddled up, not doing anything gross). I quickly ran back outside and left, and I haven't spoken to my dad since. We're going to have to address this tomorrow and I don't know how to.
submitted by myauntandmydad to relationship_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 21:41 Faction_Chief /r/news - https://www.nbc15.com/2020/10/15/jury-finds-nebraska-woman-guilty-of-dismembering-tinder-date/

/news
https://www.nbc15.com/2020/10/15/jury-finds-nebraska-woman-guilty-of-dismembering-tinder-date/
submitted by Faction_Chief to NoFilterNews [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 06:05 democrat_plantation A review of 2016's poll numbers and how Trump is doing better in 2020

These poll numbers are from Real Clear Politics average on Oct. 22.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/2020_elections_electoral_college_map.html
To begin, let’s assume – due to insurmountable poll numbers, as well as how the Republican nominee and Democrat nominee performed in the 2016 election – that Joe Biden and Donald Trump have a number of electoral college votes locked up.
Biden: California (56), New York (29), Massachusetts (11), Delaware (3), Maryland (10), D.C. (3), Hawaii (4), Vermont (3), Connecticut (7), New Jersey (14), Illinois (20), Maine CD1 (1), Rhode Island (4), Washington (12), New Hampshire (4), Maine (2), Colorado (9), New Mexico (5), Virginia (13), Oregon (7), Nevada (6), Minnesota (10) = 232
Trump: Oklahoma (7), Nebraska (4), South Dakota (3), North Dakota (3), Wyoming (3), Idaho (4), Kentucky (8), West Virginia (5), Alabama (9), Alaska (3), Kansas (6), Louisiana (8), Mississippi (6), Utah (6), Arkansas (6), Missouri (10), Indiana (11), Montana (3), South Carolina (9), Iowa (6), Texas (38), Maine CD2 (1), Georgia (16), Ohio (18) = 201
They each need to reach 270 from here.
Remaining are these states, which all went to Trump in 2016: Michigan (16), Pennsylvania (20), Florida (29), Wisconsin (10), North Carolina (15), Arizona (11) = 101
If you look at the RCP average on Oct. 22, the news does not look good for Trump. In fact, it comes out to a 333-201 win for Biden.
Michigan – Biden +7.8
Pennsylvania – Biden +4.9
Florida – Biden +2.1
Wisconsin – Biden +4.6
North Carolina – Biden +1.8
Arizona – Biden +3.2
Now, to the point. On this same date in the 2016, election, the polls also showed a Clinton win. By how much? Well…. exactly the same – 333-201. Note, however, the difference in how much more Clinton was ahead in all of these states that Trump eventually won. Again, on the same date.
Michigan – Clinton +10 (Trump won, +0.3)
Pennsylvania – Clinton +6.2 (Trump won, +0.7)
Florida – Clinton +4 (Trump won, +1.2)
Wisconsin – Clinton +7 (Trump won, +0.7)
North Carolina – Clinton +2.6 (Trump won, +3.7)
Arizona – Clinton +1.3 (Trump won, +3.5)
Notice, the only state that Clinton was not further ahead of Trump than Biden is was Arizona. In fact, she was – on average -- +1.1 points further ahead of Trump on Oct. 22 in these six key states than Biden currently is.
Make of the polls what you will, folks. Thanks for reading.
submitted by democrat_plantation to Conservative [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 05:59 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Seventh Step (Second Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series. In October 2020, I provided a final comprehensive review of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies to pursue for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter, I provided a final update on the general standing of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle.
 
This step will provide a final update on the competitive state house and state senate districts that lie within or near the 30 congressional districts that this series is either targeting or defending. These state legislative districts are grouped by state, and were then listed in the order of the related congressional districts’ overall priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support and the overall competitiveness of the congressional districts in question. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters. In this step’s first quarter, a list of competitive state legislative districts located in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York was provided.
In this second quarter, target legislative districts situated in Oklahoma, Utah, South Carolina, and New Mexico will be examined. Every state legislative district listed in this post will include its current controlling party (D or R), incumbent’s name (or an OPEN indication if said incumbent is retiring), experimentally calculated Cook PVI, the CNalysis rating given at the time of this writing, and the congressional districts that it overlaps with. The Democratic nominee’s campaign website and latest fundraising numbers will also be provided, as well as the latest fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent. At the end of each state’s group of legislative districts, a summary of the status of our campaigns there will be delivered.
Some candidates are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the twentieth step of this series.
 
Oklahoma:
HD-83 (D, Chelsey Branham, R+10, Tilt D): OK-05
Chelsey Branham (+): $52,800, https://www.chelseybranham.com/ GOP: Eric Roberts: $45,888
Summary: According to the pre-runoff reports, Chelsey Branham is raising a decent amount for the lone competitive State House race in Oklahoma, and is also currently leading her GOP opponent Eric Roberts in the fundraising department. Really nothing to see at this moment.
Utah:
HD-33 (R, Craig Hall, D+1, Tilt R): UT-04
Fatima Dirie (+): $45,137, https://www.votefatima.com/ GOP: Craig Hall: $108,013
HD-38 (R, Eric Hutchings, R+6, Tilt R): UT-04
Ashlee Matthews (+): $42,277, http://www.ashleeforutah.com/ GOP: Eric Hutchings: $65,407
HD-43 (R, Cheryl K. Acton, R+12, Tilt R): UT-04
Diane Lewis (-): $66,522, https://dianelewiscampaign.com/ GOP: Cheryl K. Acton: $27,818
HD-45 (R, Steven Eliason, R+8, Lean R): UT-04
Wendy Davis (+): $58,771, https://www.wendydavisutah.com/ GOP: Steven Eliason: $66,179
HD-47 (R, Steve Christiansen, R+15, Lean R): UT-04
Scott Bell (+): $26,355, https://scottbellforutahhd47.com/ GOP: Steve Christiansen: $51,767
Summary: The 2020 General and the Received Contributions reports show that the Democratic nominees in HD-33, HD-38, HD-43, and HD-45 have all broken the $40,000 fundraising mark, which is generally the amount that a winning State House campaign should raise. With the exception of HD-43, however, all of the Democratic nominees are being outraised by their respective GOP incumbents. The one race to pay attention to in this state is HD-47. The Democratic nominee, Scott Bell, has posted a respectable fundraising amount, but is being outraised by the district’s GOP incumbent, Steve Christiansen, according to the total fundraising numbers calculated from the 2020 General and the Received Contributions reports. Small dollar donations to Scott Bell’s campaign can close the moderate fundraising gap and noticeably improve our chances of flipping this district.
South Carolina:
SD-41 (R, Sandy Senn, R+6, Tilt D): SC-01
Sam Skardon (+): $307,203, https://samskardon.com/ GOP: Sandy Senn: $200,592
SD-43 (R, George Campsen, R+8, Lean R): SC-01
Richard Hricik (+): $239,872, https://www.richardforsc.com/ GOP: George Campsen: $283,375
SD-44 (R, OPEN, R+10, Lean R): SC-01
Debbie Bryant (+): $103,469, https://www.debbieforsenate.com/ GOP: Brian Adams: $41,459
HD-15 (D, J.A. Moore, R+3, Tilt D): SC-01
J.A. Moore: $39,802, https://jamooreforsc.com/ GOP: Samuel Rivers Jr.: $9,349
HD-114 (R, Lin Bennett, R+11, Lean R): SC-01
Ed Sutton (+): $91,037, https://suttonforsc.com/ GOP: Lin Bennett: $54,021
HD-115 (D, Spencer Wetmore, R+7, Lean D): SC-01
Spencer Wetmore (+): $97,688, https://spencerwetmore.com/ GOP: Josh Stokes: $10,586
HD-116 (D, OPEN, D+1, Lean D): SC-01
Chardale Murray (-): $7,316, https://murrayschouse116.wixsite.com/website GOP: Carroll O’Neal: $795
HD-117 (D, Krystle Matthews, R+3, Lean D): SC-01
Krystle Matthews (+): $35,681, https://www.krystleforsc.com/ GOP: Jordan Scott Pace: $18,746
Summary: Over in the State Senate races, Sam Skardon and Richard Hricik have posted excellent fundraising numbers in their SD-41 and SD-43 runs so far, according to the October 10 reports. However, Richard Hricik is still getting outraised by the SD-43 GOP incumbent George Campsen. The State House races also have some notable observations. Democratic nominees Ed Sutton in HD-114 and Spencer Wetmore in HD-115 have posted exceptionally high fundraising numbers in the October 10 reports. Spencer Wetmore’s performance can somewhat be explained from her previous victory in a special election for this particular State House district. Overall, all of our candidates running in the races listed in this state are in good standing.
New Mexico:
SD-29 (R, Gregory Baca, EVEN, Lean R):
Paul Baca (-): $82,389, https://paul4nm.com/ GOP: Gregory Baca: $45,110
SD-30 (D, OPEN, D+1, Lean D):
Pamela Cordova (-): $145,642, https://www.pamcordovaforsenate.com/ GOP: Joshua A. Sanchez: $42,634
SD-35 (R, OPEN, R+6, Lean R):
Neomi Martinez-Parra (+): $165,108, https://neomi4nmsenate.com/ GOP: Crystal Diamond: $187,093
HD-53 (D, Willie Madrid, EVEN, Lean D):
Willie Madrid (-): $31,733, http://www.williemadrid53.com/ GOP: Ricky Little: $30,112
HD-63 (R, Martin Ruben Zamora, R+5, Lean R):
Randal Brown (-): $96,359, https://drbrownfornm63.com/ GOP: Martin Ruben Zamora: $69,541
Summary: According to the Second General reports, Pamela Cordova and Neomi Martinez-Parra, the Democratic nominees in SD-30 and SD-35, have raised over $100,000 for their State Senate campaigns, which is generally the goal for a winning State Senate campaign in New Mexico to achieve. However, Neomi Martinez-Parra is still getting outraised by her GOP opponent, Crystal Diamond. We are in very excellent condition for the two State House races listed for this state, as both our Democratic nominees have raised over $31,000 for their campaigns, which is generally the winning baseline for a State House campaign to achieve. In short, we are making stellar progress in the state legislative races in New Mexico.
 
And thus we come the end of this step’s second quarter. The third quarter will identify key districts in Texas, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, and Indiana. After that, the final quarter will cover competitive districts in California, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 02:36 ammodotcom Gun Background Checks: How the State Came To Decide Who Can and Cannot Buy a Firearm

Gun Background Checks: How the State Came To Decide Who Can and Cannot Buy a Firearm

https://preview.redd.it/5uukyytmpqu51.jpg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=88429fa516f4d7772009b0a72d444e82a8c3410a
Prior to 1968, most adults in the United States could purchase a firearm without state interference. Guns were available in local retail stores, as well as mail-order catalogs, and as long as you hadn’t been convicted of a felony and you had the funds, there weren’t any questions asked.
Things are different now. Depending on where in America you are and what type of gun you want to buy, there’s a good chance you’ll need to pass a NICS-mandated background check to complete your purchase.
Although many people hold a strong opinion for and against gun background checks, they’ve proven to be an integral part of the state's gun control apparatus – and they don’t appear to be leaving anytime soon.
Since background checks are such a requirement for today’s gun enthusiasts, it’s important for gun owners (and those who may someday be gun owners) to understand everything they can, including how the current system works and how it came to be.

The History of Gun Background Checks in the U.S.

The history of background checks for gun purchases reaches back to the first restrictions placed on individuals trying to purchase firearms. Here in the U.S., this occured after the Civil War, when several southern states adopted “Black Codes,” which replaced the prior slave codes and worked to suppress the freedoms of black Americans. Among other restrictions, the Black Codes forbade African-Americans from owning firearms.
The Federal Firearms Act of 1938 began restricting the sales of firearms, requiring those in the business of selling firearms to purchase a Federal Firearms License (FFL) and maintain a list of persons who purchased firearms, including their name and address. The Firearms Act of 1938 also listed convicted felons as the first prohibited persons – who are not allowed, by law, to own, purchase, or possess firearms.
And then something happened that would forever change American history. Six days before Thanksgiving, on November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas using a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that was chambered in 6.5x52mm Carcano and fitted with a telescopic sight, which he'd purchased from a mail-order catalog.
The 1963 Kennedy assassination was followed by additional high-profile assassinations over the next 5 years:
February 21st, 1965: Malcolm X was assassinated by three members of the Nation of Islam who bull-rushed him on-stage during a speech in Harlem with a 12-gauge sawed-off shotgun and handguns chambered in .45 ACP and 9mm. X had publicly broken away from the Nation of Islam and was openly critical of its leader, Elijah Muhammad.
April 4th, 1968: Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by escaped convict James Earl Ray using a .30-06 caliber rifle in Memphis. The prior year Ray had broken out of the Missouri State Penitentiary by hiding in a bread delivery truck. Ray was a notorious escape artist and career criminal who used an alias when purchasing the rifle.
(After the assassination, investigators launched a sixty-five day manhunt for King’s assassin that led them across two continents and four countries which culminated in Ray's arrest at London's Heathrow airport where he was caught traveling on a forged Canadian passport. A decade later in 1979, Ray again broke out of jail - this time escaping from Tennessee’s most notorious maximum security prison, Brushy Mountain State Penitentiary, where he was serving a life sentence for King's assassination.)
June 5th, 1968: Two months after King's assassination in Memphis, Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy (JFK's younger brother) was assassinated by Palestinian-born Sirhan Bishara Sirhan in Los Angeles using a revolver chambered in .22. Earlier that day, Kennedy had won the South Dakota and California presidential primaries. Sirhan claimed to be part of an occult organization called the Rosicrucians.
The cumulative effect of these assassinations - along with the emergence of the Black Panthers, who'd started hanging out at government buildings armed to the teeth - led to the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was specifically intended to keep “firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetence.”
Through the Gun Control Act of 1968, the federal government placed restrictions on the sale of firearms across state lines and expanded the prohibited persons who were not allowed to purchase or possess firearms. Under the new law, gun purchases became illegal for those who were:
  • Convicted of a non-business-related felony
  • Found to be mentally incompetent
  • Users of illegal substances
To determine this information, those who wished to purchase a firearm from an FFL had to complete a questionnaire of yes/no questions such as “Are you a convicted felon?” and “Are you a fugitive from justice?” Although these questions needed to be answered, they did not require verification from the gun seller.
In 1972, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was formed as a way to help control the illegal sales and use of firearms.
In March of 1981, the assassination attempt of President Ronald Reagan led to further gun legislation with the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, which amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 to now require background checks for the purchase of firearms from a retailer. The Brady Act, as it’s known today, also led to the development of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which launched in 1998, and is the current law on background checks for gun purchases in the U.S.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, and was launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998. The NICS is used by FFLs to check the eligibility of those who wish to purchase firearms.
Located at the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division in Clarksburg, West Virginia, the NICS is currently used by 30 states and five districts, as well as the District of Columbia, to check the backgrounds of those who wish to purchase firearms. Those states that opt not to use the NICS have their own point of contact (POC) to complete background checks.
The NICS applies a person’s identifying characteristics, including name and date of birth, to its own index, as well as the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database and the Interstate Identification Index. These systems compare the intended purchaser’s demographic information against the national databases to see if they match someone deemed a prohibited person. Prohibited persons include those who are or were:
  • Convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a year or more
  • Fugitives from justice
  • A user of or addicted to a controlled substance
  • Adjudicated as a mental defective or been committed to a mental health institution
  • Illegal aliens
  • Aliens admitted to the U.S. under a nonimmigrant visa
  • Discharged from the U.S. Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
  • Renounced their citizenship to the U.S.
  • Subject to a court order that restrains their interactions with an intimate partner or child
  • Convicted of domestic violence
Since its conception, NICS has completed over 300 million background checks and has issued more than 1.3 million denials. The NICS is available 17 hours a day, seven days a week, except for Christmas Day.

How Do Background Checks Work?

When you visit a gun store and attempt to purchase a firearm, you must complete a Firearm Transaction Record, or ATF Form 4473 – which requires the intended purchaser’s name, address, and birthdate. The form also requires a government-issued photo ID and asks questions regarding the individual’s appearance, including height and weight.
Once the form’s completed, the gun seller can either call the 1-800 number for NICS or use the online system to run the background check. In over 90 percent of the cases, the results are almost immediate, with the system either approving, delaying, or denying the purchase within minutes.
With an approval, the sale can immediately proceed as planned with you purchasing the firearm. If there is a delay, the NICS and FBI investigate the inquiry over the next three days. If the FFL does not hear anything within that time period or if a determination cannot be made, then the retailer can, but does not have to, continue with the firearm transfer. When this occurs, it’s often referred to as a “default proceed” sale.
When a denial is made, which occurs in only about 2 percent of background checks, the retailer is unable to sell or transfer the firearm to the individual in question. You must submit a request to the NICS to receive the reason for your denial, the most common of which is a history of a felony conviction.
If you believe you were given an erroneous denial, you can appeal the decision by completing a Voluntary Appeal File (VAF), which can be done online or by mailing your request to the FBI. Along with the VAF application, you will also need to be fingerprinted to move forward with the appeal process.

When is a Background Check Needed to Purchase a Gun?

A background check is necessary any time you purchase a gun from a retail provider, which is defined as someone conducting business in the sale of firearms. These sellers must have a Federal Firearms License (FFL) and are legally mandated to complete a background check for every firearm sold to a non-licensed individual.
It doesn’t matter if you purchase the firearm in a brick-and-mortar store, a gun show, online, or through a magazine – if the seller is a retailer provider (i.e. has an FFL), then the background check must occur.

When is a Background Check Not Needed to Purchase a Gun?

Under federal law, any adult can sell a personally owned firearm to another adult in the same state as long as you know, to the best of your ability, that they’re allowed to own a firearm.
Private sellers aren’t required to ask for identification, they don’t have to complete any forms, nor keep any records of the transaction. What’s more, federal law does not mandate a background check to purchase a firearm from a private seller. This includes buying a gun from a relative, a neighbor, or a friend.
Although federal law does not demand a background check for the private sale of firearms, some states do require a background check.
If you inherit or are gifted a firearm, you don’t need a background check.

Do Gun Background Checks Differ By State?

Thirty states, five districts, and D.C. all rely solely on the NICS for gun background checks. The following 13 states use their own full point of contact (POC) data system for gun background checks and do not use the FBI’s system:
Some states, namely Maryland, New Hampshire, Washington, and Wisconsin, use NICS for long guns, but a state program for background checks on handguns. Iowa, Nebraska, and North Carolina use NICS, but have a partial POC for background checks in relation to handgun permits.
Many of these states have added their own provisions to their background checks, on top of what federal law mandates. In most cases, they also include looking at state and local records to determine if the person in question should or should not be allowed to own a firearm.
Some states have implemented universal background checks via an FFL, even during a private gun sale. While Maryland and Pennsylvania require background checks for all handgun transfers, regardless of retail or private sale, the following states require a background check for all firearm transfers:
In addition, some states require permits to purchase firearms. Hawaii, Illinois, and Massachusetts require a permit for all gun purchases, while Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, and North Carolina require a permit for purchasing a handgun. These permits often require their own background check as well.
It should be noted that although these laws exist in Nebraska, they’re not currently being enforced, but are expected to be by January of 2020.

But Isn’t There a Gun Show Loophole?

There is no gun show loophole when it comes to background checks for gun purchases. The law clearly states that if you purchase a firearm from a person with an FFL, a background check must occur. If you purchase a gun from a private seller, you don’t need a background check. These same two principles apply whether you’re at a gun show or not.
So if you purchase a firearm from a gun seller with an FFL at a gun show, you will need to complete Form 4473 and have a background check. Under federal law, if you purchase a gun from a private seller at a gun show, you don’t need to have a background check. Your state laws may differ.
Of the average 4,000 gun shows in the U.S. each year, it’s estimated that 50 to 75 percent of vendors have an FFL, and therefore require purchasers of firearms to complete background checks. But that doesn’t mean that 25 to 50 percent of vendors are private sellers of firearms – many of these are vendors that sell gun paraphernalia. Gun shows are filled with vendors who sell everything from t-shirts and ball caps to holsters and concealed carry gear, and it’s these sellers that make up the majority of the remaining non-licensed vendors.
Are there private gun sellers at gun shows? Absolutely. But the idea that criminals are flocking to gun shows to illegally purchase firearms is untrue. In a report by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 0.7 percent of convicted criminals purchased their firearms at gun shows.

Have Background Checks Stopped Gun Violence and Crimes?

The research on the effectiveness of background checks to stop gun violence shows conflicting evidence. In an October 2018 published study completed by U.S. Davis and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in the 10 years following California’s comprehensive background checks, the number of gun homicides and suicides were not impacted. In a similar study published in July of the same year, gun violence did not increase with the repeal of comprehensive background checks.
Yet other studies show that background checks do reduce violence. A 2015 study found that requiring Connecticut handgun owners to go through a background check led to a 40-percent decline in gun homicides and suicides over a 10-year period.
This contradicting research shows that the problem of criminals getting their hands on guns can’t be stopped by mere background checks. According to the Department of Justice Special Report on Firearm Violence, 77 percent of state prisoners associated with firearm crimes received their firearm through:
  • Theft
  • Black market
  • Drug dealer
  • On the street
  • Family or friends
Not one of these criminals would have been affected by background checks, universal or otherwise. After all, most criminals don’t feel obligated to use legal means to obtain their firearms since they've either broken laws previously or plan to do so.
Beyond theft and the black market, criminals also use straw purchases, which are illegal, to get their hands on firearms. Straw purchasers are people who can pass a background check and intentionally purchase firearms for criminals. The San Bernardino terrorists used a straw purchaser to get the firearms they used to kill 14 people in the 2015 mass shooting.
Background checks for gun purchases often become a talking point after these types of events, but those who partake in this terroristic activity often don’t have criminal histories that would flag a background check. For instance, the Virginia Tech madman legally purchased a gun at a Virginia-based FFL and passed his background check before using it to shoot fellow students.
And then there’s the fact that sometimes the background check system fails. NICS is not a 100-percent absolute system, and time has shown that gun background checks can only be as reliable as the records they contain. Devin Kelley, the Texas Church madman, was prohibited by law to own or purchase a firearm because of a domestic violence conviction while in the Air Force. Yet Kelley purchased four firearms between 2014 and 2017, completing Form 4473 and being approved each time by NICS.
In this case, the Air Force failed to report the court martial to the FBI’s National Crime Information Center, which the NICS relies on for information. So, again, the system is only as good as the information it contains.
(It's also worth pointing out that Kelley's murderous rampage was stopped by a private citizen, a plumber named Stephen Willeford, who legally owned an AR-15. Kelley was shot in the leg and torso by Willeford, stopping him from murdering more people inside that church before the police could arrive.)
And whereas sometimes the system on which gun background checks rely is incomplete, in other instances it produces false positives. In other words, law-abiding citizens get incorrectly matched by NICS, or their respective state-level POC data system, with criminals who have similar names. And if that happens to you, then you could be denied your right to own a gun because of a bureaucratic error. Estimates from the Crime Prevention Research Center pointed to 93 percent of initial NICS denials turning out as false positives in 2009, with similar estimates in 2010. (The Obama administration quit reporting these statistics after 2010.) Yes, individuals can appeal this denial and restore their gun rights, but dealing with bureacracy can be an expensive hassle.
The myriad of issues with NICS is why the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a trade association representing the firearms industry, launched FixNICS.org in 2013. It is also why the NSSF publishes a yearly ranking of the states based on the number of mental health records they provide relative to their population – to encourage the states to comply with existing federal law, and submit any and all records establishing an individual as a prohibited person to the FBI's databases. Their goal is to improve the existing system for everyone so that gun background checks are more accurate and complete.
Whether you like them or not, background checks are here to stay for gun owners and gun purchasers – but they are not the saving grace that some make them out to be. Background checks for gun purchases can only do so much and are not the permanent solution to keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and keeping Americans safe from gun violence. More concerning is that they give the state an ever-growing list of private citizens who own guns, and such a list has historically been used for subsequent gun confiscation attempts.
Gun Background Checks: How the State Came To Decide Who Can and Cannot Buy a Firearm originally appeared in The Resistance Library at Ammo.com.
submitted by ammodotcom to secondamendment [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 21:00 darkra01 Weekly Big Ten Discussion Thread

This is a weekly thread to discuss football in the Big Ten. Discussion should be limited to football in this conference.
If you have any suggestions on how to improve this weekly series going forward, I'd love to hear it.
Welcome back after a long and tumultuous off-season filled with highs and lows. For preseason talk and discussion see here and here. Here's hoping we can get through an entire season with no postponements or hiccups.
Week 1 Results
None because nothing's been played yet.
Week 1 Schedule (Rankings reflect the /CFB Poll)
Date Teams Time/TV (EST) Spread Notes
10/23 Illinois @ #17 Wisconsin 8pm Big Ten Network Wisconsin by 18.5
10/24 Rutgers @ Michigan State Noon Big Ten Network MSU by 13
10/24 Nebraska @ #9 Ohio State Noon Fox Ohio State by 26 Big Noon Saturday Game
10/24 #13 Penn State @ Indiana 3:30p Fox Sports 1 Penn State by 6.5
10/24 Iowa @ Purdue 3:30p Big Ten Network Iowa by 3.5 Brohm diagnosed with COVID-19; Out this weekend
10/24 #22 Michigan @ #24 Minnesota 7:30p ABC Michigan by 3.5 ABC's Saturday Night Primetime Game
10/24 Maryland @ Northwestern 7:30p Big Ten Network Northwestern by 11
Byes: None
Standings
East Record West Record
Ohio State 0-0 (0-0) Wisconsin 0-0 (0-0)
Michigan State 0-0 (0-0) Northwestern 0-0 (0-0)
Penn State 0-0 (0-0) Iowa 0-0 (0-0)
Michigan 0-0 (0-0) Purdue 0-0 (0-0)
Rutgers 0-0 (0-0) Nebraska 0-0 (0-0)
Indiana 0-0 (0-0) Minnesota 0-0 (0-0)
Maryland 0-0 (0-0) Illinois 0-0 (0-0)
Past Discussion Threads

Discuss predictions, upsets, coaching, general Big Ten news etc. here

submitted by darkra01 to CFB [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 05:14 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Seventh Step (First Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series. In October 2020, I provided a final comprehensive review of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies to pursue for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter, I provided a final update on the general standing of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle.
 
This step will provide a final update on the competitive state house and state senate districts that lie within or near the 30 congressional districts that this series is either targeting or defending. These state legislative districts are grouped by state, and were then listed in the order of the related congressional districts’ overall priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support and the overall competitiveness of the congressional districts in question. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters. In the first quarter of this step, a list of competitive state legislative districts located in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York will be provided.
Every state legislative district listed in this post will include its current controlling party (D, R, or VACANT), incumbent’s name (or an OPEN indication if said incumbent is retiring), experimentally calculated Cook PVI, the CNalysis rating given at the time of this writing, and the congressional districts that it overlaps with. The Democratic nominee’s campaign website and latest fundraising numbers will also be provided, as well as the latest fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent. At the end of each state’s group of legislative districts, a summary of the status of our campaigns there will be delivered.
Some candidates are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the twentieth step of this series.
 
Georgia:
SD-9 (R, P.K. Martin, R+11, Lean R): GA-07
Nikki Merritt (+): $99,413, https://merritt4georgia.com/ GOP: P.K. Martin: $248,431
SD-48 (D, OPEN, R+4, Tilt D): GA-07
Michelle Au (+): $328,712, https://auforga.com/ GOP: Matt Reeves: $277,445
HD-95 (D, Beth Moore, R+4, Lean D): GA-07
Beth Moore (+): $84,147, https://www.mooreforgeorgia.com/ GOP: Erica McCurdy: $78,489
HD-102 (D, Gregg Kennard, R+8, Tilt D): GA-07
Gregg Kennard (-): $33,731, https://www.rep-greggkennard.com/ GOP: Soo Hong: $126,468
HD-104 (R, Chuck Efstration, R+15, Lean R): GA-07
Nakita Hemingway (-): $91,419, https://nakitahemingway.com/ GOP: Chuck Efstration: $333,898
HD-106 (R, Brett Harrell, R+4, Lean D): GA-07
Rebecca Mitchell (+): $140,862, https://www.rebeccaforgeorgia.com/ GOP: Brett Harrell: $365,910
HD-108 (D, Jasmine Clark, R+7, Lean D): GA-07
Jasmine Clark: $104,528, https://www.jasmineclarkforgeorgia.com/ GOP: Johnny Crist: $55,730
Summary: There is nothing notable in the Georgia State Senate races. There are a couple of notable observations to be found in the State House races, though. Democratic nominees Rebecca Mitchell in HD-106 and Jasmine Clark in HD-108 have both broken the $100,000 fundraising benchmark, indicating that exceptionally strong campaigns are taking place in these districts. Rebecca Mitchell, however, is still being outraised by the GOP incumbent Brett Harrell. The races that should have our attention right now are SD-9 and HD-102, as the Democratic nominees in these races are currently being outraised by their opponents as of the September 2020 reports. However, the gaps in these two races are narrow enough to close if more donations were directed towards the corresponding Democratic campaigns. Also, these Democrats have posted modest overall fundraising amounts, meaning that any donations this late in the election cycle have enough of an impact to change the course of these races.
Michigan:
HD-61 (R, OPEN, EVEN, Tilt D): MI-06
Christine Morse (-): $235,215, https://www.vote4morse.com/ GOP: Bronwyn Haltom: $338,495
Summary: The post primary reports show Christine Morse, the Democratic nominee in the sole State House race listed for this state, raising extraordinary amounts for her campaign. However, she is still getting outraised by her GOP opponent, Bronwyn Haltom. Christine Morse could definitely use some additional volunteer support in the last weeks to help turn this State House district blue.
Pennsylvania:
SD-15 (R, John DiSanto, R+3, Tilt R): PA-10
George Scott (+): $470,562, https://www.georgescottpa15.com/ GOP: John DiSanto: $610,909
HD-18 (R, K.C. Tomlinson, D+5, Tossup): PA-01
Harold Hayes (+): $769,538, https://www.hayesforpa.com/ GOP: K.C. Tomlinson: $505,630
HD-29 (R, Meghan Schroeder, R+5, Tilt R): PA-01
Marlene Katz (-): $119,149, https://www.marlenekatzforpa.com/ GOP: Meghan Schroeder: $131,295
HD-53 (D, Steven Malagari, R+1, Lean D): PA-01
Steven Malagari (+): $155,227, https://www.votemalagari.com/ GOP: Miles Arnott: $8,823
HD-105 (R, Andrew Lewis, R+6, Tilt R): PA-10
Brittney Rodas (-): $85,528, https://rodasforpa.com/ GOP: Andrew Lewis: $270,037
HD-143 (D, Wendy Ullman, R+4, Tilt D): PA-01
Wendy Ullman (+): $186,829, https://www.wendyullman.com/ GOP: Shelby Labs: $7,070
HD-144 (R, F. Todd Polinchock, R+5, Tilt R): PA-01
Gary Spillane (+): $75,000, https://www.electgaryspillane.com/ GOP: F. Todd Polinchock: $47,095
HD-151 (R, Todd Stephens, D+3, Tilt D): PA-01
Jonathan Kassa (+): $94,061, https://kassaforstaterep.com/ GOP: Todd Stephens: $115,030
HD-178 (R, Wendi Thomas, R+6, Tilt R): PA-01
Ann Marie Mitchell (+): $89,061, https://voteannmariemitchell.com/ GOP: Wendi Thomas: $306,305
Summary: George Scott has posted excellent fundraising numbers in his State Senate run, but is still running behind the GOP incumbent, John DiSanto. There are also a couple of notable observations for the battleground State House races. The latest fundraising reports revealed that the Democratic nominees running in HD-18, HD-53, and HD-143 are significant outraising their GOP opponents by at least six figures. This is expected for the latter two districts, as the Democrats there are currently the incumbents. HD-18, however, is probably due in part to the Democrat unsuccessfully running in a special election in this district earlier this year. For this state, the key races that need additional support are located in HD-29 and HD-151. In both of these races, the Democratic nominees are currently being outraised by the districts’ GOP incumbents as of the 30-day post primary reports and the few 2nd Friday pre-election reports that are available. However, the fundraising gaps are narrow enough to close if both of our candidates received more donations very soon. The overall fundraising numbers of these Democrats are also medium-sized, which means that last minute donations can improve their chances of winning.
New York:
SD-1 (R, OPEN, R+3, Tilt R): NY-01
Laura Ahearn: $428,097, https://www.ahearnforstatesenate.com/ GOP: Anthony Palumbo: $156,273
SD-3 (D, Monica Martinez, EVEN, Lean D): NY-01, NY-02
Monica Martinez: $670,406, https://monicaforsenate.com/ GOP: Alexis Weik: $128,872
SD-4 (R, Philip Boyle, R+2, Lean R): NY-01, NY-02
Christine Pellegrino: $134,156, http://www.christinepellegrino.com/ GOP: Philip Boyle: $38,442
SD-50 (VACANT, OPEN, D+3, Tilt D): NY-24
John Mannion (+): $295,673, https://www.mannionforstatesenate.com/ GOP: Angi Renna: $108,878
AD-9 (R, OPEN, R+11, Lean R): NY-02
Ann Brancato (+): $15,662, https://www.annbrancato.com/ GOP: Michael Durso: $47,837
AD-12 (VACANT, OPEN, R+5, Lean R): NY-02
Michael Marcantonio (+): $212,035, https://www.michaelmarcantonio.com/ GOP: Keith Brown: $104,942
AD-15 (R, Michael Montesano, R+5, Lean R): NY-02
Joseph Sackman III (+): $28,028, https://joesackmanfornysassembly.com/ GOP: Michael Montesano: $31,755
AD-121 (R, John Salka, R+5, Tilt R): NY-22
Dan Buttermann (-): $34,358, https://www.buttermannforassembly.com/ GOP: John Salka: $17,238
Summary: The 32 day pre general reports highlight a couple of noticable observations in the New York state legislative races. In the State Senate races, Monica Martinez, the Democratic incumbent for SD-3, is posting a very strong fundraising amount and is vastly outraising her GOP opponent Alexis Weik. Over in the State Assembly races, Ann Brancato, the Democratic nominee in AD-9, is raising a rather low five-digit cumulative sum. A viable candidate needs to raise at least $21,000 in order to get a state assembly campaign off the ground, if past trends in New York races hold. AD-15 is the sole race to focus on for this state, as Democratic nominee Joseph Sackman III has posted a moderate fundraising amount and is being slightly outraised by his GOP opponent Michael Montesano, according to the 32 day pre general reports. This means that small dollar donations can considerably improve Joseph Sackman III’s chances of flipping the district if enough of them are directed to his campaign very soon.
 
And thus we come the end of this step’s first quarter. The second quarter will go over target legislative districts situated in Oklahoma, Utah, South Carolina, and New Mexico. Then, the third quarter will identify key districts in Texas, Ohio, Illinois, Florida, and Indiana. After that, the final quarter will cover competitive districts in California, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]


2020.10.22 01:10 Hydra_in_your_soup I unwittingly title jumped (US-Nebraska), am homeless and have no mailing address to mail back and forth...I’d let it go (illness/homeless/mail is screwed up national) and hadn’t heard from the buyer in a while. What is the very worst case they can do? Could I have a failure to appear?

US-Nebraska; During the pandemic when the DMV was closed I bought a camper trailer then resold it (got in over my head with what repairs were needed). I resold it to a young man who was very persistent texting and showing up to visit, who offered lowball and I accidentally accepted an offer via text- “I’ll take it tonight”, I said okay thinking it was a new person and hadn’t recognized his phone number. For various reasons I drove it to his buddies’ house, and buddy and his mom helped unhook it. I was being forced to move, leaving me homeless, so I accepted an offer to couch surf at an out of state friend’s.and within a few days was I gone. I’d just given the buyer the signed title (again the DMV was closed or maybe had just reopened). I didn’t know it was a big deal, a trailer title is like $10 in NE and I’d happily have paid it had it been COVID safe.
I didn’t mean harm, and had previously bought a car that way myself without knowing it was a big deal.
So, I’m couch surfing with no mailing address and am worried that the angry mom of the young man I sold it to (he didn’t tell her. He is like 6’2” and I thought him maybe 21 but at least 18, however he was younger).
So, what is the worst case scenario? Could she have petitioned for a court date that I would have missed since I don’t have a mailing address? Could there be a bench warrant? What is the safest way to find out?
And, what can I do to make it right? I’m still dead broke, ill and homeless.
submitted by Hydra_in_your_soup to legaladvice [link] [comments]


2020.10.21 23:45 throwaway-va90 Case Update Date Change - Case "Touched"

Hi guys - we've applied for I-130. Applied mid-July, received NOA1 at the end of that month. Assigned to Nebraska. Under case update, our last date had been July 28th, 2020, but today the date changed to today's date (10/21/2020) - I understand that this is just the date the case was last touched. However, because I'm looking for hope: any cases where your case was touched and then approved a few days after?
submitted by throwaway-va90 to immigration [link] [comments]


2020.10.21 19:00 captaingalaxy Week 8 Match-up Preview Thread: #9 Ohio State Buckeyes vs. Nebraska Cornhuskers

#9 Ohio State vs. Nebraska
When: Saturday, October, 24, 12:00 PM Eastern
Where: Ohio Stadium - Columbus, OH
Watch: Fox
Odds: Ohio State by 26.0 pts.
Total Points: 67.5
All-Time Series : Ohio State vs. Nebraska
Ohio State and Nebraska have met 8 times since 09/24/1955.
These teams last met 389 days ago on 09/28/2019.
Series Wins: Ohio State 7-0-1 Nebraska
Longest streak of continuous meetings: 4 (2016-2019).
Ohio State has won the last 5 meetings (2012-2019) in this series.
Last 6 Meetings
Winner Date Location Ohio State Nebraska Notes
Ohio State 2019-09-28 Lincoln, NE 48 7
Ohio State 2018-11-03 Columbus, OH 36 31
Ohio State 2017-10-14 Lincoln, NE 56 14
Ohio State 2016-11-05 Columbus, OH 62 3
Ohio State 2012-10-06 Columbus, OH 63 38
Nebraska 2011-10-08 Lincoln, NE 27 34
Series Comparison Data via Winsipedia
Through Week 7
Week Ohio State 0-0(0-0) Result Nebraska 0-0(0-0) Result
1 BYE N/A BYE N/A
2 BYE N/A BYE N/A
3 BYE N/A BYE N/A
4 BYE N/A BYE N/A
5 BYE N/A BYE N/A
6 BYE N/A BYE N/A
7 BYE N/A BYE N/A
All rankings reflect the current /cfb poll
Ohio State Injury Report
Data Scraped: 2020-10-16 20:00:03
Player Position Status Reported Notes
Master Teague III RB Ques Oct 24 – Achilles Sat, Sep 19 Teague III has an Achilles injury, and it is unclear if he will be active for the season opener against Nebraska.
Marcus Crowley RB Ques Oct 24 – Knee Sat, Sep 19 Crowley is managing a knee injury, and it remains to be seen if he will suit up against Nebraska on Oct. 24.
Haskell Garrett DT Ques Oct 24 – Face Sat, Sep 19 Garrett is tending to an offseason injury to his cheek, and it is unknown if he will partake in the season opener against Nebraska.
Injury data lifted from: boydsbets.com
Nebraska Injury Report
Data Scraped: 2020-10-16 20:00:03
Player Position Status Reported Notes
Erza Miller OL Out For Season – Eligibility Sat, Sep 19 Miller has been deemed ineligible for the entire 2020 season due to NCAA rules.
Will Nixon WR Out For Season – Knee Sat, Sep 19 Nixon will miss the entire 2020 season due to a torn ACL.
Omar Manning WR Ques Oct 24 – Undisclosed Thu, Oct 1 Manning is managing an unspecified injury, and it is unclear if he will face Ohio Sate in the season opener.
Braxton Clark CB Out For Season – Shoulder Fri, Oct 2 Clark has a shoulder injury and will miss the remainder of the 2020 season.
Wan Dale Robinson WR Ques Oct 24 – Undisclosed Tue, Oct 13 Robinson is dealing with an undefined injury, and it is unknown if he will play in the season opener versus Ohio State.
Alante Brown WR Prob Oct 24 – Undisclosed Thu, Oct 15 Brown has an injury to an unlisted location, but it is not expected to impede his status for Oct. 24 versus Ohio State.
Injury data lifted from: boydsbets.com
What are your "Keys to the Game"?
Who do you think wins?
Do you think the favorite will cover the spread?
Which player(s) are you most interested to watch?
Let's talk football!
To vote in the matchup "who will win poll" simply include the name of the team you think will win enclosed by {} as part of your TOP LEVEL comment discussing the matchup. To change your vote just edit your initial comment to bracket the other team. You can change your vote as often as you like until the GAME THREAD is posted
A full listing of accepted FBS team aliases can be found here.. For FCS teams you will need to use the full name as it appears in the post title.
A listing of links, and live vote totals, to all Match-up Preview threads for the current week can be found HERE.
Like this format? Generate your own "Match-up Discussion Thread" with the Match-up Discussion Thread Generator. Please DM dupreesdiamond with any issues/suggestions regarding this template
submitted by captaingalaxy to CFB [link] [comments]


2020.10.20 05:22 baronesslucy Dangerous secrets

Some secrets can cause someone to disappear, die a suspicious death, or never be seen again. The actor I will call him Miller has no idea that I had the missing book.
I was given a copy of the yet to be published tell-all book that an ex-partner had written about him . A stranger gave me the book outside a mall in Omaha, Nebraska. I put it in a book bag and took it home. The woman who wrote the book drowned in a lake a couple of days after the book went missing.
The stranger who gave me the book later died. Other people who were thought to have the book died under mysterious or suspicious circumstances. This included 3 people in town but authorities never made the connections.
My neighbor's great-niece Mia is dating Miller's son Damon. Damon came into my house while I was on vacation and basically tore the place apart. Miller was furious with him.
They cleaned up my home. If I hadn't had a camera in my house, I never would have known. I had the book with me on vacation which saved my life. I hid it well after that.
Mia got sick with the flu and went to the doctor who questioned her morals. A few days later the doctor was found in his bed deceased.
I saw a black SUV going down the street. The doctor lived nearby. It was 2:00 am. I saw someone walking down the street. I knew who it was. When the doctor didn't show up for church, the pastor went to his house. Police were called and he was found in bed, unresponsive.
I later took Damon and Mia to the Amtrak station in Grand Island and they left town quickly.
I know who the killer is and he's Miller son, Damon. I never reported to police what he did. He seemed like such a nice guy. Killers like him are the most dangerous. He broke up with Mia as he had used her to gain access to the town, believing someone in town had the book and he killed 3 people. The doctor was killed due to comments about Mia. Police never connected the dots.
I ripped all the pages from the book and shredded it. Till the day I died, I was afraid that I would be killed if it were known that I had the book. I never told anyone what I knew as I was too scared.
submitted by baronesslucy to shortscarystories [link] [comments]


2020.10.20 00:25 wadefagen UIUC Senate Approves Modified Spring 2021 Schedule (Spring Break Cancelled)

Three major changes were just officially adopted to UIUC's Spring 2021 academic calendar:
With this, Illinois becomes the 9th Big Ten college to cancel Spring Break (Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, UW-Madison, and Iowa have already canceled their breaks). With the Fall semester ending on the earlier side (Dec. 18) and the late start of Spring (Jan. 25), Winter Break is officially five weeks long! ❄
Here's the full proposal, which passed with a vote of 129-13: https://www.senate.illinois.edu/20201019senate/EP21018_FINAL_20201019.pdf
(\: There was a point of order raised after the vote about a procedural rule that may not have been followed during the floor debate/voting. The Senate parliamentarian ruled the vote had been finalized and that thereby nullified the point of order. Everyone who I was talking to on text chat during the meeting left feeling that the vote passed so we're all going with that assumption that it's passed.))
submitted by wadefagen to UIUC [link] [comments]


2020.10.19 23:49 Jantobio3391 [Nebraska] question for backpay appeal winners

I’m asking everyone
So I had been determined that the 14 weeks I was not eligible for the decision was then reverse in July And only received two payments of the $600 ending of the week and then federal aid from trump but no back pay so last week on Tuesday I received $3000K Amazing right so I was assuming because the status from disqualified week changed to partial check Sadly it will never show me a processing sign so it’s hard to tell if my back pay is being paid out to me already but the empty weeks have all changed payment issue date to 10/10/2020 it’s now 10/18 Is it safe to assume they are back paying me the weeks I was disqualified for as of now or am I going to only get a partial check every week till what’s owed to me is owed or how do I go about this in my head for peace of mind.
I also have a condition that requires me to be home at the moment so I know I’m exempt due to the high risk document I have
So can anyone even outside Nebraska give me a peace of mind on this process Take note I did not receive anything till July mis way ending
submitted by Jantobio3391 to Unemployment [link] [comments]


2020.10.19 20:07 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Fifth Step (Fourth Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series.
 
This step will provide a final comprehensive review for each of the 25 districts that this series is targeting in the 2020 elections. As of now, the Democratic nominees have been selected for each target district. This review’s main objective is to gauge the progress of each nominee’s general election campaign. During the months that have transpired from the series’ last comprehensive review, excellent overall progress has been made in the target districts, which currently cover regions located throughout fifteen states. These districts are sorted by state, then ordered by priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support, the overall flippability of the districts in question, how soon within the 2020 cycle Democratic organization began within these relevant areas, and the overall quality of the Democratic nominees. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters. In the first quarter of this step, game plans were elaborated for districts located in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The second quarter of this step went over the best strategies for districts situated in Texas, Ohio, New York, and Virginia. Then, the third quarter of this step described ideal procedures for flipping target districts in Illinois, Florida, Indiana, and California.
The last quarter will cover optimized tactics for districts within New Jersey, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. For each district, the nominee’s campaign website, the amount of money he or she has raised so far according to the 2020 Q3 reports, and their campaign donation page will be listed. The fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent and an analysis of the Democratic nominee’s campaign will also be provided.
Some nominees are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the second half of the eleventh step of this series. All districts listed on this post have their PVI and the bluest rating given by the political pundits at the time of this writing.
 
NJ-02 (Jeff Van Drew, R+1, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Amy Kennedy Fundraising Numbers: $3,765,377 Campaign Website: https://amykennedyforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/alk_web200106-launch
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Jeff Van Drew: $3,596,047
Ah yes, the race where our goal is to kick out the backstabber with the name of Jeff Van Drew. Right now, Amy Kennedy is outraising the turncoat Jeff Van Drew and has completely closed the seven figure gap that existed in the previous analysis. It is worth noting that Jeff Van Drew’s fundraising numbers include Democratic donations which were not returned, exposing his dire financial straits and his true nature as a low-class scammer. The latest polls conducted for this district indicate that Amy Kennedy has established a clear lead on Jeff Van Drew. This means is that Jeff Van Drew is likely going to be kicked out of office and will fully pay for his traitorous nature. Extra effort needs to be placed on Salem County, as the Democratic party there is underfunded and allowed their website to expire due to lack of funding.
CO-03 (OPEN, R+6, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Diane Mitsch Bush Fundraising Numbers: $3,642,301 Campaign Website: https://dianeforcolorado.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/dmb-2020
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Lauren Boebert: $2,095,647
Oh boy, has this race been a huge headache for the GOP ever since Lauren Boebert defeated the incumbent, Scott Tipton, in the GOP primary. Various articles have exposed her association with QAnon conspiracy theories and far-right militia groups. Oh yes, and there is also the controversy about Lauren Boebert telling an underage server to carry a gun at her diner, Shooters Grill, which is a Class 4 felony. Another factor in our favor is that Diane Mitsch Bush has a giant fundraising advantage over Lauren Boebert. Also, Diane Mitsch Bush is currently polling rather close to Lauren Boebert. And finally, recent reports have revealed that the Democratic infrastructure on Alamosa, Gunnison, and Moffat Counties have improved since December 2018. However, quite a few counties remain where we need to improve our efforts in order for us to have a reasonable chance of flipping this district. Conejos, Costilla, Custer, Dolores, Hinsdale, Lake, Mineral, Ouray, Rio Blanco, San Juan, and San Miguel Counties are all such areas that are still in need of a grassroots boost, as the local Democratic parties there are underfunded. Also, Diane Mitsch Bush’s volunteer page in her campaign website has slightly deteriorated, as it no longer has a space for potential volunteers to choose which activities to engage in. This is certainly a hot spot to get out the votes to not only flip a GOP district, but also to kick out Cory Gardner from the Senate as an added benefit!
NE-02 (Don Bacon, R+4, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Kara Eastman (+) Fundraising Numbers: $3,251,874 Campaign Website: https://www.eastmanforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/eastmanforcongressweb
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Don Bacon: $3,194,810
Kara Eastman has managed to completely the fundraising gap that was present in the last analysis and is now outraising the GOP incumbent, Don Bacon, in fundraising. The latest polls show Kara Eastman trailing Don Bacon by at least several points, which suggests that the race needs additional support for this district to flip in the congressional level. Don Bacon’s polling lead is due to his admittedly successful strategy of getting prominent Democrats to defect and endorse his re-election campaign. So the plan for this particular race is to turn out the district’s progressive voters to drown out the significant number of voters who will split the ticket between Joe Biden and Don Bacon. Kara Eastman’s campaign succeeds this time around, we could help Joe Biden win the single electoral vote that NE-02 holds due to the reverse coattail effects. Winning that single electoral vote would shut off a few plausible paths to Donald Trump’s re-election, further justifying why everyone should give this district their full attention.
MT-AL (OPEN, R+11, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Kathleen Williams (+) Fundraising Numbers: $4,703,520 Campaign Website: https://kathleenformontana.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/1904-web-kw
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Matt Rosendale: $3,053,461
Kathleen Williams has a clear fundraising advantage over her GOP opponent Matt Rosendale. Rosendale’s loss to Jon Tester in the 2018 Senate race gives us a template on how to flip this district, which is another factor in our favor. Also, recent reports say that the local Democratic infrastructure in Dawson and Ravalli Counties have improved since July 2019. The most recent polls for this race show Matt Rosendale and Kathleen Williams roughly neck and neck with each other and separated by small margins. A key problem for us in this race is that the majority of Montana’s counties currently have underfunded Democratic parties. Big Horn, Blaine, Carter, Chouteau, Custer, Daniels, Deer Lodge, Fallon, Fergus, Garfield, Glacier, Golden Valley, Granite, Jefferson, Judith Basin, Liberty, Lincoln, Madison, Meagher, McCone, Mineral, Musselshell, Petroleum, Phillips, Pondera, Powder River, Powell, Prairie, Roosevelt, Rosebud, Richland, Sheridan, Stillwater, Sweet Grass, Toole, Treasure, Valley, Wheatland, and Wibaux Counties make up the complete list of disadvantaged counties. That’s 39 out of a total of 56 counties! The full list of Montana’s 56 counties can be found in the ninth step’s fourth quarter. Organizing in these 39 vulnerable counties are necessary to improve our numbers in Montana. Fortunately, Kathleen Williams’ campaign is prioritizing visiting these areas in a similar manner that was taken in her previous 2018 campaign. Significant effort also needs to be placed in Lake and Cascade Counties, as these two counties split their tickets and voted for Jon Tester and Greg Gianforte in the House and Senate races in 2018.
 
And thus we come the end of this step’s final quarter. The next step will provide a final update on the overall status of the top 5 incumbents to pay attention to, who all have definitely been front and center in the NRCC’s sights. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]


2020.10.19 14:16 ParsnipLow5341 December 2020 expirations -- Any Approvals?

Hi All,
I sent my application back in May and got the notice that they received it on May 19, biometrics will be re-used. My current DACA expires on December 25, 2020. Has anyone with a similar expiration date gotten their approval yet? My paperwork got sent to Nebraska.
Please let me know. Thank you all.
submitted by ParsnipLow5341 to DACA [link] [comments]


2020.10.18 20:49 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Fifth Step (Third Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series.
 
This step will provide a final comprehensive review for each of the 25 districts that this series is targeting in the 2020 elections. As of now, the Democratic nominees have been selected for each target district. This review’s main objective is to gauge the progress of each nominee’s general election campaign. During the months that have transpired from the series’ last comprehensive review, excellent overall progress has been made in the target districts, which currently cover regions located throughout fifteen states. These districts are sorted by state, then ordered by priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support, the overall flippability of the districts in question, how soon within the 2020 cycle Democratic organization began within these relevant areas, and the overall quality of the Democratic nominees. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters. In the first quarter of this step, game plans were elaborated for districts located in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The second quarter of this step went over the best strategies for districts situated in Texas, Ohio, New York, and Virginia.
This third quarter will describe ideal procedures for flipping target districts in Illinois, Florida, Indiana, and California. For each district, the nominee’s campaign website, the amount of money he or she has raised so far according to the 2020 Q3 reports, and their campaign donation page will be listed. The fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent and an analysis of the Democratic nominee’s campaign will also be provided.
For the special case of the newly added CA-25, a list of individual local county Democratic organizations that this district partially covers will also be included for the district’s section. The fundraising numbers of the Democratic and Republican candidates will only cover the period from June 2 to September 30 in order to provide a more accurate picture of our prospects there.
Some nominees are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the second half of the eleventh step of this series. All districts listed on this post have their PVI and the bluest rating given by the political pundits at the time of this writing.
 
IL-13 (Rodney Davis, R+3, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Betsy Dirksen Londrigan (+) Fundraising Numbers: $4,383,763 Campaign Website: https://www.betsydirksenlondrigan.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/londriganweb2020
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Rodney Davis: $4,156,056
Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is continuing to run a very strong campaign from her narrow 0.8% loss in her 2018 run, as she is now outraising the GOP incumbent, Rodney Davis. The latest poll for this district show her in a dead heat with Rodney Davis, which is another sign that the race is heading our way. Also, local reports say that infrastructure in Macon County have improved since December 2018. However, quite a few counties still lack significant Democratic support, which include Bond, Calhoun, Champaign, Christian, Greene, Jersey, Montgomery, and Piatt Counties. Organization to expand voter outreach efforts for all of these counties should take place to help improve our margins in this district.
FL-15 (OPEN, R+6, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Alan Michael Cohn Fundraising Numbers: $1,560,219 Campaign Website: https://alancohnforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/cohn-for-congress-website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Scott Franklin: $1,105,401
Alan Michael Cohn is definitely someone who should not be underestimated, as he managed to pull out a rather impressive primary victory by tapping into his anti-corruption background and the support network of a lot of progressive organizations. Although he is currently outpacing his GOP opponent Scott Franklin in fundraising, Alan Michael Cohn is currently behind in the district’s latest polls by high single digit margins. Still, his campaign infrastructure is decent and certainly has the ability to close that polling gap in the last weeks of this election cycle. Hillsborough County is a highly important area to organize and win Democratic voters in, as the county also intersects with FL-16.
FL-16 (Vern Buchanan, R+7, Likely R):
Democratic Nominee: Margaret Elizabeth Rowell Good (+) Fundraising Numbers: $2,747,401 Campaign Website: https://margaretgood.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/margaretgood_website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Vern Buchanan: $2,739,612
Margaret Elizabeth Rowell Good has now fully closed the fundraising gap between herself and the GOP incumbent Vern Buchanan, and is currently slightly outpacing him in that department. However, Vern Buchanan is still clearly leading her in the latest polls by considerable margins. Fortunately, Margaret Elizabeth Rowell Good is employing several strengths in her campaign to keep this race somewhat competitive, which include her top-notch organized campaign website, extensive local roots in the district, and her current role as a sitting State Representative. Once again, I stress the importance of organizing in Hillsborough County, as we can benefit our chances in flipping two districts for the price of energizing one single county.
IN-05 (OPEN, R+9, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Christina Hale Fundraising Numbers: $3,181,208 Campaign Website: https://haleforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/haleweb2020
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Victoria Spartz: $2,374,370
Christina Hale remains ahead of her GOP opponent, Victoria Spartz, in the fundraising department, which will likely stay that way thanks to Pete Buttigieg’s active support to Christina Hale’s campaign. The latest polls for this district show that Christina Hale has established a small but consistent lead over Victoria Spartz. This is consistent with the district’s recent trends, with Joe Donnelly actually winning it in his 2018 Senate campaign and providing us with a theoretical victory map to follow. All of this means that this district is headed for a Democratic takeover if we keep providing grassroots support there. Extra efforts should be made in Blackford, Grant, and Tipton Counties, as the Democratic parties there are underfunded and could use a further boost.
CA-22 (Devin Nunes, R+8, Likely R):
Democratic Nominee: Phil Arballo (+) Fundraising Numbers: $3,971,014 Campaign Website: https://www.philarballo.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/arb_monthly_website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Devin Nunes: $22,424,339
Seriously, what the hell else is there to say about Devin Nunes, the GOP incumbent? Devin Nunes’ antics during the impeachment inquiry, his pro-Trump obsession, his lawsuits over the past several years, and now his book tour publicity stunt strongly say “enough said”. I have said, at least THIRTEEN times to date, that that I am ashamed that this traitor is a Californian. Unfortunately, Devin Nunes has an eight-figure fundraising advantage against his Democratic challenger, Phil Arballo. This is in spite of the fact that Phil Arballo has raised a respectable seven-figure sum and having a well-organized campaign website. What is worse is that Phil Arballo is behind Devin Nunes in the district’s latest polls by considerable margins. The district might be a dream flip, but I personally think that supporting Phil Arballo is still somewhat useful since it will force Devin Nunes to spend his eight-figure war chest in his own district and not spread his diseased ideals elsewhere.
CA-25 (Mike Garcia, EVEN, Tossup): Los Angeles County: https://www.lacdp.org/ Ventura County: http://www.venturacountydemocrats.com/
Democratic Nominee: Christy Smith Fundraising Numbers: $1,581,763 Campaign Website: https://www.christyforcongress.org/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/christy-for-congress-1-web
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Mike Garcia: $3,839,106
According to several local reports, Christy Smith still has plenty of negatives from the special election debacle, which has left a lot of Democratic donors burned and unwilling to invest in her race. The fact that many of them are seeing her as severely damaged goods has also led her campaign staffers to repeatedly make emphatic promotions for the underpinnings of her strategy this time around. Unfortunately, Christy Smith is being massively outraised by the now-GOP incumbent, Mike Garcia. What is worse is that she is still running behind Mike Garcia in the latest polls for this district. The strategy to win this district this time around involves racking up wide margins among Democrats, women, and Hispanics to counter Garcia’s moderate appeal on the surface. There are still quite a few voters in these groups who remain undecided, and Christy Smith needs to be competitive in the airwaves as well as have a much-improved ground game, which were two of her most prominent weaknesses in the special election. And finally, the national figures such as Biden, Obama, Harris, and Warren need to make a very strong play for Christy Smith immediately, as the mail-in ballots have already been sent to the district’s voters.
 
And thus we come the end of this step’s third quarter. The final quarter will cover optimized tactics for districts within New Jersey, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]


2020.10.18 19:08 13thSFGArmA3 A3] [Recruiting] [NA/EST] [Casual Milsim] [Varied Settings] - Afghanistan / Iraq The Surge


-The 13th Special Forces Group "The Immortals"-
l Discord: https://discord.gg/JGTEBSN
Looking for a unit where you can expect to be genuinely welcomed and included, rather than treated as a roster filler and ignored? Look no further!
The 13th Special Forces Group is a small community of ArmA 3 players that provide a realistic yet casual ArmA experience. We are comprised of members from varying backgrounds and units, and just seek to have a good time and play the game, without the strict emphasis on Milsim. We mostly specialize in Spec Ops missions, but depending on the mod and scenario, will sometimes perform different roles. Were looking for all kinds of players, with no experience required.
While most of our players live in the U.S. we have players from across the globe who join us.
-When are your OPs?-
Our campaign operations take place every Tuesday and Sunday, usually starting at 7 PM EST and running for about 2 hours, at that particular operations Zeuses discretion. We usually host an unrelated one shot mission on Friday, set in the same modlist just as a different faction. There might be an extra one off for fun, or something of the sorts, occasionally on other days. We also have an ongoing post apocalyptic RP campaign that is played every other Saturday. All events and their times will be posted in our Discord beforehand, to allow our members enough time and notice to get things in order.
-What mod/setting do you specialize in?-
Members of our unit have played them all, but we don't have one set setting. From WW2 all the way to Operation Trebuchet or beyond, no setting is off limits. We will hop from campaign setting to campaign setting, all depending on what our player base wants and votes for. All players are welcome to suggest their ideas and hopes for future missions. Some of our recent ops include
-Fictional U.S. Border war with a militant cartel
-Rhodesian Bush War
13th SFG Ready to Hunt Members of ZANU. 1969, Colorized
I know how to drive. 1970, Colorized.
13th SFG Executes an Ambush Against a ZANLA Convoy. Date Classified, Colorized.
-Modern Day Russian Invasion of Ukraine
13th SFG Night Infiltration.
13th SFG Destroys a Tank Depot.
Group Photo with BRRRRRTTTTTTTTT.
Debrief After a Tough Fight.
-U.S. Invasion of Italy in 1943
13th SFG Paratroops Await The Fleet After a Night of Hell. 1943, Colorized.
The Fleet Arrives. 1943, colorized.
Cassino Town, With a Custom Zeus Made Monte Cassino in the Distance. 1943, Colorized.
13th SFG Americans, British and Polish After Having Taken the Abbey of Monte Cassino. 1943, Colorized.
13th SFG Victory Parade After Victory in Rome. 1943, Colorized.
-U.S. intervention in Vietnam
13th SFG After a NVA Counter Assault. 1968, Colorized.
13th SFG Heads Up "The Devil's Dirt Road" after a Hellish Patrol. 1968, Colorized.
13th SFG Patrol Reacting to a Call For Aid From A Frontline Unit. 1968, Colorized.
13th SFG Poses For a Picture After a Brutal Night Holding the Line. 1968, Colorized.
13th SFG poses for a picture after defending the last U.S. base in Vietnam. 1970, colorized.
-​Russian invasion of Middle America. (Red Dawn)
13th SFG Members pose for a photo after a successful raid on two Soviet Occupied Towns. 1984.
A 13th SFG member, in a stolen Soviet Ghillie suit, engages targets at a POW camp. 1984.
13th SFG Members driving a stolen Soviet UAZ. Thinking of better times. 1984.
13th SFG Members in stolen Soviet uniforms, after a successful prison break. 1984.
13th SFG Members prepare to land behind Soviet lines and attack a chemical weapons plants. 1984.
13th SFG Members after the chemical weapons plant blows. "Gas, Gas, Gas!" 1984.
13th SFG Members defend a downed Blackhawk in the irradiated wasteland of Omaha, Nebraska. 1984.
-​101st Airborne from D-Day through the end of WW2.
13thSFG members take part in the German Blitzkrieg during the 1939 invasion of Poland during a One Off mission. 1939, Colorized.
13th SFG Members in the "duct-taped together killing machines" as Libyan Desert Taxi Service. 1942, Colorized.
13th SFG Members of the Libyan Desert Taxi Service after taking a German airfield outside of Al Alamein. 1942, Colorized.
13th SFG paratroopers, loaded in C-47s, wait for the go ahead to take off for the long flight to France. The first, and for some, last jump of the war. 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG paratroopers lost, trying to figure out where their pilot dropped them on D-Day. 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG members bodies, scattered along the beaches of Normandy as the bloody first wave desperately attempts to gain ground on D-Day. 1944, Colorized.
Paratroopers from the 13th SFG rendezvous with American tanks rolling off the beach on D-day. 1944, Colorized.
A stubborn man from Texas, LTC Cole leads the 13th SFG in a charge across a smoke filled field to take out a German encampment. 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG soldiers hold Hill 30 from a German counter attacked. Fighting persisted until a runner was able to locate and direct members of the U.S. 2ND Armored Division to relieve them. 1944. Colorized.
A XXX Corp tank cooks off from a single shot from a German Tiger, as members of the 13th SFG look on in horror. 1944, colorized.
13th SFG CO looks on in horror as the crew of the Sherman he was just talking to burns in front of him. 1944, colorized.
13th SFG members rush across the remade Son Bridge during Market Garden. 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG forces at Arnham look out across the Rhine, knowing they are surrounded and relief is days away. 1944, Colorized.
Surrounded British forces at Arnham discuss surrender with a German envoy. British commander- "We haven't the proper facilities to take you all prisoner." 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG finds and rescues members of the trapped British 1st Airborne. 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG members rushing to eliminate a German artillery position during the Battle of the Bulge. 1944, Colorzied.
13th SFG members on their way to reinforce overwhelmed US positions, knowing they will be surrounded. 1944, Colorized.
13th SFG fighters engage a German ME-109 over the English Channel during a late war bombing mission. 1944, Colorized.
Russian soldiers and a flag bearer pose at the bottom of the Reichstag in Berlin. 1945, Colorized Modern day WW3
CIA kill team in a classified location. 2028.
CIA team, captured, interrogated, and killed on international broadcast. 2028.
Ukrainian National Guard holding out on top of the Vitaly Gregor Regional Hospital as Russian forces surrounded them. These men were all dead within the hour. 2028
13th SFG Vietnam P2 Electric Boogaloo
13th SFG as 1st Infantry patrolling rice fields.
1st Infantry taking a photo after a successful village raid!
Marines take a photo after the battle of Hue City
1st Infantry Squad after a long day of battling and being seperated.
SFG Fallout
NCR Troopers Poses With A Cult Monument
13th SFG NCR Rangers Clearing A Path For The Rest
13th SFG Patrolling
We're always looking at future settings we would love to have your input on!
-How restrictive/serious are you?-
Overall, we are very casual as a unit. We do have a chain of command, to deal with issues that arise and maintain the server, but the highest a set rank goes in an operation is Squad Lead, with Zeus's acting as platoon lead and command. Our load outs are not restrictive either, the only thing we will restrict you to is to period appropriate pool of weapons, uniforms, etc. so you will have the ability to have a lot of customization for your load outs. We don't have a white-list or restricted mods, because personal choice is important. Want to see more blood from enemies you kill? Turn on a blood mod. Want to turn on JSRS to get a more immersive soundscape? Go ahead. We only ask that you don't put on mods that will hinder the enjoyment of others or give an unfair advantage.
-Is there an attendance or training requirement?-
No, we understand real life comes first. Show up when you can.
We offer training if you need or want it, from a refresher course all the way to specialized squad tactics, weapons training, or anything else ArmA offers, but there is no required training. You don't have to do push-ups and run an obstacle course while a 14 year old makes you call him sir.
-Do you offer anything other than infantry game play?-
While we do not have dedicated slots for pilots, tankers, or others, any member who shows willingness or aptitude is free to take those slots on individual operations where we do have them.
So what are you waiting for? Come join today! Hop in the Discord and ask any questions you have!
l Discord: https://discord.gg/JGTEBSN
submitted by 13thSFGArmA3 to FindAUnit [link] [comments]


2020.10.17 17:30 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Fifth Step (Second Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series.
 
This step will provide a final comprehensive review for each of the 25 districts that this series is targeting in the 2020 elections. As of now, the Democratic nominees have been selected for each target district. This review’s main objective is to gauge the progress of each nominee’s general election campaign. During the months that have transpired from the series’ last comprehensive review, excellent overall progress has been made in the target districts, which currently cover regions located throughout fifteen states. These districts are sorted by state, then ordered by priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support, the overall flippability of the districts in question, how soon within the 2020 cycle Democratic organization began within these relevant areas, and the overall quality of the Democratic nominees. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters. In the first quarter of this step, game plans were elaborated for districts located in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
This second quarter will go over the best strategies to follow for districts situated in Texas, Ohio, New York, and Virginia. For each district, the nominee’s campaign website, the amount of money he or she has raised so far according to the 2020 Q3 reports, and their campaign donation page will be listed. The fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent and an analysis of the Democratic nominee’s campaign will also be provided.
Some nominees are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the second half of the eleventh step of this series. If a hash symbol (#) is indicated next to a candidate’s fundraising haul, it means that the figure was taken from the raw 2020 Q3 electronic filings for the candidate’s campaign committee. Fundraising figures from raw filings are not always up to date, meaning that they should be treated with caution. All districts listed on this post have their PVI and the bluest rating given by the political pundits at the time of this writing.
 
TX-10 (Michael McCaul, R+9, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Mike Siegel (+) Fundraising Numbers: $1,953,616 Campaign Website: https://siegelfortexas.org/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/siegel-for-congress
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Michael McCaul: $3,334,483
Mike Siegel is still running behind the GOP incumbent, Michael McCaul, in terms of fundraising. What further complicates things is that Mike Siegel came off of a lengthy runoff that shortened his general election campaign time, leaving him behind Michael McCaul in the latest polls for this district. However, his campaign website is pretty well organized in recruiting volunteers, and he is actively reaching out to help voters that have been affected by the COVID-19 crisis. Additionally, we do have some promising signs that the district could flip our way, as recent reports have indicated that Democratic efforts in Colorado County have improved, with the Democratic county party there having secured more footholds and support than it did in August 2019. The priority right now is to improve voter outreach in several high impact counties that the district at least partially covers. For starters, Harris and Travis Counties are critical areas to organize, as both of these counties overlap with multiple districts that are covered in this series. Harris County has covers parts of TX-22, while Travis County covers areas of TX-21, and volunteering in those areas would help us flip multiple districts in Texas for the same amount of effort. Efforts in Lee and Waller Counties should also get some sizable assistance as the local Democratic parties in these areas continue to be underfunded (or at least lacking in the latest web design).
TX-21 (Chip Roy, R+10, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Wendy Davis (+) Fundraising Numbers: $7,809,356 Campaign Website: https://www.wendydavisforcongress.com Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/dav_website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Chip Roy: $4,186,407
Wendy Davis has continued to raise obscene sums of money over the past several months, and is vastly outraising the GOP incumbent Chip Roy. Her website is pretty well organized with respect to recruiting volunteers, and she was a former state senator, so she definitely has gone full speed ahead with her campaign. However, the latest polls for this district show her slightly behind Chip Roy. Still, I am rather keen to see if she can kick out Chip Roy, who definitely needs to go because of his efforts to continuously block various bipartisan efforts such as disaster aid and the coronavirus response bill. Oh, and his stunts that he pulled in the name of supporting the House Freedom Caucus is just horrible. Like TX-10, the district has several high impact counties where we should step up our organization. Bexar and Travis Counties cover regions in TX-23 and TX-10 respectively, making them ideal for improving our odds in multiple districts for the same amount of work. Organization should also focus on Bandera and Real Counties, as the Democratic county party organizations are underfunded and could use some grassroots support.
TX-22 (OPEN, R+10, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Sri Preston Kulkarni (+) Fundraising Numbers: $4,671,339 (#) Campaign Website: https://sri2020.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/kulkarniforcongress
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Troy Nehls: $1,343,215
Sri Preston Kulkarni’s campaign is definitely a lot more professional this time around. For one, his website has a well-organized place for potential volunteers to sign up. For another, his campaign is getting volunteers to reach out to voters in over 15 languages, which is really helpful in bringing out the Asian vote at record levels, which is necessary to improve our margins in the Sugar Land area. There is also the fact that the GOP nominee, Troy Nehls, is drained of resources from the expensive runoff, which gives Sri Preston Kulkarni a head start in the general election. And finally, Sri Preston Kulkarni is tied with Troy Nehls in the latest polls for this district. I once again stress the importance of Harris County, as it also covers parts of TX-10, giving us the benefit of improving our chances in flipping two districts for the price of organizing in one county.
TX-23 (OPEN, R+1, Lean D):
Democratic Nominee: Gina Ortiz Jones (-) Fundraising Numbers: $5,754,382 Campaign Website: https://ginaortizjones.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/ginaortizjones
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Tony Gonzales: $1,160,880
Gina Ortiz Jones is continuing to raise huge sums of money for her campaign. This is perhaps the easiest pickup on our end for this cycle, if we do not count those from the North Carolina redistricting victories. The main focus for this district is to volunteer and improve our voter outreach as much as possible. Local reports say that infrastructure in El Paso County and Maverick County have improved since January 2019. However, every other county in the district except Bexar County (which should also be focused on to provide additional support for TX-21) and Medina County has an underfunded Democratic county party, meaning that grassroots efforts are heavily needed to revitalize these corresponding areas. An additional factor in our favor is that the GOP nominee, Tony Gonzales, got off of a bloody recount that has drained him of resources and campaign time. As a result of all of this, Gina Ortiz Jones has established a clear lead over Tony Gonzales in the most recent polls for this district. So provided that we can focus our grassroots efforts in the areas where the infrastructure is weak, the district should turn blue this time around.
TX-24 (OPEN, R+9, Lean D):
Democratic Nominee: Candace Valenzuela Fundraising Numbers: $3,561,892 Campaign Website: https://candacefor24.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/cd24
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Beth Van Duyne: $2,648,410
Candace Valenzuela is now significantly outraising the GOP candidate Beth Van Duyne. That in itself is a small yet notable victory, considering that Beth Van Duyne is one of the GOP candidates that the national Republicans are pushing hard for, as she is branding herself as one of the members of the “Conservative Squad”, who was highly touted by Fox News in late 2019. Candace Valenzuela is running neck and neck with Beth Van Duyne, according to the latest polls conducted for this district. Finally, Candace Valenzuela is widely viewed to be on the progressive wing of the Democratic challengers that have been nominated this cycle. All of this means that turning out the Democratic base is the top priority here, as this particular race will be one of the most nationalized congressional elections in this year’s cycle.
OH-01 (Steve Chabot, R+5, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Kate Schroder (-) Fundraising Numbers: $3,173,089 Campaign Website: https://www.kateforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/k4c-site
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Steve Chabot: $2,717,307
This particular race has significantly moved our way, as Kate Schroder is now outraising the GOP incumbent Steve Chabot. The most recent polls in this district have indicated that the race is now a dead heat. There’s also the fact that Steve Chabot’s former campaign consultant has been under investigation since last year for stealing campaign funds, which has given us more openings for this particular district. However, Kate Schroder’s volunteer page has declined in quality since it now redirects to her campaign’s MoblizeAmerica page, which is far less professional in signing up volunteers, in my opinion. At this point, the main objective for Kate Schroder is to continue to increase her name recognition and inform the electorate about her background, as an early DCCC general election poll indicated that voters were more likely to support Kate Schroder if she did so.
NY-01 (Lee Zeldin, R+5, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Nancy Goroff (+) Fundraising Numbers: $5,400,156 Campaign Website: https://www.goroffforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/goroff-website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Lee Zeldin: $7,065,195
This district is certainly going to be very expensive to compete in, as Nancy Goroff has raised a very sizable seven-figure sum. However, she is still behind the GOP incumbent, Lee Zeldin, by over $1.7 million in fundraising, although that gap has slightly closed since the last comprehensive review. Recent polls suggest that Lee Zeldin still has a clear advantage, although it is certainly in the single digits. Local reports say that the Democrats in that particular district have quickly united against Lee Zeldin and directed appropriate support and voter outreach in the areas that are receptive to Nancy Goroff’s messaging. Nancy Goroff’s volunteer page has also improved over the past several months, as it now includes a space listing specific activities that potential volunteers can choose to engage in. Suffolk County is a very important county to concentrate voter outreach efforts on, as it overlaps with NY-02.
NY-02 (OPEN, R+3, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Jacqueline Gordon Fundraising Numbers: $3,550,230 Campaign Website: https://jackiegordonforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/jackiegordonsite
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Andrew Garbarino: $1,260,624
This race has a surprisingly high victory potential for us. Jacqueline Gordon has a lot of potential as a Babylon Town Councilmember, a veteran, and a woman of color, meaning that she possesses a strong ability to turn out the minority vote as well as well-established political connections. Her GOP opponent, Andrew Garbarino, is experienced some slight delays in getting his campaign off the ground due to his state Assembly duties as well as some coordination issues with Peter King, the district’s current (and retiring) GOP incumbent. Garbarino’s kickoff did not start until August, which gave us a slight head start in making our case to the district’s voters. Another advantage that we have is that Jacqueline Gordon is currently blowing away Andrew Garbarino in the fundraising department. However, her campaign volunteer page has slightly deteriorated over the past several months, as it connects potential volunteers to her MoblizeAmerica page, which is less efficient in signing up potential volunteers, in my opinion. I would like to repeat the emphasis that efforts should be made to organize in Suffolk County, since that county also covers parts of NY-01.
NY-24 (John Katko, D+3, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Dana Balter Fundraising Numbers: $2,443,168 Campaign Website: https://electdanabalter.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/balter-website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: John Katko: $3,329,771
Dana Balter is still being outraised by the GOP incumbent, John Katko, although the cumulative fundraising gap has slightly closed since the series’ last comprehensive review. The volunteer page on her campaign website has also slightly deteriorated since then, as it also now connects to a customized MobilizeAmerica webpage, which is less efficient in signing up potential volunteers, in my opinion. However, Democratic internal polling shows that Dana Balter is currently running close with John Katko. In this particular Democrat-leaning district, voter persuasion is going to be very important, as there are thousands of voters in this district who are currently plan to split the ticket between Joe Biden and John Katko in November. This finding, which has been confirmed in several polls conducted for this district, means that we should focus our voter persuasion efforts in Auburn, Syracuse, and Skaneateles, as that is where most of these split-ticket voters are located in. Additional outreach efforts should also be concentrated on strengthening our base in Cayuga County, as the local Democratic party there is relatively weak in funding.
VA-05 (OPEN, R+6, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Bryant Cameron Webb (+) Fundraising Numbers: $4,077,969 Campaign Website: https://www.drcameronwebb.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/cameronwebb
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Robert Good: $984,809
Oh boy, has this race quickly received a lot of recent attention, as all of the stars seem to be aligning in this particular race. First of all, there is a divided GOP electorate from the nominating convention that ejected the district’s incumbent, Denver Riggleman, from the nomination. Next, Bryant Cameron Webb has some serious potential of supercharging the minority vote in Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Then, Robert Good, the GOP candidate, is at a serious disadvantage when it comes to fundraising, as his cumulative fundraising figures remain much lower than Bryant Cameron Webb’s are. Also, the most recent polling for this district indicates that Bryant Cameron Webb is running very close to Robert Good. Finally, recent reports say that the Democratic infrastructure in Appomattox and Campbell Counties have improved since January 2019. Our primary goal in this district should be to increase our voter outreach efforts, as quite a few Democratic county parties are underfunded and in need of grassroots support. These counties are Brunswick, Buckingham, Cumberland, Danville City, Halifax, Lunenburg, and Prince Edward Counties. Needless to say, there is a lot of work cut out for us to flip a solid red district that voted for Corey Stewart in 2018.
 
And thus we come the end of this step’s second quarter. The third quarter will describe ideal procedures for flipping target districts in Illinois, Florida, Indiana, and California. After that, the final quarter will cover optimized tactics for districts within New Jersey, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]


2020.10.17 01:33 Watchdogs66 Our "Drive to 245": The Twenty-Fifth Step (First Quarter)

The Drive To 245: Deprive the GOP In 25
 
In 2014 and with 234 House seats, the NRCC launched the “Drive to 245” campaign for the 2014 midterms, which focused on securing 245 seats for the 114th Congress. At the close of the midterms, they ended up picking up 13 seats, putting their new majority to 247 seats, 2 seats above the goal. For the majority of this election cycle, we had at least 234 House seats to start with, until a turncoat in disguise switched to the GOP in December 2019 (get fucked Jeff Van Drew) and we lost one of our districts in a May 2020 special election (get your act together Christy Smith). Despite these setbacks, getting to 245 seats in the next election is possible for us to achieve, if we are smart about it.
 
In late November 2018, I began by compiling an initial list of 25 potential districts that could give us the necessary gains for us to make the necessary net gain of 10 seats to fulfill our “Drive to 245” campaign goal. I then outlined the state representatives and state senators that we have on our side that live within (or at least represent a good portion of) the identified districts in the second step, which was split into parts one and two. These local officials are often our first line of offense when it comes to selecting appropriate candidates to flip GOP congressional districts, as these people often start out with significant amounts of name recognition (at least compared to most political novices), developed campaign infrastructures, and established donor networks to draw on. In the third step, I explored four different ways that these state representatives and state senators can help promising candidates build a solid platform to flip these 25 districts, even if we are not able to recruit any of these seasoned individuals themselves. I then proceeded to identify every individual local county Democratic organization within in each of these 25 districts to determine how much of a viable network exists towards flipping any of these districts, and whether any of them appear to be fledgling and underfunded, which was split into parts one, two, and three. I then proceeded to draw up rough battle plans to recruit the best candidates that are suitable towards making the necessary gains for the proposed 245 House seats, which I covered in parts one, two, and three. Since then, I updated my list of 25 districts to better reflect the developments that have occurred since November 2018, as well as the candidates from our end that have filed in those districts. After that, I covered updated game plans for the updated 25 districts, which was again split into parts one, two, and three. Another comprehensive update to the list was conducted in early July to account for the GOP retirements, lack of Democratic candidate recruitment for several districts, and other remarkable events that have occurred, all of which have been documented in said update. From there, more detailed plans were made that illustrated the overall status of the Democratic campaigns for each of these districts, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. These plans also highlighted which candidates appeared to have the most organized campaigns for each district, and which ones out of these strongest candidates needed the most assistance in terms of fundraising. Donation plans were also made that could sufficiently help out these struggling candidates, if every active user of this subreddit took part. After that, I provided a detailed plan for defending our 5 most endangered Democratic incumbents for this cycle. I next discussed the different methods that volunteers can help out a campaign, and what good campaigns should provide in such activities to optimize their voter outreach effectiveness, both of which can be found in parts one and two. In October 2019, I then provided another comprehensive review of the 25 districts that are the most likely to flip blue and the ideal strategies to accomplish that goal, which can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. After that, I provided an update on the overall status of our top 5 most endangered incumbents, and posted a rescue plan to help out the least financially stable campaigns, both of which can be found in this post. My next step provided day-by-day calendars highlighting volunteer events within the targeted 25 districts that helped participants develop vital Democratic infrastructure in those areas. These calendars, which ran from October 31 to January 15, can be found in parts one, two, three, and four. In late January, I gave a third update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. At the start of February 2020, I gave a fresh analysis of the 25 districts with the best chances of going blue, which are provided in parts one, two, three, and four. I then jumped to a day-by-day calendar of volunteer events of congressional campaigns operating throughout the 25 districts, which was originally planned to be released in four parts. However, the quickly deteriorating COVID-19 situation has forced this series to be suspended halfway through this step. The two calendars provided in this step, which ran from February 7 to March 19, can be found here and here. In April 2020, I provided an updated study of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Later in May 2020, I provided another update on the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle and their performances. I subsequently proceeded in June 2020 to provide a list of the competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that this series targeted or defended, which was delivered in parts one, two, three, and four. Starting in late July 2020, I provided an updated perspective of the 25 districts with the highest chances of flipping as well as the optimal strategies for each of these districts, all of which were provided in parts one, two, three, and four. Shortly thereafter in August 2020, I provided a fresh update on the campaign status of the top 5 incumbents to defend this cycle. From there, I supplied a fresh view on the status of our campaigns in competitive state house and state senate districts that overlapped one of the 30 congressional districts that was targeted or defended by this series, which was given in parts one, two, three, and four. Next, I provided a calendar highlighting the important dates for the congressional campaigns operating within the 30 districts targeted and defended by this series.
 
This step will provide a final comprehensive review for each of the 25 districts that this series is targeting in the 2020 elections. As of now, the Democratic nominees have been selected for each target district. This review’s main objective is to gauge the progress of each nominee’s general election campaign.
Before this step proceeds to the official review, however, an important change to the list of 25 targeted districts will be announced, as well as the reasoning. Back in the beginning of the sixteenth step of this series, I announced that there would be no further changes to the list of target districts. The one exception that I gave to that statement was if any of the eventual Democratic nominees were found to have a serious scandal. This was fortunately not the case for any of the nominees running in the districts targeted in this series. The reasoning behind the announcement was that there was very little time to get newly added districts up to speed with the needed information, infrastructure, and grassroots support to provide them with realistic chances of success. I believed that my “expertise” would be better served by further expanding the knowledge that I have acquired in these 25 districts, as the great majority of the gains that are needed to get to 245 House seats in January 2021 would come from these districts.
However, several unique circumstances have occurred since then which have compelled me to make an exception to this announcement, which I will explain in the below sections. As with previous instances where changes to the target list were made, I've maintained the number of districts to a constant 25 to keep to the mnemonic listed in the title.
 
No longer on the list:
TX-31 (John Carter, R+10, Likely R): The Democratic nominee, Donna Imam, has posted some very lackluster fundraising numbers, with her total fundraising haul currently at $762,706. All of the other Democratic nominees in this series have cumulatively raised solid seven figure sums, which is generally the baseline for a winning congressional campaign to achieve. Several reports that I consulted have revealed that Donna Imam’s campaign is exceedingly disorganized. The infrastructure that MJ Hegar built in her 2018 run there is not getting translated to Donna Imam, since the Senate race against John Cornyn is getting all of the political oxygen there. Also, several Democratic operatives in TX-31 are frustrated with Donna Imam’s erratic campaign decisions, lack of steady communication channels, and inconsistent messaging. They have complained about the campaign’s substandard voter outreach efforts, social media handling, and participation in key local organizations. Several of them have decided to triage this district and take their efforts to TX-10 and TX-21. The district that I will be adding to replace TX-31 needs more of our attention and support at present at once, and I do not think that there will be too many objections to this late change.
New districts added to the list:
CA-25 (Mike Garcia, EVEN, Tossup): There has been a lot of criticism and frustration directed at Christy Smith, the Democratic nominee for this district, as well as the Los Angeles County Democrats and Ventura County Democrats for their poor organizational efforts. I provided a litany of the mistakes which were made in the special election, and caused us to lose a ton a momentum that we painstakingly built since the 2018 midterm elections. Unfortunately, several months of deep diving in this district have revealed that not all of these problems have been resolved as of now. Christy Smith is viewed as damaged goods among a good number of Democratic donors and operatives because of the magnitude of her loss in a district that went for Clinton by 6.7 points in 2016. She was significantly outraised by Mike Garcia in the quarterly reports that have been released since the special election, and the local organizational groups, especially the Los Angeles County Democrats and the Ventura County Democrats, are still operating at substandard levels. Because of all of this, Christy Smith is still running behind Mike Garcia in the polls. Unless Christy Smith receives additional assistance and coordination, which adding this district to the series’ target list will help provide, we will lose this district in November as well.
 
So now that the change to the list has been announced and explained, this step will now begin the final comprehensive review for the 25 districts that are currently on this series’ target list. During the months that have transpired from the series’ last comprehensive review, excellent overall progress has been made in the target districts, which currently cover regions located throughout fifteen states. These districts are sorted by state, then ordered by priority, which is roughly based on factors such as whether there is an important up-ballot statewide race (Presidential or Senate) to support, the overall flippability of the districts in question, how soon within the 2020 cycle Democratic organization began within these relevant areas, and the overall quality of the Democratic nominees. Given the overall length of these strategies, this step will be split into four quarters.
In the first quarter of this step, game plans will be elaborated for districts located in Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. For each district, the nominee’s campaign website, the amount of money he or she has raised so far according to the 2020 Q3 reports, and their campaign donation page will be listed. The fundraising numbers of the GOP opponent and an analysis of the Democratic nominee’s campaign will also be provided.
Some nominees are indicated with a minus or a plus, which indicates the overall quality of their campaign websites according to criteria that was listed in the second half of the eleventh step of this series. If a hash symbol (#) is indicated next to a candidate’s fundraising haul, it means that the figure was taken from the raw 2020 Q3 electronic filings for the candidate’s campaign committee. Fundraising figures from raw filings are not always up to date, meaning that they should be treated with caution. All districts listed on this post have their PVI and the bluest rating given by the political pundits at the time of this writing.
 
GA-07 (OPEN, R+9, Lean D):
Democratic Nominee: Carolyn Bourdeaux (+) Fundraising Numbers: $4,169,721 Campaign Website: https://www.carolyn4congress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/carolyn_website
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Richard McCormick: $2,168,122
Carolyn Bourdeaux continues to raise an impressive amount of money for her second run and is very well-positioned to flip the district. Her website is also well organized with respect to recruiting volunteers, especially for those wishing to participate in canvassing and phone banks. The most recent polling shows Carolyn Bourdeaux slightly leading in the polls against her opponent, Richard McCormick, which is another good sign. This district is an important one for us, since it is not only one of our most likely pick-ups, but also helps boosts Democratic turnout up the ballot for the two Senate races that are taking place this cycle, as well as helping us put Georgia in the presidential blue column for the first time since 1992!
MI-03 (OPEN, R+6, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Hillary Scholten (+) Fundraising Numbers: $2,510,892 Campaign Website: https://www.hillaryscholten.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/helphillary
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Peter Meijer: $2,664,444 (#)
Hillary Scholten is definitely getting some serious fundraising strength and has continued to build up momentum over the past several months. Her campaign is up to the point that it can be truly competitive with that of her GOP opponent, Peter Meijer, although she is currently trailing him in the latest polling. Definitely consider supporting Hillary Scholten’s campaign, as we need the turnout boost from a traditionally conservative area to help improve our chance of winning the Presidential and Senate races there. Organizational efforts should concentrate towards Ionia and Montcalm Counties, as the local Democratic Party counties there are underfunded and could use some support from the grassroots.
MI-06 (Fred Upton, R+4, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Jon Hoadley (+) Fundraising Numbers: $2,425,505 Campaign Website: https://jonhoadley.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/website-form
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Fred Upton: $3,028,491 (#)
Jon Hoadley is a fairly good candidate, as he is a current State Representative and has posted solid fundraising numbers. He also has a very well designed website for attracting and recruiting volunteers. However, his ground game, get-out-the-vote operations, and name recognition still needs work, as his performance in the Democratic primary was rather underwhelming. He is also trailing the GOP incumbent for this district, Fred Upton, by a considerable amount in the latest polls. According to recent reports, Democratic efforts in St. Joseph County have improved, with the Democratic county party there being much more funded and developed than it was in December 2018. This is a good thing, as we need every boost that we can get in Michigan for the Presidential and Senate races there.
PA-01 (Brian Fitzpatrick, R+1, Lean R):
Democratic Nominee: Christina Finello (+) Fundraising Numbers: $1,425,176 Campaign Website: https://www.finelloforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/christina-finello
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Brian Fitzpatrick: $3,780,911 (#)
We are working behind the eight ball for this district due to the chaos of several Democratic candidates dropping out of the race earlier in the cycle. Christina Finello’s main disadvantage in her campaign against the GOP incumbent, Brian Fitzpatrick, is of course the fundraising gap. Fortunately, Christina Finello’s campaign has narrowed the gap in the past several months, as it managed to outraise Brian Fitzpatrick’s campaign in the Q3 period. However, she is still trailing Brian Fitzpatrick by a noticable margin in the latest polls. Adding to the district’s strategic importance is that PA-01 is located in a crucial area for turning Pennsylvania back to blue in the 2020 presidential election.
PA-10 (Scott Perry, R+6, Tossup):
Democratic Nominee: Eugene DePasquale (+) Fundraising Numbers: $3,345,492 Campaign Website: https://eugeneforcongress.com/ Donation Page: https://secure.actblue.com/donate/depasquale-for-pa-1
GOP Fundraising Numbers: Scott Perry: $3,237,416 (#)
The Democratic nominee, Eugene DePasquale, is now leading the GOP incumbent, Scott Perry, in the cumulative fundraising and the polling departments. In order for this district to get to the Lean D category (which I believe that it has a real shot of reaching by the end of this month), Eugene DePasquale needs to ramp up volunteer efforts in Dauphin County, as that is where he posted his weakest numbers in the June primary. Another reason why PA-10 should be front and center of our radars is that the district itself another crucial area that we need to close the GOP margins in order to turn Pennsylvania back to blue in 2020.
 
And thus we come the end of this step's first quarter. The second quarter will go over the best strategies to follow for districts situated in Texas, Ohio, New York, and Virginia. Then, the third quarter will describe ideal procedures for flipping target districts in Illinois, Florida, Indiana, and California. After that, the final quarter will cover optimized tactics for districts within New Jersey, Colorado, Nebraska, and Montana. So stay tuned! Any corrections or comments are welcome.
submitted by Watchdogs66 to VoteDEM [link] [comments]