We are all Slave now.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I think he’s losing Econ voters in his base. And picking up some previously skeptical affluent voters. I think the assertion white GOP housewives in places like the Main Line voted against Trump is incorrect. I think the GOP going to pick up voters in the affluent demographic but lose a lot more in the base.

GOP housewives are voting for three things: Themselves, their kids, and their shore house renovation.

No offense, but this is crazy. Trump's not picking up anyone new, and certainly not affluent voters.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

This is not true for black people in many places.

TM

I don’t know if the line is thin when you’re black. I think the line is often ignored, or moved from neutral to “suspect until proven otherwise.”

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

No offense, but this is crazy. Trump's not picking up anyone new, and certainly not affluent voters.

Not in your locale, no.

A lot of the affluent voters here were scared he’d crater the market and economy. They’ve been pleasantly surprised. No one likes him, but they like their returns. And they want any R in power when their advisor is telling them we’re heading into a recession soon. Ds raise taxes when that happens.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Not in your locale, no.

A lot of the affluent voters here were scared he’d crater the market and economy. They’ve been pleasantly surprised. No one likes him, but they like their returns. And they want any R in power when their advisor is telling them we’re heading into a recession soon. Ds raise taxes when that happens.

I think you are projecting. A lot of affluent voters should be happy with the tax cuts, but it's not helping Republicans. The "affluent" voter -- the one who votes for Rs because Ds might raise their taxes -- you are describing will not vote for a Democrat in any circumstances. Not disputing that some of those people support Trump, but they are not gains.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

No offense, but this is crazy. Trump's not picking up anyone new, and certainly not affluent voters.

I've seen him gain traction among some very affluent voters, but there are not a lot of those people. The cross-tabs never break it down to the top 1%, but I'd bet he is doing better now than a year ago in that top 1%.

Among the well-educated shmoes who save for their kids education and their retirement and pay a mortgage on a home that cost a million or two - no, I don't think he's gained there, and that is the big group within the broader affluent category. He's gained in the category that pays cash for an $8 m home.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Devil’s Triangle? I never heard that term before. And “FFFFFFourth of July”? It’s so seedy.

ETA: The MFM threeway still strikes me strange. I get it if you’re bisexual, but as a straight man, having sex with a woman and a male friend at the same time? “Hey, Bob, I’m going to come! ...How’s that for a orgasm face? High five!”

I imagine these guys probably aren't as straight as they project. They may not even know that they're not 100% straight and certainly don't have the curiosity to examine their sexuality.

Also: They were from a single sex school. That may have had an influence on their comfortableness with one another.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I've seen him gain traction among some very affluent voters, but there are not a lot of those people. The cross-tabs never break it down to the top 1%, but I'd bet he is doing better now than a year ago in that top 1%.

Among the well-educated shmoes who save for their kids education and their retirement and pay a mortgage on a home that cost a million or two - no, I don't think he's gained there, and that is the big group within the broader affluent category. He's gained in the category that pays cash for an $8 m home.

He’s doing well with the shmoes round here. These folks live right up to the edge of their means. Every dollar counts.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

He’s doing well with the shmoes round here. These folks live right up to the edge of their means. Every dollar counts.

(1) Do they miss being able to deduct state and local taxes?

(2) I don't doubt that there are places he hasn't lost support. I took issue with the idea that he is making gains relative to Election Day 2016.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

He’s doing well with the shmoes round here. These folks live right up to the edge of their means. Every dollar counts.

I'd actually say he's lost ground among the schmoes here, which matters a lot in New Hampshire, where the seat in play has a disproportionate number of those voters. It matters some in Maine, too, where the Northern seat is in play, but what is really hurting him there is trade.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I imagine these guys probably aren't as straight as they project. They may not even know that they're not 100% straight and certainly don't have the curiosity to examine their sexuality.

Also: They were from a single sex school. That may have had an influence on their comfortableness with one another.

I'm not taking this bet against you, but if anyone wants it, I may be willing to give odds.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

(1) Do they miss being able to deduct state and local taxes?

(2) I don't doubt that there are places he hasn't lost support. I took issue with the idea that he is making gains relative to Election Day 2016.

In NJ, yes. Not across the river. Much lower taxes. Gains elsewhere wipe out any loss, which is not huge.

I don’t think he’s gaining in total. He’s just peeling away a number of voters who only voted for Hillary for economic reasons (fear).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I'd actually say he's lost ground among the schmoes here, which matters a lot in New Hampshire, where the seat in play has a disproportionate number of those voters. It matters some in Maine, too, where the Northern seat is in play, but what is really hurting him there is trade.

Yeah, on trade I think he’s going to run into a lot of fans of gridlock. They’d like a D house to stop him from doing further silly shit.

But I might be crediting voters too much there.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yeah, on trade I think he’s going to run into a lot of fans of gridlock. They’d like a D house to stop him from doing further silly shit.

But I might be crediting voters too much there.

Alas, voters are more and more likely to vote a straight party line, based on what they think of the President. As a general rule I like the idea of divided government, but polarization makes it harder to get it to work.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I imagine these guys probably aren't as straight as they project. They may not even know that they're not 100% straight and certainly don't have the curiosity to examine their sexuality.

Also: They were from a single sex school. That may have had an influence on their comfortableness with one another.

I'm considering watching the Fox interview with Kavanaugh. I probably shouldn't eat first, right?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I imagine these guys probably aren't as straight as they project. They may not even know that they're not 100% straight and certainly don't have the curiosity to examine their sexuality.

Also: They were from a single sex school. That may have had an influence on their comfortableness with one another.

Perhaps. But if you wind up fucking your buddy in that MFM, you’re going to be awfully confused. You’d think they might want to avoid that?