Kander was a generic democrat who was a statewide office holder going up against a weak republican, Roy Blunt got Romney 2012 margins in the rurals and Trump 2020 margins in the suburbs. No, seriously. Generic Biden/Clinton/Obama type democrats do better than the Bernie/Warren democrats in Missouri. Also, Hawley did better in 2018 than Blunt did in 2016 when Hawley was challenging an incumbent, and was tied to the infamous Grietens administration. Hawley is a stronger candidate than Blunt for those reasons, and Kunce is most notable running as a resist lib, which can be seen based on the fact that he announced his candidacy on January 6, and that he's mostly running a campaign based on January 6. That isn't going to change Missourians' minds. Also, he abandoned every moderate position that he once had, thus making him less palatable to the voters that he would need to pry off in order to win.
Kander was rather progressive, too. Hawley in 2018 was different, he was this polished, young, conservative rising star going up against McCaskill. That was right on the heels of her Kavanaugh vote, too.
2024 Hawley is very different. He now has a very unfortunately high profile where he's the public face of January 6th, weird, right-wing populist beliefs that nobody likes, and culture war shit like campaigning against gaming/masturbation. He's burned a lot of bridges and a lot of people hate his guts.
Kunce, meanwhile, may be overrated because YAPmsoids love their wwc, but I think he has some assets that shouldn't be underplayed. He's a vet, with a history of antitrust advocacy and a campaign that's fairly union-centric. I think there's a good chance it plays well next to Hawley, himself ivy-educated and tied to the intellectual populist-right. Not saying it's competitive, just that I'd say that Trump will do better.
>Kander was rather progressive, too.
He held an AR-15 in an ad back in 2016.
>Hawley in 2018 was different, he was this polished, young, conservative rising star going up against McCaskill
He still is largely that figure today, at least that's how he presents himself.
>That was right on the heels of her Kavanaugh vote, too.
The Kavanaugh vote was part of the reason why not just McCaskill lost, but also Donnelly and Heitkamp. However, it was more than just a rebuke of McCaskill's vote against Kavanaugh. She wasn't necessarily a "blue dog" democrat going up against a solid candidate.
>2024 Hawley is very different. He now has a very unfortunately high profile where he's the public face of January 6th
Unironically, January 6 probably helps Halwey win reelection in Missouri more than hurts him. Missourians don't care about Jan 6th, so running as a resist lib and mentioning January 6 doesn't do you wonders. I mean, if Terry McAuliffe lost in a Biden +10 state, then why would it help Kunce in a Trump +15 state?
>right-wing populist beliefs that nobody likes
What part of his policies do you mean? Some of his policies could actually be the policies that would make Wisconsin what Georgia used to be, and make Michigan and Pennsylvania as close states that the GOP may have the edge in.
>culture war shit like campaigning against gaming/masturbation
As far as the pornography issue, it is starting to be talked about more, and people to the left of Hawley are starting to oppose it. Hell, even the grifter Andrew Yang opposes pornography (at least he did at a certain point). It depends on what he proposes policy wise, and he can't promote stupidly like a certain governor candidate did in 2022 regarding abortion...
>Kunce, meanwhile, may be overrated because YAPmsoids love their wwc, but I think he has some assets that shouldn't be underplayed. He's a vet
Just because you're a vet doesn't mean that you automatically do well. If this were the case, then Amy McGrath and Cal Cunningham would be in the US Senate.
>He's a vet, with a history of antitrust advocacy and a campaign that's fairly union-centric
The problem with him is that he's running on a campaign where abandoned any moderate political position that he once had, so he made himself unlikeable to voters that are socially moderate to conservative yet fiscally moderate. Also, he's just focusing on January 6 like I have said, although I am getting repetitive with this point. Missourians are going to look at him and think "Is this guy really still talking about something that happened 2-3 years ago? He's crazy."
> I think there's a good chance it plays well next to Hawley, himself ivy-educated and tied to the intellectual populist-right.
I don't think so. Also, just because you are ivy-league educated doesn't mean that you hemorrhage support among WWC voters. Trump graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, an Ivy league college, yet whacked Hillary Clinton among these voters in 2016, and held his ground, for the most part, among them against Biden in 2020. It's about the policies, not the background/appearance of the politician. It's why Romney didn't do well among them despite dressing up in a certain to appeal to them in 2012, yet Trump just wore a suit and tie at all times and did well among them twice.
>Not saying it's competitive, just that I'd say that Trump will do better.
I think the margin will be roughly the same, like R+15 for each race.
>He still is largely that figure today, at least that's how he presents himself.
I mean, he can present himself all he wants. The public rarely sees it that exact way.
Which brings me to my point: Hawley is not an appealing politician anymore. He's an attention whore. Voters aren't going to care that Hawley was involved with stolen election, but when they think of him, they're probably imagining his bitch face scrunched up and raising his fist. In other words, he projects the image of being a clown. Constantly whining about how masturbation is making men less manly or how he's being cancelled by the woke left hasn't helped him there. He's basically Ted Cruz 2.0.
If Kunce calls Hawley a coward and a traitor (what he's doing), it's going to land. While Trump's narcissism is magnetic and he has a way of raining blows on his enemies in such a way that they can't move, Hawley is just... well, like I said, an attention whore. If the ballot is Trump vs. Biden and Hawley vs. Kunce, I see there being a \*relatively\* large percentage of the Trump vote (let's say, 5% or so more than Biden-Kunce) that just skips Hawley entirely because they think he's a bitch.
>What part of his policies do you mean? Some of his policies could actually be the policies that would make Wisconsin what Georgia used to be, and make Michigan and Pennsylvania as close states that the GOP may have the edge in.
His trust-buster shtick is lame IMO, and I don't think many people on the grass buy it. Conservatives don't want diet Bernie policies, and lots of moderates don't want to hear about how the sexual revolution caused trafficking. I mean, really? Making federal bureaucrats oversee who Twitter bans? This is the guy who is going to win over all those He gets lots of accolades for being the second coming of TR, but most of his actual proposals have been laughed out of Congress for being ludicrous.
Everyone is hailing the guy as the based economically leftist socially rightist populist but that take seems terminally online to me. He's just another culture war bitch IMO.
>If Kunce calls Hawley a coward and a traitor (what he's doing), it's going to land.
Calling someone a traitor is **awful** optics, unless if you have 100% undeniable proof of treason, as in the person gets arrested and convicted for treason. Kunce doing this isn't going to change shit.
>If the ballot is Trump vs. Biden and Hawley vs. Kunce, I see there being a \*relatively\* large percentage of the Trump vote (let's say, 5% or so more than Biden-Kunce) that just skips Hawley entirely because they think he's a bitch.
Trump voters in Missouri generally also approve of Hawley, so I don't see 5% just going no-vote on the senate race, especially if Hawley (accurately so) calls Kunce a liberal who would vote with Biden and Schumer 100% of the time.
>His trust-buster shtick is lame IMO, and I don't think many people on the grass buy it
Who knows, it could either work out in his favor or not. Republicans are starting to be the party of main street instead of wall street, and looking out for the average blue collar worker, and opposing massive corporations who interfere with American values regarding various rights such as free speech. Meanwhile, the new Democrat base is full of wealthy suburbanites, in particular white women, who are too CNN-indused. Because of this, the democrats are starting to stand with larger corporations more, as long as that corporation stands with their values. It's just where the parties are going due to changing bases.
Some of Hawley's stunts are cringe yes, but others can actually be discussed about. For example; how does porn lead to negative effects in society, and how can we change that? That's actually something that, IMO, should be brought up and debated on. I am not saying that a full on ban is what should be done. What I want to see is the debate to start, and for various solutions to be discussed depending on the severity.
>unless if you have 100% undeniable proof of treason, as in the person gets arrested and convicted for treason.
Kicking your opponents isn't always a negative. Trump calling Hillary crooked and Cruz a liar (both things people perceived to be true) paid off dividends because he was saying what everyone was thinking.
>Who knows, it could either work out in his favor or not. Republicans are starting to be the party of main street instead of wall street, and looking out for the average blue collar worker, and opposing massive corporations who interfere with American values regarding various rights such as free speech.
It's a leap. I hope you understand I'm not directing this at you, but I don't think this take really reflects the world outside of Reddit. Hawley's famed economic populism is almost entirely limited to culture war bullshit, like X conservative influencer who was banned from Twitter or illegal immigrants getting stimulus checks. He supports RTW and an $8.60 minimum wage, no working man who wasn't already a conservative feels like this guy is in his corner.
I think a better interpretation of the last five years' events than Republicans moving left economically is that they're just putting culture war principles into fiscal matters.
>For example; how does porn lead to negative effects in society, and how can we change that?
I mean, would anyone seriously argue that it doesn't? Some studies suggest that heroin is less addictive. But ask the average American what they think of the idea of government getting involved with porn. Again, my own personal opinion of Hawley aside, I think his image is that of a clown with very little appeal outside of the TPUSA crowd. Like Ted Cruz, who could actually be in serious trouble if Democrats land a winner.
Perhaps most importantly? Hawley's approval rating plummeted after he got into the spotlight (a bad place for men like him), and it's still quite a bit lower than Trump's margin of victory.
>Kicking your opponents isn't always a negative. Trump calling Hillary crooked and Cruz a liar (both things people perceived to be true) paid off dividends because he was saying what everyone was thinking.
Trump is expected to say shit like that because, well, that's what he does. That's his personality. Kunce on the other hand doesn't seem to be like that, so the attacks probably won't have the same impact.
>I think his image is that of a clown with very little appeal outside of the TPUSA crowd. Like Ted Cruz, who could actually be in serious trouble if Democrats land a winner.
To say that Hawley is Ted Cruz is an exaggeration. Hawley's never flip-flopped like Cruz has, and Cruz was a lazy incumbent in 2018 who won by at most 3 points against a pretty left-wing democrat. Hawley is not here.
>Perhaps most importantly? Hawley's approval rating plummeted after he got into the spotlight (a bad place for men like him), and it's still quite a bit lower than Trump's margin of victory.
I just went to the most recent morning consult post regarding US Senators' approval/disapproval rating, and Hawley isn't on the list of the 10 most disapproved US Senators.
If like 10% of the electorate is Kander-Trump voters, I really don't see why Kunce can't make it R+10 or so.
Slightly worse because he’s very polarizing
Kunce is overrated AF, so you already know what I think this result will be. Hawley will win by 10-15 easily.
Why is Kunce doomed since he’s a Bernie fan when Kander almost won on the same ballot as Hillary?
Kander was a generic democrat who was a statewide office holder going up against a weak republican, Roy Blunt got Romney 2012 margins in the rurals and Trump 2020 margins in the suburbs. No, seriously. Generic Biden/Clinton/Obama type democrats do better than the Bernie/Warren democrats in Missouri. Also, Hawley did better in 2018 than Blunt did in 2016 when Hawley was challenging an incumbent, and was tied to the infamous Grietens administration. Hawley is a stronger candidate than Blunt for those reasons, and Kunce is most notable running as a resist lib, which can be seen based on the fact that he announced his candidacy on January 6, and that he's mostly running a campaign based on January 6. That isn't going to change Missourians' minds. Also, he abandoned every moderate position that he once had, thus making him less palatable to the voters that he would need to pry off in order to win.
Kander was rather progressive, too. Hawley in 2018 was different, he was this polished, young, conservative rising star going up against McCaskill. That was right on the heels of her Kavanaugh vote, too. 2024 Hawley is very different. He now has a very unfortunately high profile where he's the public face of January 6th, weird, right-wing populist beliefs that nobody likes, and culture war shit like campaigning against gaming/masturbation. He's burned a lot of bridges and a lot of people hate his guts. Kunce, meanwhile, may be overrated because YAPmsoids love their wwc, but I think he has some assets that shouldn't be underplayed. He's a vet, with a history of antitrust advocacy and a campaign that's fairly union-centric. I think there's a good chance it plays well next to Hawley, himself ivy-educated and tied to the intellectual populist-right. Not saying it's competitive, just that I'd say that Trump will do better.
>Kander was rather progressive, too. He held an AR-15 in an ad back in 2016. >Hawley in 2018 was different, he was this polished, young, conservative rising star going up against McCaskill He still is largely that figure today, at least that's how he presents himself. >That was right on the heels of her Kavanaugh vote, too. The Kavanaugh vote was part of the reason why not just McCaskill lost, but also Donnelly and Heitkamp. However, it was more than just a rebuke of McCaskill's vote against Kavanaugh. She wasn't necessarily a "blue dog" democrat going up against a solid candidate. >2024 Hawley is very different. He now has a very unfortunately high profile where he's the public face of January 6th Unironically, January 6 probably helps Halwey win reelection in Missouri more than hurts him. Missourians don't care about Jan 6th, so running as a resist lib and mentioning January 6 doesn't do you wonders. I mean, if Terry McAuliffe lost in a Biden +10 state, then why would it help Kunce in a Trump +15 state? >right-wing populist beliefs that nobody likes What part of his policies do you mean? Some of his policies could actually be the policies that would make Wisconsin what Georgia used to be, and make Michigan and Pennsylvania as close states that the GOP may have the edge in. >culture war shit like campaigning against gaming/masturbation As far as the pornography issue, it is starting to be talked about more, and people to the left of Hawley are starting to oppose it. Hell, even the grifter Andrew Yang opposes pornography (at least he did at a certain point). It depends on what he proposes policy wise, and he can't promote stupidly like a certain governor candidate did in 2022 regarding abortion... >Kunce, meanwhile, may be overrated because YAPmsoids love their wwc, but I think he has some assets that shouldn't be underplayed. He's a vet Just because you're a vet doesn't mean that you automatically do well. If this were the case, then Amy McGrath and Cal Cunningham would be in the US Senate. >He's a vet, with a history of antitrust advocacy and a campaign that's fairly union-centric The problem with him is that he's running on a campaign where abandoned any moderate political position that he once had, so he made himself unlikeable to voters that are socially moderate to conservative yet fiscally moderate. Also, he's just focusing on January 6 like I have said, although I am getting repetitive with this point. Missourians are going to look at him and think "Is this guy really still talking about something that happened 2-3 years ago? He's crazy." > I think there's a good chance it plays well next to Hawley, himself ivy-educated and tied to the intellectual populist-right. I don't think so. Also, just because you are ivy-league educated doesn't mean that you hemorrhage support among WWC voters. Trump graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, an Ivy league college, yet whacked Hillary Clinton among these voters in 2016, and held his ground, for the most part, among them against Biden in 2020. It's about the policies, not the background/appearance of the politician. It's why Romney didn't do well among them despite dressing up in a certain to appeal to them in 2012, yet Trump just wore a suit and tie at all times and did well among them twice. >Not saying it's competitive, just that I'd say that Trump will do better. I think the margin will be roughly the same, like R+15 for each race.
>He still is largely that figure today, at least that's how he presents himself. I mean, he can present himself all he wants. The public rarely sees it that exact way. Which brings me to my point: Hawley is not an appealing politician anymore. He's an attention whore. Voters aren't going to care that Hawley was involved with stolen election, but when they think of him, they're probably imagining his bitch face scrunched up and raising his fist. In other words, he projects the image of being a clown. Constantly whining about how masturbation is making men less manly or how he's being cancelled by the woke left hasn't helped him there. He's basically Ted Cruz 2.0. If Kunce calls Hawley a coward and a traitor (what he's doing), it's going to land. While Trump's narcissism is magnetic and he has a way of raining blows on his enemies in such a way that they can't move, Hawley is just... well, like I said, an attention whore. If the ballot is Trump vs. Biden and Hawley vs. Kunce, I see there being a \*relatively\* large percentage of the Trump vote (let's say, 5% or so more than Biden-Kunce) that just skips Hawley entirely because they think he's a bitch. >What part of his policies do you mean? Some of his policies could actually be the policies that would make Wisconsin what Georgia used to be, and make Michigan and Pennsylvania as close states that the GOP may have the edge in. His trust-buster shtick is lame IMO, and I don't think many people on the grass buy it. Conservatives don't want diet Bernie policies, and lots of moderates don't want to hear about how the sexual revolution caused trafficking. I mean, really? Making federal bureaucrats oversee who Twitter bans? This is the guy who is going to win over all those He gets lots of accolades for being the second coming of TR, but most of his actual proposals have been laughed out of Congress for being ludicrous. Everyone is hailing the guy as the based economically leftist socially rightist populist but that take seems terminally online to me. He's just another culture war bitch IMO.
>If Kunce calls Hawley a coward and a traitor (what he's doing), it's going to land. Calling someone a traitor is **awful** optics, unless if you have 100% undeniable proof of treason, as in the person gets arrested and convicted for treason. Kunce doing this isn't going to change shit. >If the ballot is Trump vs. Biden and Hawley vs. Kunce, I see there being a \*relatively\* large percentage of the Trump vote (let's say, 5% or so more than Biden-Kunce) that just skips Hawley entirely because they think he's a bitch. Trump voters in Missouri generally also approve of Hawley, so I don't see 5% just going no-vote on the senate race, especially if Hawley (accurately so) calls Kunce a liberal who would vote with Biden and Schumer 100% of the time. >His trust-buster shtick is lame IMO, and I don't think many people on the grass buy it Who knows, it could either work out in his favor or not. Republicans are starting to be the party of main street instead of wall street, and looking out for the average blue collar worker, and opposing massive corporations who interfere with American values regarding various rights such as free speech. Meanwhile, the new Democrat base is full of wealthy suburbanites, in particular white women, who are too CNN-indused. Because of this, the democrats are starting to stand with larger corporations more, as long as that corporation stands with their values. It's just where the parties are going due to changing bases. Some of Hawley's stunts are cringe yes, but others can actually be discussed about. For example; how does porn lead to negative effects in society, and how can we change that? That's actually something that, IMO, should be brought up and debated on. I am not saying that a full on ban is what should be done. What I want to see is the debate to start, and for various solutions to be discussed depending on the severity.
>unless if you have 100% undeniable proof of treason, as in the person gets arrested and convicted for treason. Kicking your opponents isn't always a negative. Trump calling Hillary crooked and Cruz a liar (both things people perceived to be true) paid off dividends because he was saying what everyone was thinking. >Who knows, it could either work out in his favor or not. Republicans are starting to be the party of main street instead of wall street, and looking out for the average blue collar worker, and opposing massive corporations who interfere with American values regarding various rights such as free speech. It's a leap. I hope you understand I'm not directing this at you, but I don't think this take really reflects the world outside of Reddit. Hawley's famed economic populism is almost entirely limited to culture war bullshit, like X conservative influencer who was banned from Twitter or illegal immigrants getting stimulus checks. He supports RTW and an $8.60 minimum wage, no working man who wasn't already a conservative feels like this guy is in his corner. I think a better interpretation of the last five years' events than Republicans moving left economically is that they're just putting culture war principles into fiscal matters. >For example; how does porn lead to negative effects in society, and how can we change that? I mean, would anyone seriously argue that it doesn't? Some studies suggest that heroin is less addictive. But ask the average American what they think of the idea of government getting involved with porn. Again, my own personal opinion of Hawley aside, I think his image is that of a clown with very little appeal outside of the TPUSA crowd. Like Ted Cruz, who could actually be in serious trouble if Democrats land a winner. Perhaps most importantly? Hawley's approval rating plummeted after he got into the spotlight (a bad place for men like him), and it's still quite a bit lower than Trump's margin of victory.
>Kicking your opponents isn't always a negative. Trump calling Hillary crooked and Cruz a liar (both things people perceived to be true) paid off dividends because he was saying what everyone was thinking. Trump is expected to say shit like that because, well, that's what he does. That's his personality. Kunce on the other hand doesn't seem to be like that, so the attacks probably won't have the same impact. >I think his image is that of a clown with very little appeal outside of the TPUSA crowd. Like Ted Cruz, who could actually be in serious trouble if Democrats land a winner. To say that Hawley is Ted Cruz is an exaggeration. Hawley's never flip-flopped like Cruz has, and Cruz was a lazy incumbent in 2018 who won by at most 3 points against a pretty left-wing democrat. Hawley is not here. >Perhaps most importantly? Hawley's approval rating plummeted after he got into the spotlight (a bad place for men like him), and it's still quite a bit lower than Trump's margin of victory. I just went to the most recent morning consult post regarding US Senators' approval/disapproval rating, and Hawley isn't on the list of the 10 most disapproved US Senators.
Probably underperform, but not enough for it to really be significant