• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prop C passes overwhelmingly

pro-bipartisan said:
You have yet to say which races Republicans will win to gain the majority.
Click to expand...

grow up

there's 435 of em, not gallup, not rasmussen, not ppp, not ipsos, not nbc/wsj, not cnn/or, not mason dixon, survey usa...

none of em's in a position to satisfy your little foot-tapping demand

but, like i said, coming close is just as good

RealClearPolitics - 2010 Election Maps - Battle for the House

it's in the bag

ask the ONE POINT ZERO FIVE MILLION republicans who turned out in used-to-be reliably blue michigan, compared to a downcast 535,000 dems

ask the 580,000 reds in show-me land, but don't bother the 315,000 bummed out blues

talk to you november 3, hopefully you'll be over the tummy ache, or whatever it is that's got you so cranky today
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
grow up

there's 435 of em, not gallup, not rasmussen, not ppp, not ipsos, not nbc/wsj, not cnn/or, not mason dixon, survey usa...

none of em's in a position to satisfy your little foot-tapping demand

but, like i said, coming close is just as good

RealClearPolitics - 2010 Election Maps - Battle for the House

it's in the bag

ask the ONE POINT ZERO FIVE MILLION republicans who turned out in used-to-be reliably blue michigan, compared to a downcast 535,000 dems

ask the 580,000 reds in show-me land, but don't bother the 315,000 bummed out blues

talk to you november 3, hopefully you'll be over the tummy ache, or whatever it is that's got you so cranky today
Click to expand...

I hope you know every seat isn't up for election. Anyway, I guess unlike Republicans I have a spine and will answer questions; in the Senate, Democrats will win Maryland, New York, Oregon, West Virginia, Connecticut, California, Washington, Wisconsin, Nevada, Florida, Vermont, and Hawaii. *I count Independents as Dems. Here are some other links that support my statement that Democrats will hold the majority in the Senate: Election 2010: Senate Balance Of Power - Rasmussen Reports™ United States Senate Balance of Power, 2010 Senate Races - Intrade Data Forecast 8-5-2010, and Swing State Project: StephenCLE's 2010 Senate Predictions. I'll give you the House in a little bit.
 
pro-bipartisan said:
I hope you know every seat isn't up for election. Anyway, I guess unlike Republicans I have a spine and will answer questions; in the Senate, Democrats will win Maryland, New York, Oregon, West Virginia, Connecticut, California, Washington, Wisconsin, Nevada, Florida, Vermont, and Hawaii. *I count Independents as Dems. Here are some other links that support my statement that Democrats will hold the majority in the Senate: Election 2010: Senate Balance Of Power - Rasmussen Reports™ United States Senate Balance of Power, 2010 Senate Races - Intrade Data Forecast 8-5-2010, and Swing State Project: StephenCLE's 2010 Senate Predictions. I'll give you the House in a little bit.
Click to expand...

Every House seat IS up for election, and according to polls now, it seems likely that the Republicans will gain a majority of seats. The Senate is more problematical as only 1/3 are up for grabs. But it seems the GOP has at least a 50/50 chance of gaining the House...
 
A prop to block something that will help people out before it even gets a chance to help the people out and go into full effect? Also MO has an overwhelming majority of Republicans and whoever suggest MO is a swing state lol.

2008 Votes by county:
250px-Missouri_Presidential_Election_Results_by_County,_2008.svg.png


2004 Votes:
missouri08.jpg
 
ludahai said:
Every House seat IS up for election, and according to polls now, it seems likely that the Republicans will gain a majority of seats. The Senate is more problematical as only 1/3 are up for grabs. But it seems the GOP has at least a 50/50 chance of gaining the House...
Click to expand...

Don't spoil his night like that.
 
JohnWOlin said:
A prop to block something that will help people out before it even gets a chance to help the people out and go into full effect? Also MO has an overwhelming majority of Republicans and whoever suggest MO is a swing state lol.

2008 Votes by county:
250px-Missouri_Presidential_Election_Results_by_County,_2008.svg.png



2004 Votes:
missouri08.jpg
Click to expand...


Umm... those Democratic patches are also the population centers of the state (St. Louis, Kansas City, and Jefferson City) The dark red is the relatively unpopulated Ozarks... Missouri is pretty equal between the two and has long been seen as a bellweather. Once again, misleading by the left to try to make their side look better...
 
ludahai said:
Umm... those Democratic patches are also the population centers of the state (St. Louis, Kansas City, and Jefferson City) The dark red is the relatively unpopulated Ozarks... Missouri is pretty equal between the two and has long been seen as a bellweather. Once again, misleading by the left to try to make their side look better...
Click to expand...

Missouri is a red state and the majority of registered voters there are Republican as well. Democrat voter turnout was low and with over 4 million registered voters less than 1 million turned out to vote.
 
from the wik above:

Missouri is widely regarded as a state bellwether in American politics. The state has a longer stretch of supporting the winning presidential candidate than any other state, having voted with the nation in every election since 1904 with two exceptions: in 1956 when it voted for Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois over the winner, incumbent President Dwight Eisenhower of Kansas, and in 2008 when it voted for Senator John McCain of Arizona over national winner Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, both by extremely narrow margins.
Click to expand...

presidential election year-% republican-net republican-% dem-net dem-% third party-net third party
2008 49.39% 1,445,814 49.25% 1,441,911 1.36% 39,889
2004 53.30% 1,455,713 46.10% 1,259,171 0.60% 16,480
2000 50.42% 1,189,924 47.08% 1,111,138 2.50% 58,830
1996 41.24% 890,016 47.54% 1,025,935 11.22% 242,114
1992 33.92% 811,159 44.07% 1,053,873 22.00% 526,238
1988 51.83% 1,084,953 47.85% 1,001,619 0.32% 6,656
1984 60.02% 1,274,188 39.98% 848,583 0.00% None
1980 51.16% 1,074,181 44.35% 931,182 4.49% 94,461
1976 47.47% 927,443 51.10% 998,387 1.42% 27,770
1972 62.29% 1,154,058 37.71% 698,531 0.00% None
1968 44.87% 811,932 43.74% 791,444 11.39% 206,126
1964 35.95% 653,535 50.92% 1,164,344 0.00% None
1960 49.74% 962,221 50.26% 972,201 0.00% None
1956 49.89% 914,289 50.11% 918,273 0.00% None
1952 50.71% 959,429 49.14% 929,830 0.15% 2,803
1948 41.49% 655,039 58.11% 917,315 0.39% 6,274
1944 48.43% 761,524 51.37% 807,804 0.20% 3,146
1940 47.50% 871,009 52.27% 958,476 0.23% 4,244
1936 38.16% 697,891 60.76% 1,111,043 1.08% 19,701
1932 35.08% 564,713 63.69% 1,025,406 1.22% 19,775
1928 55.58% 834,080 44.15% 662,562 0.27% 4,079
1924 49.58% 648,486 43.79% 572,753 6.63% 86,719
1920 54.56% 727,162 43.13% 574,799 2.32% 30,839
1916 46.94% 369,339 50.59% 398,032 2.46% 19,398
1912 29.75% 207,821 47.35% 330,746 22.89% 159,999
1908 48.50% 347,203 48.41% 346,574 3.08% 22,150
1904 49.93% 321,449 46.02% 296,312 4.05% 26,100
1900 45.94% 314,092 51.48% 351,922 2.58% 17,642
Click to expand...
 
JohnWOlin said:
However, the point still stands that the majority of turnout was Repbulican voters.
Click to expand...

i know!

two to one!!!

in MISSOURI!

about as ominous a message as americans are capable of sending, this side of "2nd amendment solutions," to quote ms angle

(senator) claire mccaskill declared yesterday she "got the message"

google it
 
JohnWOlin said:
Well first time I stand corrected here yet. My bad. However, the point still stands that the majority of turnout was Repbulican voters.
Click to expand...

That's the point. The fact that in Missouri, the GOP showed up in such impressive numbers does not bode well for the Dems in the fall...

And in the future, I would recommend not using county-by-county maps... they can be horribly deceptive...
 
Where did the people go who said Republicans will pick up a majority in the Senate? I like how people say things without backing it up, not surprised at all though.
 
Last edited:
probably the same place all the dems went who said not all house members were up in november

LOL!

coming close is good enough
 
ludahai said:
2002 (ten characters)
Click to expand...

Yep I was correct, the actual results were a tie which gave the Democrats control for 17 days as Gore was the tie breaker, the Republicans thus gained control when Cheney became the tie breaker, but lost control again when Jim Jeffords left the Republican party and decided to Caucus with the Democrats. Republicans did not hold control of the Congress in the 2002 election they gained control of Congress in 2002.
 
Last edited:
Now I really want to know the answer, has a party ever managed to hold both houses of congress in the first term of a President that was a member of that party?

Republicans gained both Houses in Clinton's first mid-term election

Democrats already controlled the Congress for GHWB's first mid-term so the Republicans couldn't have held it.

The Democrats had control of the House for Reagan's first mid-term so again no.

O.K. it was under the Carter Administration followed by 3 straight Republican Presidential victories.
 
RealClearPolitics - Enthusiasm Gap on Display in Tuesday's Primaries

if you want to get your head around house, senate and gub races, in all their multi-variety, coast to coast, one of the best places to start is always rcp

jay cost is a must read, but the above rcp anaysis of enthusiasm, turnout and what they portend for november is by sean trende

it's eye-openingly revealing

some snippets

in michigan's tuesday primary for gub, the ratio of republicans voting to dems (1.045 million reds, 527,000 blues, 1.98 to 1) was almost DOUBLE the previous highest ratio this decade

turnout in missouri (580,000 knuckle draggers, 395,000 enlightened) saw, once again, a ratio of "them" to "us" that was DOUBLE "what it typically was this decade"

in MO4, ike skelton, chair of house armed services, endured his first primary challenge in 10 years---dem turnout was 20% LOWER than when he ran UNCONTESTED (think about it), while opposition turnout, naturally, increased

bart stupak, MI1, the congressman whose caving on his pro life position cleared passage of obamacare, (stupak soon after wisely announced his retirement)---in MI1, stupak's old seat, blue votership was HALF what it was in 08, while red ballots TRIPLED

"what makes tuesday's turnout especially noteworty," concludes trende, "is its proximity to the general election" in november

there's quite a bit more, an awful lot of data, ALL OF IT saying the same thing

check it out if you're inclined

peace
 
pro-bipartisan said:
Where did the people go who said Republicans will pick up a majority in the Senate? I like how people say things without backing it up, not surprised at all though.
Click to expand...

I think it highly unlikely (not impossible) that the GOP will pick up a Senate majority... 48, 49 max... I don't see 50 and because Biden is the Veep, the GOP would need 51.

I think the GOP should focus on the House because there is a very realistic chance of gaining the majority there...
 
Agent Ferris said:
Yep I was correct, the actual results were a tie which gave the Democrats control for 17 days as Gore was the tie breaker, the Republicans thus gained control when Cheney became the tie breaker, but lost control again when Jim Jeffords left the Republican party and decided to Caucus with the Democrats. Republicans did not hold control of the Congress in the 2002 election they gained control of Congress in 2002.
Click to expand...

Thanks for reminding me... forgot about that whole fiasco... I think it kind of was in the background in the aftermath of the Gore silliness in Florida...
 
pro-bipartisan said:
Where did the people go who said Republicans will pick up a majority in the Senate? I like how people say things without backing it up, not surprised at all though.
Click to expand...

Some things are obvious, and there is precedent for the obvious: 1994.
For those that have dificulty connecting the dots, or not wanting to see the obvious... the facts will dribble in. You can be sure the Journolists won't be eager to promote the enemy... So...

You have a pipe... here is the dope... smoke dat shi mon.

The expected groundswell is driven by the composition of voter turnout, which at about 40 per cent would be significantly lower than the 63 per cent that brought Mr Obama to power. According to polls, likely Republican voters are twice as motivated to vote as Democrats.

The University of Virginia’s widely monitored Crystal Ball will on Wednesday forecast sweeping setbacks on Capitol Hill and the loss of a clutch of state governorships on November 2.

It follows a Gallup poll that showed the Republicans with a 10 percentage point lead over the Democrats – the widest margin in 68 years. Separately, a University of Buffalo paper has predicted a 51-seat gain for Republicans in November.

The Democrats have a 39-seat majority in the House of Representatives. Many believe Democratic control of the Senate is also at risk.

FT.com / US / Politics & Foreign policy - Democrats face midterm meltdown
Click to expand...
Of course, the ultimate poll will be taken in November.
Can't wait!

.
 
zimmer said:
Some things are obvious, and there is precedent for the obvious: 1994.
For those that have dificulty connecting the dots, or not wanting to see the obvious... the facts will dribble in. You can be sure the Journolists won't be eager to promote the enemy... So...

You have a pipe... here is the dope... smoke dat shi mon.


Of course, the ultimate poll will be taken in November.
Can't wait!

.
Click to expand...

The bads news is trickling out. As stated, both chambers are now in play.
This shift in perception — from Obama as political savior to Obama as creature of Washington — can be seen elsewhere. When Obama arrived in office in January '09, his Gallup approval rating stood at 68%, a high for a newly elected leader not seen since John Kennedy in 1961. Today Obama's job approval has been hovering in the mid-40s, which means that at least 1 in 4 Americans has changed his or her mind. The plunge has been particularly dramatic among independents, whites and those under age 30. With midterm elections just nine weeks off, instead of the generational transformation some Democrats predicted after 2008, the President's party teeters on the brink of a broad setback in November, including the possible loss of both houses of Congress. By a 10-point margin, people say they will vote for Republicans over Democrats in Congress, the largest such gap ever recorded by Gallup.

Read more: Obama Unpopular Ahead of Midterms: Will the GOP Benefit? - TIME
Click to expand...
 
zimmer said:
The bads news is trickling out. As stated, both chambers are now in play.
Click to expand...

Remember all the Dems that were cackling that the Republican party was about to go extinct just a couple years ago ??

The extinction shoe might be on the other foot soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom