Official FFA 2014 Midterms- GOP wins Senate, victories everywhere (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

That doesn't matter either. I'm not interesting in arguing over whether or not tommyboy's statistics are truly accurate, nor whether or not Obama is truly responsible for the employment numbers, good or bad. None of that is important to my point, which is that the public is suffering, there's not enough jobs out there, and they blame Obama because he is in charge, and they will continue to blame Obama until this is resolved or he is no longer in charge, at which point they will blame the next President if nothing changes.

The public isn't going around looking up Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers. They're watching their friends, neighbors, family, and sometimes themselves, lose jobs and can't find replacements. Their children are graduating from college and being forced to move back home because there's no jobs waiting for them. And they're pissed off about it, and scared as well. You can quote all the figures you want, but THIS is what drove the vote Tuesday night, and it will continue to drive the vote unless things get better.

The point of my post wasn't that one statistic is useless and another is all-encompassing. It's that this isn't happening as much as the GOP would like you to believe. Simple as that.

Obviously I wish it wasn't happening at all, and obviously we're not at peak employment or in the midst of an economic boom like the 1990s or something, but things are OK. What drove the vote Tuesday night was the standard mid-second term factors. The voter demographics from Tuesday night look nothing like the voter demographics of a typical election.

 

[timschochet]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Except the elections where lots of different people vote, you mean. Those tend not to go Republican.

Such a cute theory based on two data points.

Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. They've picked up House seats in 4 of those 6. And more ballots were cast for Democratic House candidates than GOP House candidates in four of the six, including 2012 despite the disparity in seats won. But sure, two data points.

so you redefine results and definitions to match your theory and cherry-pick your end point to exclude the three elections in a row won by Republicans. That is a brilliant use of stats to present results in a completely dishonest way. Typical of the left. The reality is Republican Presidents have won 5 of the last 9 elections where lots of people vote.

Yeah, you're probably right. Things are trending great for the GOP. No reason for concern at all. Stay the course of opposing immigration reform, fighting minimum wage hikes, limiting reproductive rights, opposing gay marriage, and seeking stricter voter ID laws. I'm sure that will work out great in 2016 and beyond, when the voter demographics will probably look just like they did on Tuesday night.

 

[roadkill1292]

Fatness and Tobias, I'm not sure I agree with you guys here. What this really comes down to is the struggle within the GOP between the establishment and the conservative base. You guys seem to assume that the conservative base has won this struggle and that they will dictate how Obama is to be dealt with.

I'm not so sure of this. And the conservative base isn't either , which is why guys like Ted Cruz, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and several others have spent the last few days warning their fellow Republicans that they had "better live up to their promises ". Suddenly Barack Obama is not the biggest enemy in the room; it's Mitch McConnell.

They were tommyboy's words, not ours.

Every piece of legislation still has to get through a House Republican caucus that has shown no signs of wanting any sort of compromise. McConnell may really want to get some things done that the President could sign, but there's no way that type of legislation is making it through the House.

The only thing that really changed this week was the Senate can now pass a House budget and hold up (even more) Obama appointments.

well the message from voters is pretty clear, they didn't like what the Dems had on offer so they kicked them out. That means if you're a republican majority you need to stop whatever the Dems were/are doing and go in a different direction. If you just so happened to run on repealing Obamacare, well guess what the electorate voted you in so now you need to at least go through the motions of trying to fulfill some of your major election promises.

Well, it's pretty clear from something over half of the one-third of voters who showed up, anyway.

that and all the other governor races, local races and pretty much everything in America going republican.

Being unable to grasp math concepts cost you a lot of money two years ago, IIRC.

 

[The Commish]

Btw, Romney promised 12 million jobs. That is way better than Obama did.

WTF does this little gem mean? Is your turrets flaring up again where you just say random things?

 

[Fennis]

Sadness cars speaks to printer hot outage Romney - Obama

 

[urbanhack]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

People are pissed off because they are told to be pissed off because Obama is president. it's hilarious that people actually think you are a liberal/progressive.

 

[jon_mx]

Btw, Romney promised 12 million jobs. That is way better than Obama did.

WTF does this little gem mean? Is your turrets flaring up again where you just say random things?

Actually what I found funny was that was actually a key theme of Romney which he ran on but never backed up how it was going to happen. It is how shallow our politics are.

 

[jonessed]

Fatness and Tobias, I'm not sure I agree with you guys here. What this really comes down to is the struggle within the GOP between the establishment and the conservative base. You guys seem to assume that the conservative base has won this struggle and that they will dictate how Obama is to be dealt with.

I'm not so sure of this. And the conservative base isn't either , which is why guys like Ted Cruz, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and several others have spent the last few days warning their fellow Republicans that they had "better live up to their promises ". Suddenly Barack Obama is not the biggest enemy in the room; it's Mitch McConnell.

They were tommyboy's words, not ours.

Every piece of legislation still has to get through a House Republican caucus that has shown no signs of wanting any sort of compromise. McConnell may really want to get some things done that the President could sign, but there's no way that type of legislation is making it through the House.

The only thing that really changed this week was the Senate can now pass a House budget and hold up (even more) Obama appointments.

well the message from voters is pretty clear, they didn't like what the Dems had on offer so they kicked them out. That means if you're a republican majority you need to stop whatever the Dems were/are doing and go in a different direction. If you just so happened to run on repealing Obamacare, well guess what the electorate voted you in so now you need to at least go through the motions of trying to fulfill some of your major election promises.

Well, it's pretty clear from something over half of the one-third of voters who showed up, anyway.

that and all the other governor races, local races and pretty much everything in America going republican.

Being unable to grasp math concepts cost you a lot of money two years ago, IIRC.

I don't see why the quantity of possible voters is relevant. Those that care, vote, and if you don't vote you obviously aren't a voter.I was listening to Willy Brown this morning, who is a crooked a politician there ever was, but speaks frankly on politics since his retirement. He was pretty clear that the Dems got annihilated. Way worse than they expected. He thought Dems blew it by running away from Obama. I don't know if I agree, but it's certainly a possibility.

Anyway, he said the big worry for the Dems in 2016 was always whether the Obama coalition was for Obama or could be leveraged for all Dems. He said the party is in full panic mode now. The scale of the loss was completely unexpected and they are worried Hillary won't be able to energize like Obama did and it will impact all Dems.

 

[Fennis]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

In 2014 GOP picked up 3 in governors (Obama 2 years in second term)

In 2006 Dems picked up 6 governors (Bush 2 years in second term)

In 1998 GOP lost 1 gain went to Independent (Clinton 2 years in second term)

in 1986 Dems lost 8 (Reagan 2 years in second term)

 

[jon_mx]

Except the elections where lots of different people vote, you mean. Those tend not to go Republican.

Such a cute theory based on two data points.

Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. They've picked up House seats in 4 of those 6. And more ballots were cast for Democratic House candidates than GOP House candidates in four of the six, including 2012 despite the disparity in seats won. But sure, two data points.

so you redefine results and definitions to match your theory and cherry-pick your end point to exclude the three elections in a row won by Republicans. That is a brilliant use of stats to present results in a completely dishonest way. Typical of the left. The reality is Republican Presidents have won 5 of the last 9 elections where lots of people vote.

Yeah, you're probably right. Things are trending great for the GOP. No reason for concern at all. Stay the course of opposing immigration reform, fighting minimum wage hikes, limiting reproductive rights, opposing gay marriage, and seeking stricter voter ID laws. I'm sure that will work out great in 2016 and beyond, when the voter demographics will probably look just like they did on Tuesday night.

The Dems are not on the popular side of most of those issues. Yeah, most people want immigration reform, but that means completely different things to different groups. If you asked should we give amnesty to 17 million illegals, it is not going to come back with popular results. Most of those issues have many nuisances too them, taking an extreme position on either side is not the winning strategy. That is the one area Dems outmaneuver Republicans on being happy taking small steps. But when they get too cocky and over-reach that is when things swing back the other way.

 

[timschochet]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

People are pissed off because they are told to be pissed off because Obama is president. it's hilarious that people actually think you are a liberal/progressive.

Well I agree with the bolded.

But my opinion on this matter has very little to do with my personal views. It always amuses me how much time people spend on trying to project their own views on the public. I don't waste time with that. I hold a whole lot of views that the majority of the public will NEVER agree with me on- open borders for instance.

I didn't think the American public was as pissed off at Obama as they are. I was wrong about that. Tuesday night opened my eyes. Do I personally think Obama is doing a terrible job on the economy? Not at all. He was placed in a terrible position, and he's done what he could to get us out of it. Overall I give him a B+. I can't name too many things that I would have done differently.

But again, that has nothing to do with public perception. And it is foolish and myopic to ignore what the public is telling you. In this case, the public is telling us that they are not satisfied with what Obama has done, and they want a new direction. That's the bottom line. Democratic politicians, including the President, ignore this at their peril.

 

[timschochet]

But- the Republican victories are a short term thing, for two reasons:

The first is that the GOP offered no specific alternatives in this election. They basically ran as "not Obama". That's well and good for now, but they have no philosophical mandate to go forward with. The GOP are like the emergency plumber there to fix your bathroom leak- your first plumber can't do it, so you sent him away and now you find a second guy. You don't care how he does it, you just want him to fix the damn leak. In other words, the public is not committed to conservatism. They're not committed to anything.

The second is that the immigration problem lingers like an open wound on their national election chances. I wrote this before in another thread but right now the percentage of Latinos who vote Democrat is 65-70%. If that holds, then within 10 years Texas becomes a blue state, and there is no way for a Republican to get to the White House without Texas. None, that's the ballgame. So between now and then Republicans need to get rid of this issue.

 

[jonessed]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

In 2014 GOP picked up 3 in governors (Obama 2 years in second term)

In 2006 Dems picked up 6 governors (Bush 2 years in second term)

In 1998 GOP lost 1 gain went to Independent (Clinton 2 years in second term)

in 1986 Dems lost 8 (Reagan 2 years in second term)

It's not just the governorships. The Democrats have outright control over seven states compared to 24 for Republicans. Republicans have 2/3rds of the state legislative bodies. They haven't had this much local control since the Civil War.

The Republicans have made serious gains in developing their ground game and organizing voters since Obama was elected. Their record control of the House is a direct result.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't see why the quantity of possible voters is relevant. Those that care, vote, and if you don't vote you obviously aren't a voter.I was listening to Willy Brown this morning, who is a crooked a politician there ever was, but speaks frankly on politics since his retirement. He was pretty clear that the Dems got annihilated. Way worse than they expected. He thought Dems blew it by running away from Obama. I don't know if I agree, but it's certainly a possibility.

Anyway, he said the big worry for the Dems in 2016 was always whether the Obama coalition was for Obama or could be leveraged for all Dems. He said the party is in full panic mode now. The scale of the loss was completely unexpected and they are worried Hillary won't be able to energize like Obama did and it will impact all Dems.

Anyone that was blown away by the extent of the defeat wasn't paying attention. It was a perfect storm for the GOP- midterm elections with a second term president who's not all that popular, a Senate map where virtually every vulnerable seat was a democratic incumbent in a red or purple state, apathy from the left knowing that there was very little at stake, etc. The result was a voting demographic that looks nothing like the demographic will look in 2016. In 2016 there will be a presidential election, likely with a female Democratic candidate, these population trends llikely continuing, and a Senate map will look like this.

Obviously you don't like to lose seats, and I expected it to be 53/47 or 54/46 so 55/45 makes the Democratic task in 2016 that much harder. But it should be equally obvious IMO that there's no deeper meaning or trend at work here. What do you think are the chances that the GOP keeps the Senate and wins the White House in 2016? Maybe 10%?

 

[timschochet]

Three Republicans I really like and admire after listening to them this last week:

John Kasich

Rob Portman

Mitch McConnell

One Republican I dislike, but who intrigues me greatly:

Scott Walker

Two Republicans I can't stand:

Ted Cruz

Joni Ernst

 

[jonessed]

I don't see why the quantity of possible voters is relevant. Those that care, vote, and if you don't vote you obviously aren't a voter.

I was listening to Willy Brown this morning, who is a crooked a politician there ever was, but speaks frankly on politics since his retirement. He was pretty clear that the Dems got annihilated. Way worse than they expected. He thought Dems blew it by running away from Obama. I don't know if I agree, but it's certainly a possibility.

Anyway, he said the big worry for the Dems in 2016 was always whether the Obama coalition was for Obama or could be leveraged for all Dems. He said the party is in full panic mode now. The scale of the loss was completely unexpected and they are worried Hillary won't be able to energize like Obama did and it will impact all Dems.

Anyone that was blown away by the extent of the defeat wasn't paying attention. It was a perfect storm for the GOP- midterm elections with a second term president who's not all that popular, a Senate map where virtually every vulnerable seat was a democratic incumbent in a red or purple state, apathy from the left knowing that there was very little at stake, etc. The result was a voting demographic that looks nothing like the demographic will look in 2016. In 2016 there will be a presidential election, likely with a female Democratic candidate, these population trends llikely continuing, and a Senate map will look like this.

Obviously you don't like to lose seats, and I expected it to be 53/47 or 54/46 so 55/45 makes the Democratic task in 2016 that much harder. But it should be equally obvious IMO that there's no deeper meaning or trend at work here. What do you think are the chances that the GOP keeps the Senate and wins the White House in 2016? Maybe 10%?

I'm talking largely about local elections and control.

Where are you getting 10% from?

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't see why the quantity of possible voters is relevant. Those that care, vote, and if you don't vote you obviously aren't a voter.

I was listening to Willy Brown this morning, who is a crooked a politician there ever was, but speaks frankly on politics since his retirement. He was pretty clear that the Dems got annihilated. Way worse than they expected. He thought Dems blew it by running away from Obama. I don't know if I agree, but it's certainly a possibility.

Anyway, he said the big worry for the Dems in 2016 was always whether the Obama coalition was for Obama or could be leveraged for all Dems. He said the party is in full panic mode now. The scale of the loss was completely unexpected and they are worried Hillary won't be able to energize like Obama did and it will impact all Dems.

Anyone that was blown away by the extent of the defeat wasn't paying attention. It was a perfect storm for the GOP- midterm elections with a second term president who's not all that popular, a Senate map where virtually every vulnerable seat was a democratic incumbent in a red or purple state, apathy from the left knowing that there was very little at stake, etc. The result was a voting demographic that looks nothing like the demographic will look in 2016. In 2016 there will be a presidential election, likely with a female Democratic candidate, these population trends llikely continuing, and a Senate map will look like this.

Obviously you don't like to lose seats, and I expected it to be 53/47 or 54/46 so 55/45 makes the Democratic task in 2016 that much harder. But it should be equally obvious IMO that there's no deeper meaning or trend at work here. What do you think are the chances that the GOP keeps the Senate and wins the White House in 2016? Maybe 10%?

I'm talking largely about local elections and control.

Where are you getting 10% from?

I got the 10% from my glorious rear end. Total guess, was curious where you'd put the number.

The local elections were likely a product of the national factors that skewed the turnout. Nobody turns out to vote for their state legislator- most people can't even name theirs.

 

[pizzatyme]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

People are pissed off because they are told to be pissed off because Obama is president. it's hilarious that people actually think you are a liberal/progressive.

Who's telling them this, the liberal media? Or is the majority of the country now watching Fox news?

 

[pizzatyme]

Kasich/Martinez 2016...you heard it here first.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Kasich/Martinez 2016...you heard it here first.

And that's the same place I heard that the Pacers had a great chance to beat the Heat most of last year, so you know it's rock solid.

 

[Rich Conway]

Kasich/Martinez 2016...you heard it here first.

Well, Yankee23Fan did say that in this thread a few pages ago, but other than that...

 

[jon_mx]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

People are pissed off because they are told to be pissed off because Obama is president. it's hilarious that people actually think you are a liberal/progressive.

Who's telling them this, the liberal media? Or is the majority of the country now watching Fox news?

What is more curious is who is telling urbanhack those whacky things.

 

[pizzatyme]

Kasich/Martinez 2016...you heard it here first.

And that's the same place I heard that the Pacers had a great chance to beat the Heat most of last year, so you know it's rock solid.

Let it go, man. Let it go.

 

[jon_mx]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

People are pissed off because they are told to be pissed off because Obama is president. it's hilarious that people actually think you are a liberal/progressive.

Well I agree with the bolded.

But my opinion on this matter has very little to do with my personal views. It always amuses me how much time people spend on trying to project their own views on the public. I don't waste time with that. I hold a whole lot of views that the majority of the public will NEVER agree with me on- open borders for instance.

I didn't think the American public was as pissed off at Obama as they are. I was wrong about that. Tuesday night opened my eyes. Do I personally think Obama is doing a terrible job on the economy? Not at all. He was placed in a terrible position, and he's done what he could to get us out of it. Overall I give him a B+. I can't name too many things that I would have done differently.

But again, that has nothing to do with public perception. And it is foolish and myopic to ignore what the public is telling you. In this case, the public is telling us that they are not satisfied with what Obama has done, and they want a new direction. That's the bottom line. Democratic politicians, including the President, ignore this at their peril.

Don"t worry Tim, I will still think of you are a progressive. Getting off the Democrat's Kool-aid that Tuesday's elections were meaningless, does not change anything in my eyes.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Kasich/Martinez 2016...you heard it here first.

And that's the same place I heard that the Pacers had a great chance to beat the Heat most of last year, so you know it's rock solid.

Let it go, man. Let it go.

We miss you in the NBA thread, pizzatyme. Come back and visit some time.

 

[tommyboy]

Except the elections where lots of different people vote, you mean. Those tend not to go Republican.

Such a cute theory based on two data points.

Democrats have won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections. They've picked up House seats in 4 of those 6. And more ballots were cast for Democratic House candidates than GOP House candidates in four of the six, including 2012 despite the disparity in seats won. But sure, two data points.

so you redefine results and definitions to match your theory and cherry-pick your end point to exclude the three elections in a row won by Republicans. That is a brilliant use of stats to present results in a completely dishonest way. Typical of the left. The reality is Republican Presidents have won 5 of the last 9 elections where lots of people vote.

Yeah, you're probably right. Things are trending great for the GOP. No reason for concern at all. Stay the course of opposing immigration reform, fighting minimum wage hikes, limiting reproductive rights, opposing gay marriage, and seeking stricter voter ID laws. I'm sure that will work out great in 2016 and beyond, when the voter demographics will probably look just like they did on Tuesday night.

you might be describing the religious right, but not the entire Republican/Libertarian/Tea Party voting block, by any means.

I mean, those are all quick and easy mindless soundbites but irrelevant to anyone but Liberals that want to feel good about their imagined moral superiority.

 

[dhockster]

But- the Republican victories are a short term thing, for two reasons:

The first is that the GOP offered no specific alternatives in this election. They basically ran as "not Obama". That's well and good for now, but they have no philosophical mandate to go forward with. The GOP are like the emergency plumber there to fix your bathroom leak- your first plumber can't do it, so you sent him away and now you find a second guy. You don't care how he does it, you just want him to fix the damn leak. In other words, the public is not committed to conservatism. They're not committed to anything.

The second is that the immigration problem lingers like an open wound on their national election chances. I wrote this before in another thread but right now the percentage of Latinos who vote Democrat is 65-70%. If that holds, then within 10 years Texas becomes a blue state, and there is no way for a Republican to get to the White House without Texas. None, that's the ballgame. So between now and then Republicans need to get rid of this issue.

I was listening to Dan Patrick, the new lieutenant Governor of Texas, and he actually won the Latino woman's vote by 2 points and came very close to winning the Latino vote in total. The democrats view on abortion issue did not play well to the Latinos in Texas,

 

[Rich Conway]

I'm not a progressive, and I think the results this week are meaningless in terms of predictive value of future elections.

timschochet is correct that the GOP needs to do something to court Latino voters or POTUS will become unattainable.

 

[jonessed]

I don't see why the quantity of possible voters is relevant. Those that care, vote, and if you don't vote you obviously aren't a voter.

I was listening to Willy Brown this morning, who is a crooked a politician there ever was, but speaks frankly on politics since his retirement. He was pretty clear that the Dems got annihilated. Way worse than they expected. He thought Dems blew it by running away from Obama. I don't know if I agree, but it's certainly a possibility.

Anyway, he said the big worry for the Dems in 2016 was always whether the Obama coalition was for Obama or could be leveraged for all Dems. He said the party is in full panic mode now. The scale of the loss was completely unexpected and they are worried Hillary won't be able to energize like Obama did and it will impact all Dems.

Anyone that was blown away by the extent of the defeat wasn't paying attention. It was a perfect storm for the GOP- midterm elections with a second term president who's not all that popular, a Senate map where virtually every vulnerable seat was a democratic incumbent in a red or purple state, apathy from the left knowing that there was very little at stake, etc. The result was a voting demographic that looks nothing like the demographic will look in 2016. In 2016 there will be a presidential election, likely with a female Democratic candidate, these population trends llikely continuing, and a Senate map will look like this.

Obviously you don't like to lose seats, and I expected it to be 53/47 or 54/46 so 55/45 makes the Democratic task in 2016 that much harder. But it should be equally obvious IMO that there's no deeper meaning or trend at work here. What do you think are the chances that the GOP keeps the Senate and wins the White House in 2016? Maybe 10%?

I'm talking largely about local elections and control.Where are you getting 10% from?

I got the 10% from my glorious rear end. Total guess, was curious where you'd put the number.

The local elections were likely a product of the national factors that skewed the turnout. Nobody turns out to vote for their state legislator- most people can't even name theirs.

National factors like poor Democrat turnout and Independents voting Republican?

I would probably put it around 20%.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I don't see why the quantity of possible voters is relevant. Those that care, vote, and if you don't vote you obviously aren't a voter.

I was listening to Willy Brown this morning, who is a crooked a politician there ever was, but speaks frankly on politics since his retirement. He was pretty clear that the Dems got annihilated. Way worse than they expected. He thought Dems blew it by running away from Obama. I don't know if I agree, but it's certainly a possibility.

Anyway, he said the big worry for the Dems in 2016 was always whether the Obama coalition was for Obama or could be leveraged for all Dems. He said the party is in full panic mode now. The scale of the loss was completely unexpected and they are worried Hillary won't be able to energize like Obama did and it will impact all Dems.

Anyone that was blown away by the extent of the defeat wasn't paying attention. It was a perfect storm for the GOP- midterm elections with a second term president who's not all that popular, a Senate map where virtually every vulnerable seat was a democratic incumbent in a red or purple state, apathy from the left knowing that there was very little at stake, etc. The result was a voting demographic that looks nothing like the demographic will look in 2016. In 2016 there will be a presidential election, likely with a female Democratic candidate, these population trends llikely continuing, and a Senate map will look like this.

Obviously you don't like to lose seats, and I expected it to be 53/47 or 54/46 so 55/45 makes the Democratic task in 2016 that much harder. But it should be equally obvious IMO that there's no deeper meaning or trend at work here. What do you think are the chances that the GOP keeps the Senate and wins the White House in 2016? Maybe 10%?

I'm talking largely about local elections and control.Where are you getting 10% from?

I got the 10% from my glorious rear end. Total guess, was curious where you'd put the number.

The local elections were likely a product of the national factors that skewed the turnout. Nobody turns out to vote for their state legislator- most people can't even name theirs.

National factors like poor Democrat turnout and Independents voting Republican?

I would probably put it around 20%.

20% sounds good too.

Point is, this isn't a trend of any kind. It's an independent event with a lot of variables at play that won't be present the next time around. Just like every election. In this case, the variables were a perfect storm that tilted the voter demographics towards the GOP. Other than maybe the marijuana initiatives I guess. No presidential election means only the motivated were voting, and the motivated were the people who hate Obama and the people in states with competitive Senate races, which were largely GOP leaning states. That last one is gonna do a 180 in two years, as you likely know.

 

[urbanhack]

Tobias- all those governorships and state legislators/ that's not a typical midterm. I think you're underestimating how pissed off people are.

People are pissed off because they are told to be pissed off because Obama is president. it's hilarious that people actually think you are a liberal/progressive.

Who's telling them this, the liberal media? Or is the majority of the country now watching Fox news?

What is more curious is who is telling urbanhack those whacky things.

My cat.

 

[Fennis]

I'm not a progressive, and I think the results this week are meaningless in terms of predictive value of future elections.

timschochet is correct that the GOP needs to do something to court Latino voters or POTUS will become unattainable.

Step 3 of the new Congress is to vote to build a bigger wall. But in an attempt to reach Hispanic voters the GOP will paint the wall a nice, light brown and call it La Pared.

 

[tommyboy]

well, I for one will savor the final 2 years of Republican existence, that's for sure.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

GOP finally declared winner in Alaska.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/12/alaska-senate-midterm-election-results_n_5729950.html

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Update: Cassidy crushed Landrieu, 56-44, to take her US Senate seat and round out the final piece in the Senate puzzle.

I think this makes the final tally 55-45 seat majority, counting 1 independent (Sanders?) as Democrat?

Landrieu had multiple problems but the vote on ACA/Obamacare was a major one. Her weird, last second flipflop on Keystone was poorly handled, and during the campaign it was revealed that she largely lived in DC with no apparent real home in New Orleans or Louisiana.

Louisiana, after a long fling with Democratic populism dating back to Huey Long and continuing through Earl Long and Edwin Edwards, leaving it often a final late Democratic stronghold in the South, appears to have finally completed a turnover seen elsewhere in the South. Every statewide seat is now GOP.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Update: Cassidy crushed Landrieu, 56-44, to take her US Senate seat and round out the final piece in the Senate puzzle.

I think this makes the final tally 55-45 seat majority, counting 1 independent (Sanders?) as Democrat?

Landrieu had multiple problems but the vote on ACA/Obamacare was a major one. Her weird, last second flipflop on Keystone was poorly handled, and during the campaign it was revealed that she largely lived in DC with no apparent real home in New Orleans or Louisiana.

Louisiana, after a long fling with Democratic populism dating back to Huey Long and continuing through Earl Long and Edwin Edwards, leaving it often a final late Democratic stronghold in the South, appears to have finally completed a turnover seen elsewhere in the South. Every statewide seat is now GOP.

Louisiana voters love their KooKs.

 

[Soonerman]

Update: Cassidy crushed Landrieu, 56-44, to take her US Senate seat and round out the final piece in the Senate puzzle.

I think this makes the final tally 55-45 seat majority, counting 1 independent (Sanders?) as Democrat?

Landrieu had multiple problems but the vote on ACA/Obamacare was a major one. Her weird, last second flipflop on Keystone was poorly handled, and during the campaign it was revealed that she largely lived in DC with no apparent real home in New Orleans or Louisiana.

Louisiana, after a long fling with Democratic populism dating back to Huey Long and continuing through Earl Long and Edwin Edwards, leaving it often a final late Democratic stronghold in the South, appears to have finally completed a turnover seen elsewhere in the South. Every statewide seat is now GOP.

Louisiana voters love their KooKs.

Well they did until they got rid of the last heir to the Longs and Edwin Edwards.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Update: Cassidy crushed Landrieu, 56-44, to take her US Senate seat and round out the final piece in the Senate puzzle.

I think this makes the final tally 55-45 seat majority, counting 1 independent (Sanders?) as Democrat?

Landrieu had multiple problems but the vote on ACA/Obamacare was a major one. Her weird, last second flipflop on Keystone was poorly handled, and during the campaign it was revealed that she largely lived in DC with no apparent real home in New Orleans or Louisiana.

Louisiana, after a long fling with Democratic populism dating back to Huey Long and continuing through Earl Long and Edwin Edwards, leaving it often a final late Democratic stronghold in the South, appears to have finally completed a turnover seen elsewhere in the South. Every statewide seat is now GOP.

Louisiana voters love their KooKs.

And it's a Long list of k00ks too.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Speaking of k00ks, our esteeemmmed former guvnah Edwin W. Edwards, ex-con extraordinaire, lost what was quite likely his final race for office in the heavily GOP gerrymandered 5th Congressional District. Despite having been convicted on fraud and corruption charges and tried thrice for corruption the LA Democratic Party still found it fitting to endorse him and the local electorate to vote him the Demo candidate. Local political flunky Garrett Graves, who is basically a tool of the oil industry and some very powerful and scary businessmen around here, won the seat. In Louisiana it's always out of the frying pan into the fire.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Update: Cassidy crushed Landrieu, 56-44, to take her US Senate seat and round out the final piece in the Senate puzzle.

I think this makes the final tally 55-45 seat majority, counting 1 independent (Sanders?) as Democrat?

Landrieu had multiple problems but the vote on ACA/Obamacare was a major one. Her weird, last second flipflop on Keystone was poorly handled, and during the campaign it was revealed that she largely lived in DC with no apparent real home in New Orleans or Louisiana.

Louisiana, after a long fling with Democratic populism dating back to Huey Long and continuing through Earl Long and Edwin Edwards, leaving it often a final late Democratic stronghold in the South, appears to have finally completed a turnover seen elsewhere in the South. Every statewide seat is now GOP.

Louisiana voters love their KooKs.

No they don't. Landrieu and Edwards both lost.

 

[jonessed]

It bodes well for Republicans in 2016 that Democrats are clinging to this idea that they lost because they did not cater to their liberal base enough.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Speaking of k00ks, our esteeemmmed former guvnah Edwin W. Edwards, ex-con extraordinaire, lost what was quite likely his final race for office in the heavily GOP gerrymandered 5th Congressional District. Despite having been convicted on fraud and corruption charges and tried thrice for corruption the LA Democratic Party still found it fitting to endorse him and the local electorate to vote him the Demo candidate. Local political flunky Garrett Graves, who is basically a tool of the oil industry and some very powerful and scary businessmen around here, won the seat. In Louisiana it's always out of the frying pan into the fire.

Voting for The Crook against David Duke was one of the best votes of my life.

 

[timschochet]

It bodes well for Republicans in 2016 that Democrats are clinging to this idea that they lost because they did not cater to their liberal base enough.

it doesn't bode well or ill actually, because that's the same exact mindset adopted by each party after every political loss in living memory.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Speaking of k00ks, our esteeemmmed former guvnah Edwin W. Edwards, ex-con extraordinaire, lost what was quite likely his final race for office in the heavily GOP gerrymandered 5th Congressional District. Despite having been convicted on fraud and corruption charges and tried thrice for corruption the LA Democratic Party still found it fitting to endorse him and the local electorate to vote him the Demo candidate. Local political flunky Garrett Graves, who is basically a tool of the oil industry and some very powerful and scary businessmen around here, won the seat. In Louisiana it's always out of the frying pan into the fire.

Voting for The Crook against David Duke was one of the best votes of my life.

I actually worked on EWE's campaign. - He did do that one noble thing in his life, and he deserves our gratitude for that.

 

[Sand]

Speaking of k00ks, our esteeemmmed former guvnah Edwin W. Edwards, ex-con extraordinaire, lost what was quite likely his final race for office in the heavily GOP gerrymandered 5th Congressional District. Despite having been convicted on fraud and corruption charges and tried thrice for corruption the LA Democratic Party still found it fitting to endorse him and the local electorate to vote him the Demo candidate. Local political flunky Garrett Graves, who is basically a tool of the oil industry and some very powerful and scary businessmen around here, won the seat. In Louisiana it's always out of the frying pan into the fire.

Voting for The Crook against David Duke was one of the best votes of my life.

"Vote for the crook - it's important."

I also voted against that SOB. Horrible that he got that far.

 

[Soonerman]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/in-tough-senate-race-pork-couldnt-buy-landrieu-victory/article/2557070

Every now and then, there is hope for the republic.

 

[Sand]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/in-tough-senate-race-pork-couldnt-buy-landrieu-victory/article/2557070

Every now and then, there is hope for the republic.

She was an embarrassment to the state of Louisiana. So glad she's gone.

 

[cstu]

In November 2016, Republicans will defend 24 seats, Democrats 10. Seven of the GOP seats are in states that President Barack Obama won with 50 percent or more of the vote in 2012.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/21/in-2016-republicans-will-fighting-to-hold-senate-majority/