The Pendulum swings the right direction
-
I wouldn't make too much of two Governor's jobs going to the Republicans, and two House seats going to the Democrats, in an off-year election.
Should I get all excited about that New York House seat going Democratic for the first time in over 100 years? It's really not an indicator of anything. Except maybe that newt Gingrich was right, and local people generally know their issues and candidates better than Sarah Palin and Gary Bauer and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
The same lesson was learned by Dems in Connecticut a few years ago.
-
Rush yesterday:
"If Hoffman wins -- and polls suggest that he will -- the race there will be dismissed as an outlier...Folks, I want you to print these words out. I want you to get the transcript off my website. I want you to print these out, I want you to distribute them, I want you to carry them with you, and we'll just see how close I am to being right. (When Hoffman wins) the State-Run Media will say, "New York-23, the race is more about the demise of the Republican Party and anger on the right than Obama or his policies."
So what does it mean now that Hoffman lost? Do tell, Rush.
-
Face it. Losing the VA and NJ races to republicans is telling Obama that his way of running things is not popular. He campaigned a lot in VA and the Gov still lost by quite a margin. I think you are in denial.
-
That's not what the exit polls say. Obama is still largely popular in New Jersey, and still in positive territory in Virginia, and this is a lot more complicated than simply saying "people don't like Obama". You guys just like saying it. It doesn't make it true.
Voters everywhere are going to very anti-incumbent. They're very nervous about the economy. They don't like either party, and if you look at the polls Obama is more popular than Congressional Democrats by a long shot, and Democrats in Congress are even more popular than Republicans in Congress.
These are two solid wins for Republicans, and one embarrassing loss.
-
Partisanship is gay.
-
I wouldn't make too much of two Governor's jobs going to the Republicans, and two House seats going to the Democrats, in an off-year election.
Should I get all excited about that New York House seat going Democratic for the first time in over 100 years? It's really not an indicator of anything. Except maybe that newt Gingrich was right, and local people generally know their issues and candidates better than Sarah Palin and Gary Bauer and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
The same lesson was learned by Dems in Connecticut a few years ago.
I wouldn't make too much of two Governor's jobs going to the Republicans, and two House seats going to the Democrats, in an off-year election.
Premature and irrational exuberance, if you ask me.
How many times have we seen Governors unable to 'deliver' their States for a Presidential candidate.
I'm glad to see some folks, apparently, rejecting spendthrift government. Better than the other way around, IMHO, but nothing to celebrate. Next year will be a better barometer because of the types of elections taking place and because current programs will have had more time to work (or not).
-
I wouldn't make too much of two Governor's jobs going to the Republicans, and two House seats going to the Democrats, in an off-year election.
Premature and irrational exuberance, if you ask me.
How many times have we seen Governors unable to 'deliver' their States for a Presidential candidate.
I'm glad to see some folks, apparently, rejecting spendthrift government. Better than the other way around, IMHO, but nothing to celebrate. Next year will be a better barometer because of the types of elections taking place and because current programs will have had more time to work (or not).
Premature and irrational exuberance, if you ask me.
How many times have we seen Governors unable to 'deliver' their States for a Presidential candidate.
I'm glad to see some folks, apparently, rejecting spendthrift government. Better than the other way around, IMHO, but nothing to celebrate. Next year will be a better barometer because of the types of elections taking place and because current programs will have had more time to work (or not).
I agree that next years elections have much more meaning. But following the idolizing by some of Obama, and declaration of death of the Republican Party by Shep and a few others, it seems the republicans are still quite alive.
-
The Gov wins in those states by Republicans sends a message.
The exit polls showed that most folks said their vote wasn't a rejection of Obama.
They just were concerned about the economy, and the direction the country is going in.
Which, is about what is being done and tried/planned.... by Pelosi, Reid, etc the rest of their leftist ilk...
and the Obama admin.
If the Dems had won those governorships, well, we'd see "mandate for Obama" all over the
liberal media.
But to lose? Of course the left will minimize it as meaningless.
John is right, though - next year, the elections will be far more dramatic is meaning.
If anything, Obama's extensive work to show up to help in Virginia failed miserably. That is a rejection of Obama's help to the Dem
in Virginia.
-
Trying to extrapolate any kind of national trends from these three elections is quite frankly Retarded as hell.
That being said, the Democrats are going to lose seats in 2010 (it nearly always happens at midterm elections), but treating this as some kind of referendum on Obama is pushing it a little bit too far. I'm sure the cable networks are trying to play that angle right now, however. Then again, I don't really watch that crap.
EDIT: Even if somehow the cable pundits are right and the people who actually study this shit (political scientists, etc.) are wrong, long-term demographic changes simply do not favor the Republicans. Unless ya'll adopt a more reasonable position towards minorities and immigrants the party is pretty much doomed in the long term. Old rich white guys are simply a rapidly shrinking portion of the population, you can't rely on them to win elections forever.
-
Trying to extrapolate any kind of national trends from these three elections is quite frankly Retarded as hell.
That being said, the Democrats are going to lose seats in 2010 (it nearly always happens at midterm elections), but treating this as some kind of referendum on Obama is pushing it a little bit too far. I'm sure the cable networks are trying to play that angle right now, however. Then again, I don't really watch that crap.
EDIT: Even if somehow the cable pundits are right and the people who actually study this shit (political scientists, etc.) are wrong, long-term demographic changes simply do not favor the Republicans. Unless ya'll adopt a more reasonable position towards minorities and immigrants the party is pretty much doomed in the long term. Old rich white guys are simply a rapidly shrinking portion of the population, you can't rely on them to win elections forever.
shit said:
Trying to extrapolate any kind of national trends from these three elections is quite frankly Retarded as hell.That being said, the Democrats are going to lose seats in 2010 (it nearly always happens at midterm elections), but treating this as some kind of referendum on Obama is pushing it a little bit too far. I'm sure the cable networks are trying to play that angle right now, however. Then again, I don't really watch that crap.
EDIT: Even if somehow the cable pundits are right and the people who actually study this shit (political scientists, etc.) are wrong, long-term demographic changes simply do not favor the Republicans. Unless ya'll adopt a more reasonable position towards minorities and immigrants the party is pretty much doomed in the long term. Old rich white guys are simply a rapidly shrinking portion of the population, you can't rely on them to win elections forever.
Thanks mz the pussy, err, I mean SHIT. And by the way, the young white guys all turn into old white guys eventually.
-
I wouldn't make too much of two Governor's jobs going to the Republicans, and two House seats going to the Democrats, in an off-year election.
Should I get all excited about that New York House seat going Democratic for the first time in over 100 years? It's really not an indicator of anything. Except maybe that newt Gingrich was right, and local people generally know their issues and candidates better than Sarah Palin and Gary Bauer and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
The same lesson was learned by Dems in Connecticut a few years ago.
I wouldn't make too much of two Governor's jobs going to the Republicans, and two House seats going to the Democrats, in an off-year election.
Should I get all excited about that New York House seat going Democratic for the first time in over 100 years? It's really not an indicator of anything. Except maybe that newt Gingrich was right, and local people generally know their issues and candidates better than Sarah Palin and Gary Bauer and Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
The same lesson was learned by Dems in Connecticut a few years ago.
Kinda right on the first two counts but I think people just get antsy and look for some issue to get worked up over.
Congressional check kiting scandal comes to mind.
WSS
-
Congressional check kiting scandal comes to mind.
WSS
***********************
I wish I had time to read more.
Never heard of the congressional check kiting scandal. My bad. Steve is the man.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login