Quote:
| Originally Posted by Paulpatine I never understood how a right-winger like Santorum won in PA anyway. The Democrats must pick up this seat. |
It’s because, outside of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is a very red state. And he may win again, because Casey isn’t really exciting most of Philadelphia, which is what any Democrat needs to win PA.
Not congressional but -
The CA-Governor race is bumming me out.
I’d bet that half the state doesn’t even know who Phil Angelides is, thanks to his virtually non-existent campaign. Seriously. I don’t even know his positions on any issues. I will likely vote for him but I think he has no chance of winning.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by jonvoight’s car The Democrats may have a chance to unseat Allen in Virginia, but the most recent polls give Allen around 50% support and a 6 point lead. . |
Not to worry. There are still a few voting blocs he hasn’t offended yet.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Rylander Seriously. I don’t even know his positions on any issues. I will likely vote for him but I think he has no chance of winning. |
Amazing!
I didn’t want to politicize the North Korea thread too much, so I am posting this here. What effect, if any, do you think that this North Korean mess will have on the Midterm elections? The Democrats are already attacking Bush’s North Korea policy as a big part of the reason why NK is nuclear today. But do the Democrats really want to make the major issue in the campaign National Security? That’s the one issue where the public trusts Republicans more than Democrats. Also, the Republicans would be smart to put the focus on the need for a missile defense system and the Democrats’ efforts to stop it. Pelosi has said repeatedly that we don’t need it and she voted against it. She might try to undo the system as Speaker. The public, in light of recent developments, would probably be very much in favor of such a system. Could the Republicans turn an apparent negative into a positive here?
I can’t imagine it would make much of a difference. When a leader of a Communist country threatens to lob nuclear missiles unless we sit down at a table with them, well, I can’t imagine any Democrat agreeing with that. They may agree with direct talks with North Korea under principle, but certainly not under threat, and definitely not during an election year. They’d be eaten alive with attack ads, and rightfully so. It doesn’t matter how logical direct talks may be - at this point, they are directly threatening the US and our allies, so NK pretty much cut their own foot off with this play. No one will want to sit down with them now.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by jonvoight’s car The voters aren’t going to be fooled into thinking the Democrats are the reason they didn’t get a minimum wage increase, regardless of how the House Bill vote turned out. |
i think you overestimate the american voting pool.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Nordling I can’t imagine it would make much of a difference. When a leader of a Communist country threatens to lob nuclear missiles unless we sit down at a table with them, well, I can’t imagine any Democrat agreeing with that. They may agree with direct talks with North Korea under principle, but certainly not under threat, and definitely not during an election year. They’d be eaten alive with attack ads, and rightfully so. It doesn’t matter how logical direct talks may be - at this point, they are directly threatening the US and our allies, so NK pretty much cut their own foot off with this play. No one will want to sit down with them now. |
I don’t think there will be a lot of, if any, Democrats saying we should sit down with them one-on-one now. It would look like capitulation. But they can certainly criticize Bush for choosing not to do it in the past. After all, that’s what Kerry was calling for in 2004. In other words, it’s too late now, but it could have prevented the current crisis. The more likely strategy (the one Kerry used yesterday) is to say that Bush’s obsession with attacking Iraq distracted us from the problems with North Korea. But if the Democrats try to criticize Bush too much on this, it keeps the debate focussed on the one area where Democrats do not have an advantage with the voters.
The Republicans seem to have the discipline to stay focussed on the issues that resonate with the voters. As far as I can tell, the economy seems to be really strong right now, budget deficits aside. Gas prices are dropping and the DOW is surging. The unemployment rate is fairly low right now. But polls show that the voters trust the Democrats more on the economy. Rather than try to change perceptions in the run-up to the election, Republicans put the focus on National Security, where voters trust them more. The Democrats should have the same discipline.
Not that it will really matter too much this year. The Democrats will make decent gains next month, even if the focus in on National Security. But they lost a chance to make 1994-like gains by not using Gingrich’s playbook in issuing a Democratic Agenda. But Frist has been a disaster in the Senate and Hastert is useless without DeLay. As far as legislation goes, the Republican Congressional Leadership has really dropped the ball. Of course, having a president whose approval rating hits the low 40s on a good week doesn’t really give the Republicans much of a cause to rally around.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by TheCynic i think you overestimate the american voting pool. |
Maybe. But no one is making an issue of the minimage wage bill right now. At least not in any hotly contested races.
Ironically, North Korean nukes are the best things to happen to the Republican party in recent months.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica Ironically, North Korean nukes are the best things to happen to the Republican party in recent months. |
Maybe, but some people are starting to lay blame on the administration for letting the Korea situation deteriorate this far.
“Some people” being John Kerry 2 years ago. But he lost because only Bush could make us safe.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Schwartz “Some people” being John Kerry 2 years ago. But he lost because only Bush could make us safe. |
Actually Hillary Clinton today.
Not sure if Gallup polls are worth a tin shit, but CNN’s been reporting all day that the most recent results show that 59% of voters have said they’ll be voting Democrat come November. Not sure if it’s any real indicator, but it suddenly doesn’t feel like quite a dead heat. I still don’t forsee a complete turnover of power, but all the Dems need is to reclaim either the House or the Senate to throw a monkey wrench in the current administration.
While DeWine in Ohio, Chafee in Rhode Island, and Burns in Montana have some fight left in them, they will all likely lose their Senate seats to their Democratic Challengers. Santorum in Pennsylvania is dead in the water, unless he sees a delayed bounce from what I understand have been pretty favorable debate performances. That’s four seats. The Democrats must win 2 of 3 races in Tennessee, Missouri, and Virginia to take control of the Senate.
In Tennessee, it’s a very close race, with Corker ® and Ford (D) each having small leads in various polls within the respective margins of error. In Missouri, the polls are all over the place, Of the three most recent polls, SurveyUSA gives McCaskill (D) a 9 point lead, Rasmussen gives Talent ® a 1 point lead, and just today Zogby gave Talent a 3 point lead. In Virginia, the race has tightened to a 2 to 6 point margin for Allen ®. New Jersey is finally breaking for the Democrats, leaving the once vulnerable Democratic incumbent with a small lead.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
This site has it-
Senate 50 Dems, 49 Rep, 1 Ind
House 229 Democrats, 202 Republicans, 4 Ties
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Anyawatchin Angel Senate 50 Dems, 49 Rep, 1 Ind |
Lieberman is so going to fuck over the Dems if he wins.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Anyawatchin Angel http://www.electoral-vote.com/ This site has it- Senate 50 Dems, 49 Rep, 1 Ind House 229 Democrats, 202 Republicans, 4 Ties |
It shows how close everything is in the Senate this year. I loved that site during the '04 Presidential election. The only problem with using it for the Congressional elections is that the polls are all over the place. For example, two polls of likely voters with similar sample size in Missouri released on the same day differed by 10% (9% lead by McCaskill and 1% lead by Talent). That’s a huge difference. So, the site averaged them to give McCaskill a 5% lead. The newest poll gives Talent a 3 point lead, which has not yet been reflected on the site. I’m pretty sure that this site usually goes with the most recent poll released, even if it is completely out of whack with all the other recent polls. I don’t know what is going on with the Congressional polls, but there have been wild, double-digit swings in virtually every hotly contested race this year.
Not to sound like a buzzkill but with polls this close, I can’t help but think that gerrymandering will have a huge but silent effect on these races. Also, the GOTV drives of each respective party (but particularly the GOP who are better at this,) will offset any conclusions we can draw from the polls.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Pop Zeus Not to sound like a buzzkill but with polls this close, I can’t help but think that gerrymandering will have a huge but silent effect on these races. Also, the GOTV drives of each respective party (but particularly the GOP who are better at this,) will offset any conclusions we can draw from the polls. |
Obviously gerrymandering won’t affect Senate races, but do you expect that big of an effect on House races outside of Texas? Edited to add: Chuck Todd of MSNBC agrees with you in this (really good) article: Is this '94?: 5 reasons why this will be just like GOP revolution — and 5 why it won’t
I think you are dead on with GOTV drives. Small poll leads have a tendency to disappear when your GOTV drive is anemic. Republicans are usually better at this, but a lot of voters are hearing and reading “Big Gains Expected for Democrats” stories in the press. This may discourage some of the Republican base from turning out.
My prediction right now is that the Dems pick up about 25 seats in the House, taking control. I think they pick up 5 seats in the Senate, delivering a 50-50 tie (counting Lieberman as a Dem). That means Cheney will be pretty busy casting tie-breaking votes for the next two years.