USA Politics

It is looking like the GOP has 9 seats (10 if King switches caucuses as he indicated he might) ... they might again gain in governors races, and will add at least 10 House seats giving them their biggest majority since the 1940s
 
National exit polls taken of Election Day voters show an electorate unhappy with the president - and the opposing party.

  • 59% are dissatisfied or angry with the Obama administration
  • 60% are dissatisfied or angry with the Republican leaders in Congress
  • 53% have an unfavourable opinion of the Democratic Party
  • 54% have an unfavourable opinion of the Republican Party
 
Angry raving:
These Republicans politicians, they especially represent people who do not trust the government, right? It's better to trust in God. What a society. Well, let them block every move of progression, let them give more freedom of weapon possession, and ignore the consequences. Let them fuck up insurance, health care, social welfare, immigration and foreign policy again. Let the influence of corporations and lobbying on politics increase again.

Let the dollar rule the nation. Let them increase apartheid between rich and poor people again. Everyone for himself! Let the weak and poor s(t)ink in their shit. And tolerate, or better increase the amount of death penalties again. More innocent especially BLACK people killed without hard evidence. Just punish, punish, punish, punish. But don't forget to build extra prisons. Their full already.

Good luck America, you're gonna need it when your nation is deadlocked in conservatism.
Good luck, Obama, you don't have a chance anymore, you're facing a nation that doesn't want to make things better for all Americans.
 
Last edited:
He did not have a chance when he did not come through or flat out lied on the majority of his promises. Hence, the exit poll you quoted and others that have a similar percentage (around 60) that flat out do not trust him

That is why his party lost and worse than expected tonight.

The GOP has more seats in Congress than at any point since the 1920s ... a big turnaround in 6 years when they were declared dead in 2008
 
bearfan said:
He did not have a chance when he did not come through or flat out lied on the majority of his promises. Hence, the exit poll you quoted and others that have a similar percentage (around 60) that flat out do not trust him/
Click to expand...
There've been lots of lies about him. Lots of people are easily fooled these days.
bearfan said:
The GOP has more seats in Congress than at any point since the 1920s ... a big turnaround in 6 years when they were declared dead in 2008
Click to expand...
Perhaps you would monitor for us those things that will become better (in your opinion) from now on.
 
Last edited:
From the NY Daily News

B1qDOZ-IQAA0kdz.jpg
 
Well, look who owns the NY Daily News.

This will probably mean Obama's lame duck years will spiral into nothingness. The GOP has no incentive to work with the president and they will try to pin everything on Obama as they try to tear down Hillary. This is no different than the Democrats did to Bush in 2006. Hell, there's even a war in Iraq again.

These results are expected. What happens next is expected. Watch. The GOP will pass tons of policies they know Obama will not sign. Unfortunately for the GOP, this might not work. And, if you're paying attention, next time there's a Senate election it's going to suck for the GOP.
 
The more I look at it, the more I say now: The GOP will not pass one domestic piece of law that has compromises from their end, excepting in the cases of national defense/ISIS killing. They will create laws and pass them and claim they have the will of the majority so the president should sign them. I'm not saying Obama won't sign some, I am saying that they are not going to take the White House's position into account. Neither the GOP nor the Democrats are responsible to their constituents anymore, so why care?
 
Good news for the GOP:
The results, obviously. They get to set the tone for the next 2 years.
States like West Virginia, South Dakota, and Arkansas are starting to fall in line with their presidential voting patterns in the Senate.
Strong pickups at the state level.
In the Senate and House game, the GOP is starting to create a stranglehold on both houses.

Good news for the Dems:

Yes, there is good news. North Carolina and Georgia were closer than expected. 8 points in Georgia in a non-presidential year is not bad. It is possible that if there is a strong Democratic candidate that Georgia could start turning purple in the next election cycle. North Carolina has affirmed its purple status. In the presidential game, the Democrats are starting to go into a strong ahead.
 
LooseCannon said:
Good news for the GOP:
The results, obviously. They get to set the tone for the next 2 years.
States like West Virginia, South Dakota, and Arkansas are starting to fall in line with their presidential voting patterns in the Senate.
Strong pickups at the state level.
In the Senate and House game, the GOP is starting to create a stranglehold on both houses.

Good news for the Dems:

Yes, there is good news. North Carolina and Georgia were closer than expected. 8 points in Georgia in a non-presidential year is not bad. It is possible that if there is a strong Democratic candidate that Georgia could start turning purple in the next election cycle. North Carolina has affirmed its purple status. In the presidential game, the Democrats are starting to go into a strong ahead.
Click to expand...

A note on Georgia, the Dems had their best possible candidates with good name recognition -- Sam Nunn's daughter for Senate against a pretty poor GOP Candidate who embraced outsourcing (which I think is a valid business activity, but sounds bad in a campaign) and Jimmy Carter's grandson for governor. Neither could keep it under 50% to force a runoff.

In North Carolina, Hagen was favored to win, slighlty ... at least in the RCP average and Nate Silver's site.

In other good GOP news, they were expected to drop governorships and as of now, they picked up a net 3 (Lost PA, won in MD, MA, AR, and IL) 3 of those being blue states and the Clintons campaigned hard in Arkansas for the 2 races there.

Wendy Davis and her allies spent a ton of money in TX, and she lost big. The GOP with weak candidates did really well in VT (a repudiation of the Health Care plan there), OR (more to do with some recent scandals than anything else).

When the dust settles on the State Legislatures, the GOP will pick up more houses(both houses in Nevada and West Virginia, the house in MN, others are still undecided) as well as gain some super majorities in others, and possible eliminate a Dem super majority in CA and IL.


There is a ton of stuff that was bottled up in the Senate for the last year that passed the House with decent amounts of Dem support (things like Keystone XL, repeal of a Medical Device tax, work requirements for welfare, etc). I would expect all those smaller things to get through fairly quickly and we will see what Obama does

The window for doing anything is January to October (at the latest), after that everything becomes about 2016. Congress will take a stab at one big ticket item (tax reform, immigration reform, etc).
 
If this Congress works on anything big with Obama, I will be shocked.

I agree it's definitely a huge GOP win. I'm just saying that 10 years ago if the best Democrat candidate got within 10 points in Georgia it'd be considered a miracle. Absolutely a wave election. The big problem for the GOP is their 2010 wave comes up next in a presidential year. Those have been bad for the GOP. We have gotten into this pattern where midterms are great for the GOP and the presidential years are good for the Democrats - which means balance shifts. This isn't too bad.
 
2016 will come down to who the candidates are ...as we discussed earlier, most voter groups are not locked into a party .. there is enough "soft middle" to swing it one way or another. Presidential campaigns (rightly or wrongly) tend to go more on perception and personality than policy.

Maybe Christie runs and taps into a "no BS, straight talker" wave, maybe Paul hits a libertarian streak, perhaps someone like Walker hits a "competence over hype wave" coming off of Obama. Hillary might end up being seen as a Dem version of McCain ... We will see. I agree Hillary has the edge now, but 2 years out that is meaningless
 
bearfan said:
2016 will come down to who the candidates are ...as we discussed earlier, most voter groups are not locked into a party
Click to expand...
Recent polling suggests that more and more Americans are identifying less with a party. I think this is for the good - in general, people shouldn't vote party line, but should consider both candidates and national platforms.

bearfan said:
I agree Hillary has the edge now, but 2 years out that is meaningless
Click to expand...
I agree. The candidate has to be someone who brings people out for the Dems. That's their real problem in midterm elections - for whatever reason they can't get their strong supporters to vote in those, but they can turn out a few million more when the president is on the line. Even when Bush was running, though, those years were harder for the GOP. Neither Gore nor Kerry were particularly strong candidates.
 
I am not really sure how strong Hillary is. On the plus, the Clinton name is a good name, the "first woman" will help her. On the negative, she has negatives ingrained in people, she will be pretty old (combined with that, the "it's my turn" candidates for both parties can be seen as retreads and not bold), she can put her foot in her mouth, as evidenced by her recent book tour, her term as Sec of State is not a plus anymore (reset button with Russia, Banghazi, Middle East)

.. and she might decide just not to run, she is up there in age, just had a grand kid and could decide to throw in the towel. If that happens, there is not really an obvious front runner. I know some Dems like Warren, but she is probably too left and MA politicians do not have a good track record. Biden?, O'Malley(but he is hurt by the MD Gov race), no one really stands out to me at this point
 
I can't see Elizabeth Warren running, or winning, if she won. O'Malley didn't run in Maryland this time, but he's not as damaged as Christie is currently. Most people don't pay attention to the governor's race in Maryland. Deval Patrick is another possibility. Hard to say anything there because everyone is waiting on Hillary. I think she is a strong candidate, but she has weaknesses that anyone thinking about 2016 has certainly been working on since Obama won in 2012.

What she needs to do, to be frank, is decide soon. If she decides, she puts Bill out there as much as she can, and lets him do about 35% of the campaigning. Bill is still supremely popular. Hillary would be 2 years younger than Ronald Reagan. If Reagan can do it, she can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top