Nate Silver: GOP 60 percent chance of winning the senate (president, suspect, Obama)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree. Solve the electoral which means runnng a mainstream guy/woman who openly touts mainstream values during the conservative primary season and all the way to November, than, only than, does the demographic issue dissipate.
I honestly do not care about the first 50 elections. We are not a one tiny subset (white, land-owning males) voting nation anymore. The Edsel will come back before Ozzie and Harriet demographics will.
Sure I agree that the "Ozzie and Harriet demographics" are not coming back. But remember that during the Ozzie & Harriet years ( 1952-1966) the Democratic party was generally in control. Democrats controlled the US House all but 2 of those years. Don't reduce US politics to race. Ultimately it is about ideas, not skin tone.
Sure I agree that the "Ozzie and Harriet demographics" are not coming back. But remember that during the Ozzie & Harriet years ( 1952-1966) the Democratic party was generally in control. Democrats controlled the US House all but 2 of those years. Don't reduce US politics to race. Ultimately it is about ideas, not skin tone.
The Ozzie & Harriet reference is not race related, but 3 kids, 2 parent, 1 income household versus the present norm..you betcha..not coming back.
At the same time, the GOP is idiotic if they do not correct their 40 plus percent loss amongst America's fastest growing subset of voters. The same ignorance would hold if the 67-31 single women shellacking did not result in significant changes in positions within the party.
Stupidity is doing the same things again and again, expecting different results. Each of these two subsets of voting blocks were given clear messages by several different GOP campaigns that their values were not welcome in the party, and they responded properly by using their voting rights to send a loud and clear message. Hence, the word President will not appear before the names Romney or McCain.
We need to be adult enough to realize the GOP base is making the POTUS nominee unelectable by out of date policy positions which their chosen puppets have foolishly lacked the spine to fight back against.
Exactly, @ 60 seats. However, there is one caveat--getting a majority in the Senate would put the kibosh on Pres. Obama's effforts to stack the federal courts. Since fed. judges get a life term, that is no small thing.
Obama's efforts to stack the courts, by doing what appointing replacement judges like every president before him has.
Elections have consequences and judges are a big one for president. Obama is not doing anything crazy with judicial appointments.
If democrats show up, they win. Simple as that. There are more dems than repubs now.
The problem is they don't show up in midterms. The difference in turnout between 2010 and 2012 was huge. They won the House back in 2006 only because of the Iraq war backlash.
They only care about presidential elections but they don't realize that the president can't accomplish much without Congress.
If democrats show up, they win. Simple as that. There are more dems than repubs now.
The problem is they don't show up in midterms. The difference in turnout between 2010 and 2012 was huge. They won the House back in 2006 only because of the Iraq war backlash.
They only care about presidential elections but they don't realize that the president can't accomplish much without Congress.
Dems do not show in mid-terms, do show for POTUS, and the reality is, without winning moderates and independents by huge margins, your premise is spot on.
Obama's efforts to stack the courts, by doing what appointing replacement judges like every president before him has.
Elections have consequences and judges are a big one for president. Obama is not doing anything crazy with judicial appointments.
I wouldn't use the term "crazy," but no doubt what has happened under Pres. Obama is a radical shift in how judges are confirmed. No president since FDR has done anything like this.
I wouldn't use the term "crazy," but no doubt what has happened under Pres. Obama is a radical shift in how judges are confirmed. No president since FDR has done anything like this.
Those are not voting percentages, those are chances of the seat changing.
LOL....yes I am aware of that. The Dems came up with a pretty strong candidate in Natalie Tennant. She has won statewide election already and is pretty popular. So the election is voting for a popular politician or against Obama. I see those odds at maybe 70-30.
Irrelevant clown makes a claim that pacifies hapless Republicans, and Pubs jump all over it. Pubs are praying for ANY news to cling to, since their ideology, ideas, and contributions to this society are repulsive and unwanted. Romney had a better chance of winning the presidency it was claimed, and look what happened.
Jennifer Aniston is more likely to date a black man than is Silver in being right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.