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.
Now I have given solid reason and news as to why they will flip. You just don't like they are not in favor of the your "home team" the republicans and cannot argue with my logic.
Senate seats likely to flip..
To the Dems.
1.) Wisconsin Russ Feingold is leading Johnson by almost 10 points in every poll.
2.) Illinois Kirk is gone.
3.) Florida Open seat in a presidential year. Florida will go democratic by about 2% in the presidential election due to the influx of 300k Puerto Ricans over the last 5 years. How will this translate to the Senate?
4.) Ohio Portman is trailing in every poll from 5 to 9%, but is still raising huge money over the former Governor Strickland. If the Dems win this race then it's a rout for the republicans on the night as they will loose the Senate and the Presidency.
5.) New Hampshire Dead even race, but the Dems got their women to run in this race.
6.) Pennsylvania... Tooney is very conservative and the Dems don't have a great candidate in this one. Tooney is leading in all polls by at least 4 points. Probably their best shot at holding a democratic leaning seat.
Only way Toomey wins is if the Republican presidential candidate wins Pennsylvania and that hasn't happened since George Bush Sr. in 1988. Pennsylvania even voted for Gore and Kerry against the national tide in 2000 and 2004. And ever since the Republicans won big in the 2010 midterms in Pennsylvania; Obama beat Romney by a healthy margin, Democratic Senator Bob Casey easily won reelection, the Republicans lost all three statewide races in 2012 (attorney general, state treasurer, state auditor, in 2014 incumbent conservative Republican governor Tom Corbett lost badly to Democrat Tom Wolf, and two days ago the Republicans lost their majority on the state supreme court. Pennsylvania is moving away from the Republicans and fast.
There are roughly 5 of the 34 senate seats that look to be up for grabs. For example, nobody is going to unseat Boxer in CA or Murkowski in AK so simplistically pointing to 24 rep seats up is utterly meaningless.
These are the 5 seats that by polling consensus are reasonably "in play"
Wi, NV, NH, FL, IL - 4 rep, 1 dem.
That's enough to make the Senate 50-49-1
Thinking that the dems are going to magically unseat enough reps to regain control....that's extremely wishful thinking.
Boxer is retiring. Kamala Harris and Sanchez are running for her seat.
Only way Toomey wins is if the Republican presidential candidate wins Pennsylvania and that hasn't happened since George Bush Sr. in 1988. Pennsylvania even voted for Gore and Kerry against the national tide in 2000 and 2004. And ever since the Republicans won big in the 2010 midterms in Pennsylvania; Obama beat Romney by a healthy margin, Democratic Senator Bob Casey easily won reelection, the Republicans lost all three statewide races in 2012 (attorney general, state treasurer, state auditor, in 2014 incumbent conservative Republican governor Tom Corbett lost badly to Democrat Tom Wolf, and two days ago the Republicans lost their majority on the state supreme court. Pennsylvania is moving away from the Republicans and fast.
The biggest issue the dems face in PA is their candidate, they got their fifth or sixth string candidate.
I see a 53-47 Senate for Hillary in 16. Allowing her the ultimate presidential legacy a Supreme Court of her choosing.
The "gerry mandering" whine by Democrats is tiresome, just as it was tiresome by Republicans. Does it happen? Of course it does and BOTH parties do it. BOTH parties attempt to set up Districts for "their guy" to win. The Dems use to do it better, but they beat it to death with the DOJ's finger in all the "pre-clearance" States/Counties (which they now have lost due to over-reach) and they packed so many Districts to get Blacks elected that they forgot about balance in the other Districts.
2010 happened on the Democrats turn over Re-Districting, so it shouldn't have been such a blow-out for the Republicans .... but it was. TeamObama was in such a hurry to Cram Down their Leftist Agenda that they never considered how that was going to turn the voters against them in a Crucial Re-Districting Census Election.
That was just short-sighted and stupid. Obama was taunting the GOP about how "elections have consequences & I Won!" and then he discovered the consequences of the 2010 election.
2010 didn't happen on the Democrats turn of redistricting, nor was I blaming 2010 on redistricting. The GOP had an extremely strong 2010, which put them in control of many state legislatures. As a result of that it put them in charge of redistricting which has helped them in elections since then.
"Here's another scenario that Democrats aren't thinking about: What happens if/when Republicans get a large enough majority in the House and Senate to override Presidential vetos?."
Democrats aren't thinking about it because it isn't a realistic possibility. The Republican majority presiding over the current Congress (114th) is the largest the party has achieved in the past 83 years. This eight-decade high-water mark dwarfs any majority held by the Democratic Party since ... 2011. Yeah, that's right -- the Democrats had a larger majority (+ ~15 seats) less than five years ago. Also: for much of the four-decade period spanning from 1955 to 1995.
Over the past two decades, no party has controlled more than 316 seats (the apogee of the Democratic majority in mid-2009). Disregarding the distribution of seats between the two chambers, this represents 59% of the membership of Congress -- well short of the 67% needed for a supermajority. In fact, the last time that either party commanded a theoretically veto-proof majority was at the outset of the 89th Congress (1965-67). So fragile was this Democratic supermajority that it would expire upon the loss of two seats in the Senate or six in the House (which was actually responsible for its dissolution mid-term). And the size of such caucuses usually entails a fair amount of ideological diversity, so maintaining a unified front is often a dubious prospect. In the aftermath of the 1936 election, a staggering 77% of the seats in Congress were held by members of the Democratic Party (the GOP was left with 16 senators and 88 representatives). Still, FDR's legislative agenda met considerable resistance from conservative quarters of his own party.
But let's toss the finer points of legislative strategy by the wayside and simply appreciate how rare the occasion of a supermajority is. The examples I've cited constitute a comprehensive list of every instance in the past century in which a party has simultaneously held such a majority in both houses of Congress. So for four years between 1935 and 1939, and fewer than two following the 1964 election. That's it. And what conditions gave rise to this ephemeral legislative phenomenon? Respectively: an epochal political realignment that produced the greatest electoral college rout in the nation's history (1936); and an incumbent president capturing a higher share of the popular vote (61.1%) than any candidate has carried in any election subsequent to the uncontested 1820 race (Monroe v. ∅). So yeah, I'm not putting much stock in the emergence of a veto-proof Republican majority (or Democratic, for that matter) seeing as how the GOP has had larger Congressional delegations at various times since the turn of the last century, but has never come close to achieving a legislative supermajority.
Last edited by drishmael; 11-05-2015 at 05:19 PM..
The tragedy is that while your statement, "not all states are flaming left wing", is absolutely true, it is also an unfortunate reality that most of the states with large numbers of electoral votes are left leaning.
The Pacific states and the Northeast states can make it tough for a Republican. But Reagan took them all. Or maybe, Carter lost them all....whatever.
So it is possible.
.
Reagan was over 30 years ago and this country and the demographics have "changed" a lot.
When you look at the Election Results Maps you will notice that it's NOT that the Blue States are "flaming left wing", but that the highly URBAN areas are dominating the rest of the Blue States.
The "large number of electoral votes" are condensed in the High Population Urban centers and the rest of those States have NO say in what happens. That could possibly "change" if all the Non-URBAN voters managed to get themselves to the Polls in an effort to Take Back Their States ..... but we haven't seen that happen. I'm not even sure there are enough people outside of the Leftist Cities to even make it happen. At some point - these Cities will implode the way Detroit did and they will drag down their entire State.
So, according to conservatives, this country is going to the sh!!tter. Our nation is apparently not great any more. It's fair to say that the Republicans (who control not only the vast majority of the state governorships and legislatures, but also the House, Senate and SCOTUS) are entirely responsible for that. Right?
So, according to conservatives, this country is going to the sh!!tter. Our nation is apparently not great any more. It's fair to say that the Republicans (who control not only the vast majority of the state governorships and legislatures, but also the House, Senate and SCOTUS) are entirely responsible for that. Right?
Mick
Beginning in 2006 (actually, 2007), Democrats held Congress. The Recession was their fault, right?
The republicans have been the worst Gerrymanders for the last 3 decades having won big in the census cycles. In the past this has balanced out and we have had decent balance allowing government to work.
The last cycle broke the back so to speak.
You have states which are very 50/50 going 13-5 and 12-4 for the republicans in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Several of the maps have been thrown out they are so bad Florida is the big one which comes to mind. When you have a party which wins 54% of the congressional vote but has 30 less seats then democracy is gone.
This isn't about Republicans vs. Dems. here it is about good democracy which we are not seeing at this point in time. Instead we have idiots running our elected government. Take Ben Carson who is leading the republican field and thinks that Adam and Eve walked around with dinosaurs back in the day. Do you really want this guy's finger on the button @ 3am? or having to make a decision about economic policy in the US? Now I am picking on a republican but you can go across the isle and find a democrat just as bad.
So funny - 30 years ago Texas was a Dark Blue State. Exactly who do you think was doing the Gerrymandering that gave the State of Texas CongsCritters like Lloyd Doggett, Eddie Bernice, Soloman Ortiz & the famous Sheila Jackson Lee? I should know, I was voting for Democrats in Texas 30 years ago - a Republican couldn't get elected Dog Catcher. Here's a Tip - don't EVER think you can't turn a State from BLUE to RED or the other way around ... I've seen it and lived it. When enough people get FED UP enough, they get up off their Backsides and go VOTE.
It's only "good democracy" when the Democrats get to do the Gerrymandering - anyone who doesn't think that Sheila Jackson Lee & Eddie Bernice are not "idiots" is just not paying attention or so deep in a Bubble that they have lost all concept of reality.
It's ALWAYS about Republicans vs Democrats (and I don't even believe that there are many real Democrats left) - Always has been, Always will be.
TeamObama dropped the ball and now the entire (whatever is left of the party that used to be known as) Democratic Party will pay the price. This is part of the Great Obama Grand Legacy & well deserved.
So funny - 30 years ago Texas was a Dark Blue State. Exactly who do you think was doing the Gerrymandering that gave the State of Texas CongsCritters like Lloyd Doggett, Eddie Bernice, Soloman Ortiz & the famous Sheila Jackson Lee? I should know, I was voting for Democrats in Texas 30 years ago - a Republican couldn't get elected Dog Catcher. Here's a Tip - don't EVER think you can't turn a State from BLUE to RED or the other way around ... I've seen it and lived it. When enough people get FED UP enough, they get up off their Backsides and go VOTE.
It's only "good democracy" when the Democrats get to do the Gerrymandering - anyone who doesn't think that Sheila Jackson Lee & Eddie Bernice are not "idiots" is just not paying attention or so deep in a Bubble that they have lost all concept of reality.
It's ALWAYS about Republicans vs Democrats (and I don't even believe that there are many real Democrats left) - Always has been, Always will be.
TeamObama dropped the ball and now the entire (whatever is left of the party that used to be known as) Democratic Party will pay the price. This is part of the Great Obama Grand Legacy & well deserved.
.
While I agree with you on many counts, I wouldn't take a victory lap just yet. Democrats still have a lot of political pull, but Republicans NEED to work hard to diminish that, I'm fully under the belief that a Republican wave is coming (we're already seeing this at state and congressional levels), and if Hillary is elected in 2016, the wave will be even larger. The problems of this nation are simply too large to downplay, and the party in control of the White House ALWAYS receives the blame.
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.
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.
