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.
Question would be how long are we going to HOPE FOR CHANGE when it is now a total liberal controlled congress for 2 1/2 years and see what it has done to us.
LIBERALS HAVE CONTROLLED CONGRESS FOR 2 1/2 YEARS !!
Exactly and this is when things started to go down hill. Hmmmm
It's WORSE right now with the (D)s in complete control of Washington DC than it was at any point during the Bush Administration. The worst times during the Bush Admin were when the (D)s ran Congress since January 2007. The unemployment rate is now 9.5% officially, with the real number closer to 17%. By the time the bottom hits, it's very likely that the official unemployment number will be 12% or higher. On top of this, a minimum wage hike is scheduled for the end of this month. This will wipe out many lower end positions.
If the (D)s were paid to destroy America intentionally, they could not do a better job than they are doing right now.
Just a little reminder...
The cost of the Bush/Cheney Iraq occupation...$687,618,242,635 and still freakin' counting.
Thank you President Obama for finally bringing and end to this insanity!
Vitter will win his seat as the DC madame scandal is a bit dated. He's a real conservative and, last I checked, his numbers are good (and the search for a good opponent is weak).
Vitter has other problems besides merely the DC madame scandal. Congressman Charlie Melancon looks to be a very strong opponent. Remember Cajuns usually vote for Cajuns (in the history of Louisiana the only time that a Cajun candidate running in a statewide race was the Roemer/Edwards gubernatorial race) and Louisiana voters generally prefer conservative Democrats over Republicans (although they'll vote GOP over a liberal Dem). Melancon is a Dem but he's also a conservative.
Quote:
Rand Paul (son of Ron) is running for Bunning's seatl hopefully he can win that seat and keep it (R).
I admire Dr. Paul but the GOP wasn't exactly too welcoming to him in 2008. They only like him now because he denounces Obama, and certainly haven't adapted most of his policies. Although Paul's statement that the GOP can regain their lost glory by turning against the war on drugs is an interesting one, and one that might work if it was ever adapted. I assume Rand Paul's policies are like his father's (he did speeches in lieu of his father during his father's presidential campaign).
Republicans will probably lose a few more seats in the House and possible one or two in the Senate. Overall the Republicans have more seats up for election. I think the Democrats will win the day again.
I don't see the Dems gaining seats in the House. The economy's crappy and the opposition party usually wins seats in the first off year election during an administration. In essence, this is 1982 all over again, with the parties reversed ; Obama's Reagan and the GOP then are the Dems now (in terms of positioning). Given the margin that the Dems have in the House, they'll keep the House. The Senate is another story. That'll be very close. Whoever controls that will control it by the barest of majorities. I'm starting to think that control of the Senate will be a toss-up. Members of both parties will lose seats but more Dems will lose seats than Republicans. Although with Burris not running for election his seat (Obama's old seat) will stay in Dem hands. As stated before the only Republicans sure to lose their seats will be Vitter (who faces a strong challenge from Charlie Melancon, although Melancon would hardly be a loyal Dem vote in the Senate) and Jim Bunning (who has an undistinguished record in the Senate, an approval rating in the 20s, and some strong Dem challengers). As for the person who mentioned Rand Paul's possible challenge to Bunning, he'd get treated as badly by the national GOP as his dad did in 2008, and a primary challenge would just strengthen the Dems.
I see a gain unfortunately.
I think my Senator will be safe and I'm ok with that. I do however wish there was another Democrat running against her. She doesn't deserve her seat in the least.
It's too early to tell. Personally I do not think any significant shifts will occur. IMHO the Dems should do what the Rs did and do some gerrymandering.
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.
