Senate and House. Ready, set, go! Prediction: Senate stays Dem, House goes Dem, Michelle B. loses. Hope: Tester edges out Rehberg in Montana Senate race. Rehberg is one of the more odious politicians I have ever met.
Someone explain to me why Scott Brown has a chance in Massachusetts. Isn't it obvious he will say whatever it takes to get elected and has few principles? The idea of a Senator from a solidly left-wing state like Mass caucusing with the GOP in the Senate makes no sense whatsoever. Another thing that amazes me is Todd Akin might still win in Missouri.
"Michelle B" are you talking about Michelle Bachmann? I haven't seen the latest polling results but I would put money on her winning.
Does anyone know if this year has any great political ads like this? <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/uxJyPsmEask" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I was in MA when Scott Brown won because the Dems ran an absolutely horrible and incompetent candidate against him. I actually think he's been a pretty decent Senator, and about as bipartisan as a Republican can be these days (not that that's saying much). If I were still a voter in MA, I would probably vote for him over Warren, whom I think is also a really terrible candidate.
i agree. this will even turn out to be a good thing for the republicans. it will give them a chance to figure out who they are while obama gets this country back on track. barack is not gonna punt the ball forward, he's gonna run it like earl campbell right through the opposition for a game winning TD. and like earl, he won't even spike the ball, he'll end his term thanking america for the honor of allowing him to be president of the greatest nation on earth. (your choice of smilies).
I've heard it is close but her district is very conservative and she has a big war chest. She has already started running ads in the Twin Cities media market, which covers a big chunk of her district, while her opponent Jim Graves hasn't yet. [Edit] Just looked at a couple of articles citing the poll released on 9/10. That poll is an internal poll conducted by the Graves campaign and not an independent poll. Also note that the 6th District has been redrawn to be even more conservative, ironically Bachmann's home in Stillwater, MN is no longer in the district.
My perspective with Bachmann's races (and I just moved out from Minnesota)is that because she's such a controversial figure, it seems to me that every time she goes up for re-election, my friends are all "Oh yeah, THIS time she's going down" and they give me all sorts of elaborate explanations of why she's going to lose. I know that sort of stuff was much bigger in 08 against Tinklenberg than 10, but it's popped up again in 12. I don't believe for a minute she'll lose, and it's just leftist fantasies.
Tinklenberg was the best candidate to run against her. Unfortunately a member of my own party sabotaged that with an unendorsed Independence Party bid that took 10% of the vote. Other than that though she has benefited from weak opposition, two out of four of the DFL opponents who ran against her were absolutely terrible (its too early to tell with Jim Graves). Even though against a good DFL opponent she still has a built in edge in terms of the district.
I know it's a huge long shot, but I really hope people in Texas watch the 2 scheduled debates between Ted Cruz and Paul Sadler. Sadler is by far the better candidate. Cruz is nothing but a shill for the teabaggers.
Here is a good summary with links to various estimates of the House race: http://theweek.com/article/index/233698/are-republicans-in-danger-of-losing-the-house
Republicans keep the House by a slim margin. Dems control the senate. We have more gridlock for 4 years, and hit the fiscal cliff- leading to another recession. Obama goes down in history as ineffective. Christie and the Repubs take all three branches of government in 2016. The income inequality grows, as does the stock market and GDP. In the end, America's economy is somewhat resurgent, taxes are low, there are almost no social services, and the middle class is small.
Republicans will most likely hold the house. The Republicans had the huge advantage of being able to gerrymander districts after the huge swing in 2010. More than taking over congressional districts, Republicans made historical gains in taking over legislatures in states like Louisiana, Mississippi, Maine, Minnesota, etc.. Democrats had held control of Mississippi and Louisiana since Reconstruction ended. And its likely they'll never gain back control. In Arkansas, Democrats saw their historical supermajority in the House dwindle to a tiny sliver of a majority. These are all Republican gains that will likely never be reversed since it was only a matter of time before Republicans finally dethroned Democrats in Southern legislatures. (similar to how Dems in Texas finally lost control in 2004 but at least Texas has a demographic change that makes Democratic control in the future seem possible) These losses mean the gerrymandered districts in southern states that produced Democratic Congressmen in traditionally Republican states are gone and wont be coming back. Those are permanent losses inflicted in 2010. That said, Dems will make gains in the House by virtue of the fact that Republicans did win a ton of seats that they shouldn't have won. But even in Texas where Blake Farenthold won a traditionally Democratic seat, he is now protected by now gerrymandered lines that erased a historically democratic seat. I do think the Senate will remain in Democratic hands. Dems have managed to put forth great candidates in traditionally Republican states. North Dakota, Arizona, and Indiana are all toss ups now when those should have been solid Republican wins. And as long as Obama wins, you only need 50 to hold the Senate. (although part of me is always terrified that Joe Manchin will eventually defect to the Republicans)
RNC changes it's mind, the money begins to flow for Akin Democrats On NRSC’s Todd Akin Change Of Heart: We Knew It Democrats respond “No one should’ve been fooled by the party’s faux outrage and their ensuing change of course because as the Republican establishment is making clear today, the Akin backlash was never about principle, it was purely about politics,” DSCC spokesperson Shripal Shah said in a statement. He suggested Akin will be part of the national election. “The fact is that in today’s GOP, Todd Akin actually represents the party’s mainstream,” he said. “All Republican candidates across the country are going to have to answer for Todd Akin’s extremism on election day.”
