Will the GOP take back the Senate and House? - NO they won't.

[Kilmer17]

I think what gets me esp. relative to the House is that the choice is between Pelosi and Boehner? Really? Boehner is as bad if not a worse and uglier political creature than Pelosi could ever dream to be. He's the kind of guy who makes used car salesmen and mob hitmen feel virtuous. Sigh...

You can understand though that their is a large percent of the country (more than half right now) that feel that way or worse about Pelosi.

[Wrong Direction]

Rasmussen came out with a poll today showing Rossi +1 in Washington, with Murray still below 50%. Generally, incumbent D's won't likely be able to make up ground beyond what the polls are saying on election day, as it's predicted that turnout models are - if anything - underestimating the Republican turnout. Murray has been +1 in several other polls recently, so it's clearly still a potential D hold, but it's an ominous sign for the D majority.

If Murray loses, I predict the D's also lose WV and the R's end up with 51 seats. I put the chances of this at about 40% less than even money, but certainly possible. My personal prediction still stands at 51-49 Dem majority on 11/3.

[Predicto]

Here's Larry Sabato's prediction. He's a lefty without question so if this is his prediction add another 10-20% on top of that IMO.

Why do you assume that Sabato would not speak honestly just because he is a liberal? His prognostications have been 99 percent accurate, election after election.

[DjTj]

Why do you assume that Sabato would not speak honestly just because he is a liberal? His prognostications have been 99 percent accurate, election after election.

aREDSKIN is a righty, so you should subtract 10-20% from his predictions. :pfft:

[Duckus]

Here's Larry Sabato's prediction.

These is pretty much exactly how I see it. GOP picks up 55ish in the house, 7-8 Senate.

Not too bad for Dems considering, but def not anything to be happy about.

[Burgold]

You can understand though that their is a large percent of the country (more than half right now) that feel that way or worse about Pelosi.

Agreed. They are both horrible choices. If the choice is between Pelosi and Boehner there ain't a winner!

[Predicto]

aREDSKIN is a righty, so you should subtract 10-20% from his predictions. :pfft:

I just found it odd. It's almost like he has been conditioned to believe that everyone in the liberal media is lying to him. Hard to imagine.

[Kilmer17]

These is pretty much exactly how I see it. GOP picks up 55ish in the house, 7-8 Senate.

Not too bad for Dems considering, but def not anything to be happy about.

Considering what?

This is horrific for the Dems. Less than two years ago the general concensus was that the GOP was either dead or marginalized into a regional party. The Dems have succeeded in bring the GOP back from the brink of death. What's far worse is that 2 years from now the Dems will be defending a dozen or so more Senate seats that they captured in the hateBush landslide of 06. Plus the tidal wave in the state houses and legislatures is going to make 2012 bad in house races for the Dems as well.

There's no way to sugar coat this. It's an epic disaster.

[Baculus]

Yep, the tea o cons are just as detrimental as all other big spenders. There is no fundamental difference when facing the results

Thank you -- I am glad you recognized this. :-)

So, what is your solution? A third party? Perhaps using populist leverage to affect Democratic policy?

[Henry]

Considering what?

That unemployment is still at 10%.

[Kilmer17]

That unemployment is still at 10%.

So do you think it could be WORSE than 55 seats?

[Monte51Coleman]

Agreed. They are both horrible choices. If the choice is between Pelosi and Boehner there ain't a winner!

It's simply amazing how the most dangerous and creepy individuals regularly become the party leaders.

[btfoom]

Why do you assume that Sabato would not speak honestly just because he is a liberal? His prognostications have been 99 percent accurate, election after election.

It's the same with Rasmussen. I've read folks say that he's too much of a 'righty' and should be discounted. His polling is solid and usually right.

I think that anyone who is on the 'losing' side of the polling wants to try to discredit the poll.

Also, can anyone explain why the state Governor races are important on a national level? Is it just a trend to try to show which direction the population is leaning?

[DjTj]

So do you think it could be WORSE than 55 seats?

I think that where the Dems really got lucky is from the epic failure of Bush in 2006 and 2008. The Dems never should have had many of the Congressional seats they now hold, and Obama appeared on the scene at just the right moment to build a huge majority. They're giving it all back this year, but the Dems benefited as much (or more) from external circumstances in the past two elections than the Republicans are this time around.

[aREDSKIN]

I just found it odd. It's almost like he has been conditioned to believe that everyone in the liberal media is lying to him. Hard to imagine.

We'll see in a few days who's the most accurate. Maybe not necessarily "lying" more of a "mitigation strategy". I know of your "love" for Sabato but he's still a shill for the left, albeit not as abrasive and gun ho as most. I do like Larry but he does tilt a wee bit.

[aREDSKIN]

aREDSKIN is a righty, so you should subtract 10-20% from his predictions. :pfft:

I'll take a bet on that one!!!!! Or was that just a message board drive by?? :pfft:

[Baculus]

Considering what?

This is horrific for the Dems. Less than two years ago the general concensus was that the GOP was either dead or marginalized into a regional party.

If it wasn't for the tea party movement and Fox News, they would be dead in the water. It isn't as if they have reinvented themselves or introduced new policy. It is the same old, same old GOP.

Also, they have been marginalized into a regional party -- mostly the South and parts of the Midwest. This is partially due to their rigid ideology and their unwillingness to work with moderates and liberals within their ranks.

The Dems have succeeded in bring the GOP back from the brink of death.

Yes and no. The economy doesn't help. But I have demonstrated in the past that even Ronald Reagan took time to implement his policies. As it is, there is little difference at this point between Obama and Reagan's fiscal and economic numbers, as far as unemployment is concerned.

People are angry and confused, and the incumbent party tends to take the brunt of it. But again, it isn't as if the GOP are offering any solutions to woo voters.

What's far worse is that 2 years from now the Dems will be defending a dozen or so more Senate seats that they captured in the hateBush landslide of 06.

"Hatebush." More like "HateBush'sandtheGOP'sbadpolicies."

Plus the tidal wave in the state houses and legislatures is going to make 2012 bad in house races for the Dems as well.

I disagree. If the GOP continue to block legislation, then they will face the wraith of voters, again. The only thing keeping any hope alive for the GOP is for Obama to fail and for the country to spiral downward. That is why the GOP prey for America's failure so they can gain power. It is a self-centered, selfish political attitude, where the GOP are more important then the nation.

There's no way to sugar coat this. It's an epic disaster.

No it isn't, because a lot of races are tightening up. What's an epic disaster are the Republican policies that brought this country to ruin. So what has the Republicans done to change such policies?

Nothing.

I have asked this before: WHY would anyone vote for the GOP, with their warfare, big spending, pro-Wall Street policies? And the GOP have opposed any needed meaningful reform -- health care? No. Wall Street reform? No. Bank leader reform? No. Environmental reform? No. Foreign policy reform? No. Instead, they want to make issues out of minor issues, while ignoring what needs to be accomplished.

What are they concerned about? "Obama told us to sit in the back of the car! Ahhhhhh!"

It's like watching a bunch of children.

The Republicans are defined by what they oppose, and not what they support. That is why when Republicans are asked about specific policy, they don't have an answer. They can only fall back on the same tired slogans without providing an affective, quantifiable course of action.

Too bad they GOP drove away the moderate intellects in their party, because diversity in politics is good. We all can't be conservative right-wingers who oppose secularism, social justice, environmental issues and economic issues. It is time the GOP realize this . . but I know they wont, because they, and their supporters, are too stuck on their ideology.

Introspection is not a right-wing strong point.

[88Comrade2000]

Considering what?

This is horrific for the Dems. Less than two years ago the general concensus was that the GOP was either dead or marginalized into a regional party. The Dems have succeeded in bring the GOP back from the brink of death. What's far worse is that 2 years from now the Dems will be defending a dozen or so more Senate seats that they captured in the hateBush landslide of 06. Plus the tidal wave in the state houses and legislatures is going to make 2012 bad in house races for the Dems as well.

There's no way to sugar coat this. It's an epic disaster.

Actually, I think in 2012 the GOP will die for good. The Republicans will not satisfy the Tea Partiers these 2 years and I fully expect the Tea Party to split and go 2nd Party. Why do I say second party and not third party? What's left of the Republican party will be the third party.

In a three way race in most races including the Presidency, Obama and the Democrats win. Tea Party comes in 2nd and Republican Party comes in third and dies after the 2012 election.

All we are going to see is positioning for 2012 the next 2 years and nothing more. No problems will be addressed as neither side can be seen as compromising.

[DjTj]

I'll take a bet on that one!!!!! Or was that just a message board drive by?? :pfft:

Okay. So do you want to draw the line at 15% above Sabato?

Sabato predicts +55 for the House, so will you take +63.5 as the line?

And Sabato predicts +8 for the Senate, so will you take +9.5 as the line?

You win if the Republicans get 64 House seats and 10 Senate seats. I win if the Republicans get 63 or fewer House seats and 9 or fewer Senate seats. Push if we split the House and Senate. Pelosi or Boehner sigs until swearing in?

[Henry]

Okay. So do you want to draw the line at 15% above Sabato?

Sabato predicts +55 for the House, so will you take +63.5 as the line?

And Sabato predicts +8 for the Senate, so will you take +9.5 as the line?

You win if the Republicans get 64 House seats and 10 Senate seats. I win if the Republicans get 63 or fewer House seats and 9 or fewer Senate seats. Push if we split the House and Senate. Pelosi or Boehner sigs until swearing in?

This thread suddenly got very interesting.

[JMS]

This thread suddenly got very interesting.

Yeah I agree... I would love to see them make ".5" a congresman and senator... They should do that on national TV... Give us half of Pelosi and half of Boehner... Get a chain saw and "award" the seat; on national TV... I'd watch that.

[Predicto]

We'll see in a few days who's the most accurate. Maybe not necessarily "lying" more of a "mitigation strategy". I know of your "love" for Sabato but he's still a shill for the left, albeit not as abrasive and gun ho as most. I do like Larry but he does tilt a wee bit.

I have no "love" for Sabato. I have heard him quoted a lot, but I had to google him to see what his actual record was.

The only pollster/prognosticator guy I have "love" for is Nate Silver, of fivethirtyeight.com (and franky, he's gotten annoying lately).

[Duckus]

I have no "love" for Sabato. I have heard him quoted a lot, but I had to google him to see what his actual record was.

The only pollster/prognosticator guy I have "love" for is Nate Silver, of fivethirtyeight.com (and franky, he's gotten annoying lately).

Yea - whats up with 538? Everything they do seems stale now. I used to go there everyday, now I go once a month.

[twa]

He's run out of good news

Face it ,his staring at those numbers has got to be difficult

[Duckus]

Considering what?

This is horrific for the Dems. Less than two years ago the general concensus was that the GOP was either dead or marginalized into a regional party. The Dems have succeeded in bring the GOP back from the brink of death. What's far worse is that 2 years from now the Dems will be defending a dozen or so more Senate seats that they captured in the hateBush landslide of 06. Plus the tidal wave in the state houses and legislatures is going to make 2012 bad in house races for the Dems as well.

There's no way to sugar coat this. It's an epic disaster.

Considering the history of politics in the country. If you thought the US was going to become a one party system and Democrats were going to run the country for the next 100 years, then yes, this is shocking.

Is it good? No

Have Democrats brought most of this upon themselves? Absolutely

Are Democrats good at ****ing things up like this? Absolutely

Is losing 50 seats good? Hellllll no.

Is losing 50 seats about normal for 10% unemployment and an unpopular president? Yes

Democrats picked up dozens of seats they had absolutely no business winning in rural GOP hot spots the last few cycles. Even if Obama had a popularity rating around 60% and unemployment was 4%, I think Democrats still lose 15-25 so house races. They were bound to lose some of those 06, 08 seats. Add to that 10% unemployment, an anti-government sentiment and an unpopular President and 50 seems about right.