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

[Duckus]

He's run out of good news

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

Nah, honestly I think he could do really interesting stuff base on how bad the Dems will get beat. Think outside the box, write some good articles and make it a good read. In my opinion, he used to be more creative and really break things down. Now it seems like its only House and Senate polls, which I can get from any website.

[twa]

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

Ya never know,with the radical shifts a viable third party is a viable possibility ...in chaos there is opportunity

[GoSkins561]

All I know is, a true sign of a politician is the use of putting the thumb in front of the camera thing, it's so freaking annoying. Let's make an ES agreement to not vote for politician who uses the thumb thing while talking in front of a camera.

[Wrong Direction]

Also, they have been marginalized into a regional party -- mostly the South and parts of the Midwest.

The RCP "No Toss Ups" lists R's as having 31 Governorships after this election. Considering the number of Dem governorships in the NE and pacifc west, I think you might need to look in the mirror.

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.

Two points about this. 1) The first sentence seems like wishful thinking to me. The House will always be subject to momentum swings because they all run every time, but the D's have much more "tough" holds in 2012 than R's. This isn't a political statement, it's a simple matter of math based on the populations of those states.

2) I remember a few years ago when all of the R's were saying the D's wanted nothing more than for the country to go down the crapper under Bush. I actually think you AND those R's a few years ago were right. Power is intoxicating, and the out of power party always wants power first and foremost.

[Wrong Direction]

Ya never know,with the radical shifts a viable third party is a viable possibility ...in chaos there is opportunity

Part of me wonders what % of the vote a socially liberal, fiscally conservative party could capture. I feel like there aren't that many stringent big government types out there, and there aren't that many stringent anti-abortion/anti-gay marriage types out there. If each of those groups are less than a 3rd of the population, a third party might stand a chance. I don't believe it'll happen anytime soon though, to be honest.

[commyderm2]

Politics are getting more and more absurd.. In two short years Americans somehow forgot that the Republicans sold us down the river AGAIN, after figuring out that all the Democrats are going to do is sell us down the river.. Guess what's going to happen when Republicans win the majority.. they will sell us down the river AGAIN!! like they've done every other time that they've had control.. People justify this by saying yea, Republicans are awful, corrupt, scummish, and evil, but Democrats did this.. Nancy Pelosi did that, Barrack Obama is Muslim... blah blah blah blah blah.. Demo's do the same thing.. you partisan hacks are idiots.. Keep voting D &/or R and seal your, mine and my children's fate.. you ****ing clowns..

[twa]

Makes starving the beast seem like a good idea don't it?

[IHOPSkins]

Related...Governors Race

Last I heard Meg was way behind in CA.......

Five reasons why Meg Whitman will beat Jerry Brown

Rasmussen has moved the race from Leans Democrat to Toss-up as of their latest report. It’s back in the margin of error of 4 points, at 49 to 45 in favor of Brown. What’s significant is that last week Brown had a six point edge, at 48 to 42.

The LA Times/USC poll is wrong. Earlier this week, the LA Times released poll results showing Brown leading the race 52 to 39. There isn’t a major poll that places the race anywhere near these numbers, which if it were accurate, would make the race a blow out for the Democrats—while all the other polls call it a toss-up or within a few points. As an example of how out of touch this poll is, The Times has Brown gaining significant support among conservatives, which is about as likely as Obama getting invited to a Tea Party cook-out.

Willie Brown, former California House Speaker and former Mayor of San Francisco, says that if the race is within 8 percentage points, the dems will lose. "I do not believe that Jerry Brown has a ground operation,"......

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-san-francisco/five-reasons-why-meg-whitman-will-beat-jerry-brown

I would rather see Boxer lose....and I am not a big fan of purchasing an election...but I was surprised by Meg being this close

[thebluefood]

Politics are getting more and more absurd.. In two short years Americans somehow forgot that the Republicans sold us down the river AGAIN, after figuring out that all the Democrats are going to do is sell us down the river.. Guess what's going to happen when Republicans win the majority.. they will sell us down the river AGAIN!! like they've done every other time that they've had control.. People justify this by saying yea, Republicans are awful, corrupt, scummish, and evil, but Democrats did this.. Nancy Pelosi did that, Barrack Obama is Muslim... blah blah blah blah blah.. Demo's do the same thing.. you partisan hacks are idiots.. Keep voting D &/or R and seal your, mine and my children's fate.. you ****ing clowns..

This guy right here speaks the truth.

[IHOPSkins]

Battle for the House

Current House: 255 Democrats | 178 Republicans | 2 Vacancies

Projected;

Republicans 224 (163 safe seats)

Democrats 171 (121 safe seats)

Toss Ups 40

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html#previous_changes

[aREDSKIN]

Here's Larry hedging.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aRXwx1kHqo&feature=player_embedded

[twa]

Democrats at DEFCON 1: Is Christine O’Donnell now leading in internals?

http://hillbuzz.org/2010/10/26/democrats-at-defcon-1-is-christine-odonnell-now-leading-in-internals/

[IHOPSkins]

Democrats at DEFCON 1

Wow...I can see why

The problem is some internal poll that apparently shows that a high percentage of Democrats early voting are voting straight ticket Republican instead…they are Democrats voting against Democrats.

[War Paint]

This guy right here speaks the truth.

Yeah, he does.

[Wrong Direction]

Wow...I can see why

The problem is some internal poll that apparently shows that a high percentage of Democrats early voting are voting straight ticket Republican instead…they are Democrats voting against Democrats.

R's keep talking about O'Donnell, but I'll eat about 50% of my hat if she wins. I do think there's some doubt (unlike 538, which puts it at 100%), but I think there's very little doubt that she'll lose.

[twa]

R's keep talking bout her?...count the posts and articles,the libs are obsessed.

The notion she could win and the Pres and vice are working the locals ought to bring what a problem they have down home.

[nonniey]

Democrats at DEFCON 1: Is Christine O’Donnell now leading in internals?

http://hillbuzz.org/2010/10/26/democrats-at-defcon-1-is-christine-odonnell-now-leading-in-internals/

Pretty sure that is wishful thinking. Many of those who supported her candidacy (IE Hannity, Rush etc.) are sensitive due to the criticism from the right for that support. Now they're grasping at straws because they don't want to be portrayed as total fools for that support by fellow conservatives (ie Krauthammer, Will etc.) especially if that is the difference between a Republican Senate and a Dem Senate.

[Wrong Direction]

R's keep talking bout her?...count the posts and articles,the libs are obsessed.

The notion she could win and the Pres and vice are working the locals ought to bring what a problem they have down home.

I've heard both Rush and Sean Hannity talk about her a lot this week. They keep talking about polls tightening.

[nonniey]

R's keep talking bout her?...count the posts and articles,the libs are obsessed.

The notion she could win and the Pres and vice are working the locals ought to bring what a problem they have down home.

It is good politics for the Dems, she is such a bad candidate they have been able to use her to taint Republicans in other races. The nomination of O'Donnel didn't just lose the Deleware seat it may have helped Boxer and Murray survive (which really sucks and is why I, among others, was pretty pissed about O'Donnels primary victory).

[IHOPSkins]

R's keep talking about O'Donnell....

My qoute was about Democratic races in general

[Fergasun]

If the Democrats are distracted in Delaware Senate Race they can't focus on the other places they need to hold, like Fiorina in California. Maybe its because I don't have much use for watching TV but I felt Fiorina's ads on TV today (ran heavily during the college football games) were very effective, although Boxer also got her point across. The GOP picking up 8 seats in the Senate is nearly as good as getting a slim majority. I don't know where the magic number is, but it means that the Democrats in the Senate have to work at peeling away 7 votes at filibustering legislation.

This means there is more power to the GOP "RINOs" willing to compromise and work together. Right now the GOP moderates are Snowe, Collins, and Brown. They are the ones who stopped blocking financial reform (although in some sense I feel like the GOP leadership actually has some control in when to let the moderates vote for bills, because continuously blocking things will get you in trouble). II am really hoping that Miller takes the Alaska seat, because it will put another potential moderate seat out of play. So 48 minus 3 means there's still 5 more moderates the Democrats will need to work with.

Let's look at D seats that might flip to see if there are moderates who would be easy to compromise with.

Reid going to Angle, No.

Bennett going to Ken Buck. No.

Lincoln's seat going to Boozman. No.

Feingold going to Ron Johnson. No.

Dorgan to Hoeven. Yes, I think he might be moderate enough to join Snowe and Collins. So now we are looking for 4 more.

Bayh to Coats. Hard to ell, but I'll put down a yes just to have a less conservative looking assumption. 3 more.

Sestak to Toomey. No.

Amazingly it looks like only 2 of the 7 seats will be filled with moderate GOPers, although I'm not sure of the history of these states and if these are ones that were toss-ups or if they are moderate states.

So we're looking for 3 more moderates. I'm fairly certain there will still be moderate GOP members in the Senate. Judd Gregg looks like he is being replaced by a moderate (oh only beat out the tea party candidate by 1600). Just think that the key to the Senate coming the 112th Senate may be that a tea-party Senator missed the nomination by 1600 votes. So there will still be people like Dick Lugar, Lindsey Graham, willing to work with Democrats, but I don't think they are as liberal as Snowe, Collins, Brown, and my projections for the seats flipping are.

My theory on folks like Lugar, Graham, and others willing to work with the other party is that both parties realize they need these folks in order not to grind the country to a halt. In fact if I was told that Mitch McConnell provided approval for the RINOs to negotiate and they negotiated in a way that got more support than just them (which always seems to be the case), they aren't really RINOs, they are carrying out the will of the GOP but providing the GOP cover for compromising since some part of the wing gets pissed at any amount of compromise. As a similar example consider how Bunning held up the unemployment extension for some period of time. I fully believe that Bunning had the backing from McConnell, yet they can't openly say that because it peels away some of the kabuki theater the parties need to make things interesting.

So we'll most likely end up with legislation that passes 75-25 (or more likely 70-30, considering that the tea party folks aren't going to like the compromises). I think the tea party folk are going to be disappointed by their impact on the Senate. Certainly there will be impact in the force by which they can advocate for their position both in speech and during hearing, but I don't think they will have much legislative power, something to watch for over the 2012, and 2014 cycles however. For my own entertainment purposes I hope the "tea party" works against the GOP establishment in some regards, but I think the legislative process is fairly transparent so it is easy to see what different factions exist.

More interesting will be looking at the interplay and negotiations between the House and Senate. Even with a Democratic House and Democratic Senate, there were some interesting negotiations on bills. Now with a GOP House and a Democratic Senate, I have no idea how they will be able to pass much meaningful legislation. The two big items I see coming down the legislation pipeline are:

1) Fiscal Policy (ie. Federal budget, size of government)

2) Immigration Reform (considering that Clinton attempted some form of immigration reform we are now well into the 2nd decade of both parties agreeing there are issues, but not agreeing on the solutions). I think we are going to see a repeat of 2005-2006 where an immigration bill was crafted and simply went down under the weight of popular disapproval. I'm not even sure the House will be able to pass a bill on this, unless it is one for more tighter immigration restrictions (especially given the effects of the financial crises). The immigrant groups were right to feel that they missed a big opportunity in the 110th Congress (consider that health care reform had one shot with Carter, and one shot with Clinton... the Congress and President line up once in a blue moon).

I'm not counting the repeal of parts of health care reform or financial regulation which I've heard rumblings is in the cards. Those items may very well pass the House but are DOA in the Senate. I've heard some callers into talk radio shows have some fantasy of Obama veto'ing a bunch of legislation that repeals health care reform items, but that legislation is not getting through the Senate.

[Fergasun]

Talking about GOP leaders. I prefer someone like Pence or Hensarling over Boehner/Cantor/Ryan. I simply don't want the GOP lead by the folks who voted for and supported the TARP. If you want to know who in the House GOP is part of the "we support big business wing" versus the "we are principled conservatives" look at how they voted for and attempted to get through alternatives to the TARP. I do not want corporate socialism anymore...

[IHOPSkins]

I'm not counting the repeal of parts of health care reform .......Those items may very well pass the House but are DOA in the Senate.......

There are More Dem seats up for re-election in the Senate in 2 years then now.....If this election is as big a blow out as is now being predicted.....you might see even more Senators running from their Obamacare votes.....or risk losing their seats

[Wrong Direction]

There are More Dem seats up for re-election in the Senate in 2 years then now.....If this election is as big a blow out as is now being predicted.....you might see even more Senators running from their Obamacare votes.....or risk losing their seats

That will be interesting. My guess is they'd support things to make the bill better, but not repeal. I doubt the leadership would allow any significant changes to Obamacare to make it to the Senate floor, but if they can get it out of committee, I guess anything's possible.

[Burgold]

That will be interesting. My guess is they'd support things to make the bill better, but not repeal. I doubt the leadership would allow any significant changes to Obamacare to make it to the Senate floor, but if they can get it out of committee, I guess anything's possible.

My hope is that the Senate and House and President will work to repeal certain provisions of the Health reform that are particularly odious. We need and needed health reform. What we got wasn't all that great, but we shouldn't "throw out the baby with the bath water" Keep what's good. Repeal other parts. Add in new aspects that are needed. I suspect this will not happen as it would require a swallowing of pride on both parts and intelligent cooperation... and when's the last time we saw that.