- Joined
- Mar 5, 2008
- Messages
- 113,022
- Reaction score
- 60,610
- Location
- Sarasota Fla
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
For that to happen the GOP would have to lose 2 of the seats they now currently lead in, and that's assumeing the Dems keep Feigngold's, Reid's, Murray, all of which only lead by 1.something. That's assumeing some pretty good fortune for the Dems going forward. As far as the house is concerned I feel your way off, the GOP only needs 10 of 35 toss ups alomst all of which are Dem seats.
I mean for the Dems to hold the House they have to win 2/3 the toss up seats.
What you have to understand is most of the polling that people base the bloodbath on is generic polling, which is basically worthless. The repubs will make significant gains in the south, but only small gains the rest of the country, so things could very well end up as he describes.I could easily see repubs get as any as 20 seat majority in the house, with 10 not at all unlikely, but if I where to guess, it will be a very close to split house. Dems will almost surely keep control of the senate, but probably not by more than 2 or 3 seats.
It appears that Newsweek lied about their own poll... The numbers just don't add up.
Check this out!
The FreeStater Blog: Newsweek: Overpriced Even at $1
To not repeat myself, I'll just link to my post in another thread here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-el...int-lead-generic-ballot-4.html#post1058954443
Sorry, but anyone who thinks that the GOP won't control the house either hasn't noticed what is going on, or has tried to blind themselves to it. I would be surprised if they picked up less than 50 seats, and wouldn't be surprised if they picked up more than 60.
I don't know why you said that about the South; the GOP has potential gains pretty much everywhere now, including areas where they don't usually win much, like the Northeast and the West. Maybe you said that because of numbers that show that their numbers in the South are racheting up the numbers for the country as a whole, but that is always the case. The important thing is not how well they do in a region, but how well they do in a region compared to the norm. If they win only one or two House elections in New England, it will be more than they already have now.
Generic Ballots aren't accurate tools to show election outcomes, but they do show general trends. For the Democrats to come back from the shorfall they have now would be unprecedented, and if they keep the House by a single seat, it will be one of the largest political upsets in U.S. history.
What you have to understand is most of the polling that people base the bloodbath on is generic polling, which is basically worthless. The repubs will make significant gains in the south, but only small gains the rest of the country, so things could very well end up as he describes.I could easily see repubs get as any as 20 seat majority in the house, with 10 not at all unlikely, but if I where to guess, it will be a very close to split house. Dems will almost surely keep control of the senate, but probably not by more than 2 or 3 seats.
Compare the link I provided, and got from you, to your link. Notice how they tell a different story. Now, why do you think that is? It's because of the inherent flaw in generic polling.
Edit ti respond to your edit: who is this Nate Silver?
To add, and thanks goes to dav for this link: Senate Races - Election 2010 - The New York Times
Dems have 46 fairly solid seats in senate, with 5 leans democratic, and 8 tossups, which means that dems should retain the senate.
In the house, 168 solid democratic, 163 solid repub(and this is why I hate generic polls, which would lead one to guess otherwise on those). In leaning, it's 55 dem, 18 repub, and 31 tossups.
Now, this all does not consider some important points, such is how motivated to get out to vote people on the left and right are. I suspect that in the leadup to November, you will see strong pushes by both sides to get people out to vote(yes, you can call me Capt. Obvious for that).
What you have to understand is most of the polling that people base the bloodbath on is generic polling, which is basically worthless.
The repubs will make significant gains in the south, but only small gains...
You should check out the numbers at Real Clear Politics which averages all of the polls together, tends to iron out the anomolies. I can show you numbers that have the Republicans leading by vastly larger margins than I've stated here.
Check them out... Not looking good for the Dems.
RealClearPolitics - 2010 Election Maps - Battle for the House
Trust me...
why?
i'll stick with links, if you don't mind
with links, questions of character don't come up
For example, Silver gives Arkansas a 100% chance of electing a Republican Senator, while the NYT map only has that race as "lean GOP". This probably holds true of House seats as well.
At least to begin with, all they have to do is not vote to fund it.
a republican house will certainly move to undo the mandate, which those bellwether show me's shouted down via measure c, 71 to 29
a boehner led house will certainly act, here, and reds will be hailed as heroes and heroines for so doing
which is an excellent start
HA! You got two if you're lucky and he doesn't get impeached before that.
j-mac
They can "move to undo the mandate" all they like. But they aren't actually going to get anywhere regardless of the outcome of the 2010 or 2012 elections. I think the Democrats are in for a world of hurt in 2010, but I'm not the slightest bit concerned that Republicans will have the power to undo health care reform.
I'm not the slightest bit concerned that Republicans will have the power to undo health care reform.
Sorry to break your bubble...but you are delusional if you think there is a Republican out there that is going to beat Obama in 2012. Who is it? Jindal (LOL)....Palin (JK!!!)....Gingrich (as if).....seriously....who has the GOP got?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?