Mid-Term Elections 2010: The Latest

[sharkman]

Sorry, I don't follow the reason you made the Reagan reference, would you mind fleshing that out?

[dmviolo]

we do not acknowledge your sham political system....

[Jack Weber]

we do not acknowledge your sham political system....

It's Markuze time!!!!

[BubberMiley]

we atheists do not acknowledge your sham political system either.

[punked]

Sorry, I don't follow the reason you made the Reagan reference, would you mind fleshing that out?

You brought up Bushes first Midterms and so I brought up Reagan's. Who had the same approval rating as Obama does and lost the house his first midterms. Apples to apples right. Glade they showed that damn socialist Reagan that Bum. Good for the voters showing those terrible presidents.

[Shady]

Sorry, I don't follow the reason you made the Reagan reference, would you mind fleshing that out?

He brings up Reagan constantly. I think he's obsessed with the former President. He thinks that mentioning Reagan gives cover to Obama's record drop in approval, and the shellacking he's going to take in the upcoming election.

What punked fails to mention is that Reagan lost one seat in the senate in 1982. Obama's going to lose 7+ seats. That's not usual. Either is losing 30+ house seats. Which is going to happen to Obama. So if we're going to accurately compare both mid-term elections, Reagan lost a total of 28 seats. Obama's going to lose at minimum 40, and could lose as many as 50.

[Shady]

Wow. Not good if you're a Democrat.

President Obama Heads into Midterms at Lowest Approval Rating of Presidency

Currently, two-thirds of Americans (67%) have a negative opinion of the job President Obama is doing while just over one-third (37%) have a positive opinion. This continues the president's downward trend and he is now at the lowest job approval rating of his presidency.

Link

[punked]

Wow. Not good if you're a Democrat.

Must be why Democrats are holding their 2006 early voting advantage in more then 25 states right? Hahahahahaha. Don't worry Shady you already dialed back your Republican predictions you can stop now.

[Shady]

Must be why Democrats are holding their 2006 early voting advantage in more then 25 states right?

You keep telling yourself that!

[sharkman]

He brings up Reagan constantly. I think he's obsessed with the former President. He thinks that mentioning Reagan gives cover to Obama's record drop in approval, and the shellacking he's going to take in the upcoming election.

What punked fails to mention is that Reagan lost one seat in the senate in 1982. Obama's going to lose 7+ seats. That's not usual. Either is losing 30+ house seats. Which is going to happen to Obama. So if we're going to accurately compare both mid-term elections, Reagan lost a total of 28 seats. Obama's going to lose at minimum 40, and could lose as many as 50.

Hmm, I don't think Clinton did that well in his first mid-term either, something about a Newt.

[Shady]

This may be the best opening statement of any mid-term debate I've ever seen. And by best, I mean most horrific. What was this guy thinking?

[August1991]

DEMOCRATS WIN!!!

Why?

Because they'll keep the Senate, and while they'll lose the House, it will be closer than expected. IOW, the MSM will say that Obama saved the furniture from the fire. Watch for numerous comparisons to Clinton in 1994.

In certain races, the Democrat will defeat the Tea Partier (eg. Delaware).

[punked]

DEMOCRATS WIN!!!

Why?

Because they'll keep the Senate, and while they'll lose the House, it will be closer than expected. IOW, the MSM will say that Obama saved the furniture from the fire. Watch for numerous comparisons to Clinton in 1994.

In certain races, the Democrat will defeat the Tea Partier (eg. Delaware).

I think so to. The Republicans and Shady set the bar to high. I mean Shady even called the Republicans winning 60 Senate seats at one time. So while Republicans will do amazing it will be viewed as a loss when they only win the house if that.

[sharkman]

Only the most loyal Dem supporters will call tomorrow's spanking a Republican loss. These same have called the voters all manner of uncomplimentary names but the day of reckoning will happen anyway. Obama is said to be still expecting a win! Reminds me of the Iraqi propaganda minister announcing how the Iraqi army was trouncing the American armies as the opposite was happening and the reporters were laughing in his face.

[punked]

Only the most loyal Dem supporters will call tomorrow's spanking a Republican loss. These same have called the voters all manner of uncomplimentary names but the day of reckoning will happen anyway. Obama is said to be still expecting a win! Reminds me of the Iraqi propaganda minister announcing how the Iraqi army was trouncing the American armies as the opposite was happening and the reporters were laughing in his face.

Yep Obama might lose as many house seats as that terrible Socialist Reagan. Remember republicans NEVER controlled the house under Regan. What Reagan lose his first midterms 30 seats? Must mean every body hated him and his party and he never became anything. History.

[sharkman]

Yeah, they didn't like him so much 2 years in. It's what he was able to do after that while drawing on his experience that made his legacy. Same for Clinton, he lost big time in his first mid term, then he moved to the middle and started doing more of what the people wanted. Of course, having Ross Perot divide the conservative vote didn't hurt.

Obama has no decades of experience to draw on and he sure isn't going to move to the middle since he's a idealist first, politician second. He's the author of the biggest debt in history, and I'm speaking of the medicare bill. He passed this bill, not when times were good, but in the middle of the worst recession in modern history. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And still no jobs. What do you expect the voters to do, give him a promotion?

Bush is somewhat of a mystery in that he alone made advances in his first midterm even though the left hated his guts from day one. Can you offer a theory why?

[punked]

Yeah, they didn't like him so much 2 years in. It's what he was able to do after that while drawing on his experience that made his legacy. Same for Clinton, he lost big time in his first mid term, then he moved to the middle and started doing more of what the people wanted. Of course, having Ross Perot divide the conservative vote didn't hurt.

Obama has no decades of experience to draw on and he sure isn't going to move to the middle since he's a idealist first, politician second. He's the author of the biggest debt in history, and I'm speaking of the medicare bill. He passed this bill, not when times were good, but in the middle of the worst recession in modern history. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And still no jobs. What do you expect the voters to do, give him a promotion?

Bush is somewhat of a mystery in that he alone made advances in his first midterm even though the left hated his guts from day one. Can you offer a theory why?

Yah I don't know if you know this but Reagan NEVER controlled the house so don't give me this if you lose the house then you are the worst president ever garbage unless you want to talk about what horrible president that Socialist Reagan was.

OHHHHH NOES History that doesn't fit your stupid narrative. BTW unemployment still below Reagan's at this time in his career.

[sharkman]

Huh? Reagan never had both houses to lose as Obama does. Not that I think he will, but perhaps you should get some perspective on how big a deal it will be. Some of the media will get it right and call it a big rejection of Obama's policies. He had a historic approval rating. Both houses to work with and he couldn't turn the economy around. That is a big deal. Reagan had much less to work with, and he did much better with his recession.

It's not so bad, the sun will come up on Wednesday morning and life will go on. Try not to take it too hard. Obama's just going to get spanked big time. End of story.

[bush_cheney2004]

Huh? Reagan never had both houses to lose as Obama does. Not that I think he will, but perhaps you should get some perspective on how big a deal it will be....

Agreed...what kind of screwy logic is that? President Reagan never had the House to lose.

It's not so bad, the sun will come up on Wednesday morning and life will go on. Try not to take it too hard. Obama's just going to get spanked big time. End of story.

Good advice...it's not the end of the world.

[August1991]

Good advice...it's not the end of the world.

Agreed. The US Constitution and Americans have survived far worse than Obama or a Tea Party.

[victorywar]

we do not acknowledge your sham political system....BYE BYE

[sharkman]

we do not acknowledge your sham political system....BYE BYE

'kay, see ya vic...Oh,(something tells me I'll regret this)by the way, who is we and just what do you acknowledge? Would you acknowledge a six-pack?

[waldo]

He had a historic approval rating. Both houses to work with and he couldn't turn the economy around.

see record GOP filibusters... see the most obstructionist GOP party of 'NO'... see the inherited Bush mesh. Turn the economy around? How about save the economy? Besides - as it's being touted, a control of the House will mean the GOP will actually have to propose something... anything... they simply can't just continue to say 'NO' - nowhere to hide anymore! Many pundits predict the last half of Obama's first term will actually prove more productive, given the GOP party of 'NO' will be exposed should they keep... being the party of 'NO'.

[sharkman]

Then you must look on the election results with a great deal of anticipation, as do I.

[Shakeyhands]

see record GOP filibusters... see the most obstructionist GOP party of 'NO'... see the inherited Bush mesh. Turn the economy around? How about save the economy? Besides - as it's being touted, a control of the House will mean the GOP will actually have to propose something... anything... they simply can't just continue to say 'NO' - nowhere to hide anymore! Many pundits predict the last half of Obama's first term will actually prove more productive, given the GOP party of 'NO' will be exposed should they keep... being the party of 'NO'.

And this has been the trouble. Obama should not being trying to build bipartisian bridges, he should have just pushed the agenda through.