There's been a lot of polls and other reports coming out that basically translates to "Republicans are completely and totally fucked" when November 7 rolls around.

Considering it's still 4 weeks away, my personal view is that Democrats have more than enough time to completely and totally destroy any chances they have at taking over either chamber of Congress. They've certainly had plenty of practice over the last 6 years.

So, without the bullshit, the explanations, the polls, etc etc etc -- do you honestly think the Democrats will win either chamber of Congress, or do you think they'll stick to tradition and piss away their chances before 11/07?

A) Democrats will win the House
B) Democrats will win the Senate
C) Democrats will win both
D) Democrats will fuck up, again

Pick one.

10/5/2006 8:07:22 PM

I'm not saying they won't fuck it up between now and then, but they're now making huge gains in a number of races. Now, the simple fact that it has nothing to do with the candidates themselves, but a more or less unrelated person wanting to fuck a teenager, that speaks pretty poorly of the Democratic leadership in general.

Or maybe the American people.

A little of both.

10/5/2006 8:16:09 PM

Americans love sex scandals.

It's hard to say why.

10/5/2006 8:20:20 PM

I don't trust any of the polls and shit.

To me they translate to "If we say it's gonna happen, maybe it will happen..."

10/5/2006 8:27:05 PM

Quote :

"One of our problems is that the races keep expanding. By this time, you're usually narrowing the number of races and pulling funding away from people who can't win. We've got people who were not on the radar of either the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] or the [Republican National Congressional Committee] and they have a chance."

-Howard Dean

10/5/2006 8:28:00 PM

Is there an option for net gain, but no control?

I wouldn't consider that to be failure.

10/5/2006 8:50:43 PM

^
why not? a net gain was a foregone conclusion after the GOP's disastrous candidate recruitment efforts back in the beginning of the year

10/5/2006 10:21:36 PM

c

10/5/2006 10:34:20 PM

here's a surefire prediction:

Vernon Robinson will say something stupid.

10/6/2006 1:23:27 AM

unfortunately probably

10/6/2006 3:12:53 AM

I don't think the Democrats ever "fuck up" -- the American people just don't want Democrats.

To make an analogy to marketing -- a lot of marketing people think they "position products" and "create brands," but ultimately it's the customer's perspective -- and wallet -- that decides brands and market position.

The Democrats can shimmy right, shimmy left; they can run the Barack Obamas or the Clintons. But ultimately the customers -- the voters -- percieve Democrats as amoral, divisive, elitist liberals. Fair, true, or not; that is their brand. The inherently conservative American public does not want that.

I strongly suspect that realignment has happened -- that the Democrats have become like the British Tories, and it will be a long time indeed before they again enjoy credibility in the eyes of American voters. It's a simple consequence of the efficacy of the Republican machine, and the shifting cultural landscape of the last thirty years.

So -- no, the Democrats won't fuck up. They're toast already.

10/6/2006 4:11:45 AM

I'm going with A) Democrats will win the House
by 1 seat

I hope whomever gets elected deals with social security though. Bush is trying to offer solutions on that piece of shit. If you don't like his, come up with your own, but for God's sake, fix it before I have to start my own country.

10/6/2006 7:04:49 AM

I think the Democrats should take at least one house. Unless there's some really nasty scandal that breaks out (and to top the coverup of a known closet-homosexual pedophile/child predator is pretty hard to do), they should be able to score enough gains to get them a chunk of Capitol Hill.

10/6/2006 9:31:29 AM

As long as vernon robinson doesnt win, i'm okay with D. I mean 2 more years of total corrupted frack ups by the GOP should close the deal on a total change in 08.

10/6/2006 9:43:12 AM

^ Don't say that.

10/6/2006 11:32:43 AM

^^^ Eh... I don't know. The democrats of the last decade and a half or so have shown a remarkable ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They kind of remind me of our football team sometimes...

10/6/2006 12:06:32 PM

Quote :

"I'm going with A) Democrats will win the House by 1 seat I hope whomever gets elected deals with social security though. Bush is trying to offer solutions on that piece of shit. If you don't like his, come up with your own, but for God's sake, fix it before I have to start my own country. "

that would be awesome for the republican party because then they could get a moderate to switch parties...gene taylor comes to mind.

10/6/2006 12:09:08 PM

Democrats will fuck up again. I hope the Republicans do lose either the House or the Senate. Time for them to see how pissed a lot of the country is with most of their shit.

Then maybe we can have some fiscal conservatives and some social hands of type folks in the Republican Party again.

10/7/2006 7:14:05 AM

A

10/7/2006 10:40:06 AM

Quote :

"Democrats now outdistance Republicans on every single issue that could decide voters' choices come Nov. 7. In addition to winning--for the first time in the NEWSWEEK poll--on the question of which party is more trusted to fight the war on terror (44 to 37 percent) and moral values (42 percent to 36 percent), the Democrats now inspire more trust than the GOP on handling Iraq (47 to 34); the economy (53 to 31); health care (57 to 24); federal spending and the deficit (53 to 29); gas and oil prices (56 to 23); and immigration (43 to 34). And even if the Republicans manage to bail out their ship before the midterms, they'll have a hard time matching their one-time strengths to voters' priorities. A third of registered voters, 33 percent, say the single most important issue that will decide their vote will be Iraq; compare to 20 percent who say the economy and only 12 percent who say terrorism, which ties with health care."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15167150/site/newsweek/page/2/

10/7/2006 2:08:16 PM

Quote :

"the economy (53 to 31); federal spending and the deficit (53 to 29);"

Seriously? This kind of makes me chuckle. I mean even in my most giddy liberal fantasies I wouldn't say the dems are MORE trustworthy on THOSE issues.

[Edited on October 7, 2006 at 6:27 PM. Reason : ]

10/7/2006 6:27:31 PM

Hoping C, but if we get anything, it'll be A.

We'll probably end up with D.

10/7/2006 6:31:16 PM

Quote :

"I mean even in my most giddy liberal fantasies I wouldn't say the dems are MORE trustworthy on THOSE issues."

Tax and spend makes more sense than to just spend.

10/7/2006 6:34:13 PM

Actually taking the senate seems fairly unlikely as everything would have to go right in 6 out of 7 of the plausible races:

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=24889&pg=1

Although 6 of these races are leaning toward the democratic candidate, many of those are still within the statistical margain of error. Looks like the dems will be picking up some seats for sure. For six or seven to happen the dem's either have to campaign perfectly, or the republicans have to come up with another closeted skeleton.

^Yeah, but I'd tend to put them in as equally untrusted. It takes a mix of both kinds of idiocy to get something good.

Now I know PA isn't exactly a Republican bastion, but they definately behaved better for the RNC when it was held there didn't they? I mean there were some arrests, but I don't think anyone had to hide in a closet.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2540175

That's a lot of anger there. Think Rove and his cadre have anything (short of pulling a bin-ladin out of their asses) that could diffuse it?

[Edited on October 7, 2006 at 6:50 PM. Reason : ]

10/7/2006 6:37:25 PM

D

10/7/2006 8:26:14 PM

Quote :

"One of our problems is that the races keep expanding. By this time, you're usually narrowing the number of races and pulling funding away from people who can't win. We've got people who were not on the radar of either the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] or the [Republican National Congressional Committee] and they have a chance."

-Howard Dean

Is it more important to gain control of the house or the senate? Which party has the largest coffers? That will answer your question.

10/10/2006 7:57:44 AM

the yankees don't win the world series every year. . .

10/10/2006 8:09:13 AM

Heh, I like the baseball analogy. So doping is to baseball as illegal campaign finances are to politics?

So which politician is going to get caught with the proverbial needle in his butt this year? Or is that already Foley?

[Edited on October 10, 2006 at 8:20 AM. Reason : ]

10/10/2006 8:19:55 AM

They'll have to put an asterisk by the candidates name if they win.

10/10/2006 8:24:14 AM

i think an asterisk would apply to someone with campaign finance violations or voter fraud that's discovered months after the election is decided.

[Edited on October 10, 2006 at 8:28 AM. Reason : don't think i've ever actually spelled out asterisk]

10/10/2006 8:27:50 AM

Seriously, on that incident in PA:

Having an anti-war group of hippies and some union employees mad at you is hardly going to lose you points with conservatives.

10/10/2006 8:47:02 AM