This year's election will be interesting

[landrun]

I visit real clear politics a lot to get look at the polls and see how things are going. They use an average of all polls and have always been pretty accurate. They also have a really good mix of articles from both the left and right.

I didn't really think the Repubs had a chance to win back the Senate. But it is starting to look like they just might be able to pull this off. One upset and it is there's.

As of this morning, the Senate in projected to be 48-46 Democrats with 6 toss up seats. It was 49-46 but they put Boxer's seat back into the toss-up column this morning.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_elections_senate_map.html

If you remove all toss-ups and call them as they're currently leaning, the Republicans pick up 4 of the 6 toss-up seats and we're at 50-50. Which I think means Joe Biden cast the deciding vote for the Democrats.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_elections_senate_map_no_toss_ups.html

Still, very interesting though. I wonder how the upcoming Democrat 'October Surprise' will change this. :P

[JohnnyMack]

Another great site is:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com

These guys were incredibly accurate in the '08 elections.

[OklahomaTuba]

This is one of those historic wave elections.

Like 94.

1894. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections,_ 1894)

[soonerscuba]

Hope so, shared governance is typically good for the nation. I have my doubts as to whether or not Republicans are actually interested in governing, but I hope I am wrong.

[JohnnyMack]

Hope so, shared governance is typically good for the nation. I have my doubts as to whether or not Republicans are actually interested in governing, but I hope I am wrong.

The thing that I often wonder about is where we'd be as a country today if McCain had won? The recession was in place well in advance of BHO's victory, so it's not (contrary to what our resident right wing loons think) his fault we entered a recession, but I really wonder what unemployment levels and GDP would look like if we had an R president against a D congress over the last two years.

Tuba, this is where you chime in with squanderer in chief, trillion, loud noises, bar graphs, etc.

[landrun]

Well in all fairness, Mccain was almost as bad as Obama. He wouldn't have been a good president. But he would have been better than Obama.

We would have increased the national debt, but not nearly as deep as Obama has taken us. There wouldn't have been a take over of the auto industry or school loans etc... And ObamaCare wouldn't have passed (which in itself should make us all regret McCain lost)

In short, it would still be bad, but not as bad and not as fast.

[OklahomaTuba]

Tuba, this is where you chime in with squanderer in chief, trillion, loud noises, bar graphs, etc.

Nah, at this point i'll let the results speak for themselves.

[Collier11]

If the GOP is voted into power this election, isnt this quote by Obama almost a slap in the peoples face???




By Michael A. Memoli, Tribune Washington Bureau


A Republican majority in Congress would mean "hand-to-hand combat" on Capitol Hill for the next two years, threatening policies Democrats have enacted to stabilize the economy, President Obama warned Wednesday.

Speaking on Michael Baisden's syndicated radio show, Obama also made a direct appeal to African Americans about the importance of the November vote, even though he's not on the ballot himself.

"The reason we won [in 2008] is because young people, African Americans, Latinos -- people who traditionally don't vote in high numbers -- voted in record numbers. We've got to have that same kind of turnout in this election," he said. "If we think that we can just vote one time, then we have a nice party at Obama's inauguration, and then we can kind of sit back and suddenly everything's going to change – that's just not how it works."

Obama called into Baisden's show, syndicated to 71 radio stations in 21 states, as part of his effort to rally core Democratic constituencies with less than four weeks before the election. Although his campaign itinerary is limited by sagging approval ratings in key states, Obama is making a more-targeted effort focused on supportive venues like Baisden's show.

"Everybody in the barbershops, the beauty shops, and at work -- everybody's got to understand: This is a huge election," he said. "If we turn out in strong numbers, then we will do fine. If we do not, if we are depressed and decide, well, you know, Barack's not running right now, so I'm just going to stay home, then I'm going to have my hands full up here on Capitol Hill."

Days before the release of a key jobs report, Obama said most of the job losses his administration gets blamed for occurred before "any of my economic plans were put into place," and that the country is still "experiencing the hangover from the misguided policies" of the last decade.

Obama said a big voter turnout was vital, both to counter millions of dollars being spent by outside groups and the enthusiasm Republicans have demonstrated.

"They are fired up. They are mobilized. They see an opportunity to take back the House, maybe take back the Senate," he said. "If they're successful in doing that, they've already said they're going to go back to the same policies that were in place during the Bush administration. That means that we are going to have just hand-to-hand combat up here on Capitol Hill."

Obama is returning to the campaign trail Thursday, with an appearance just outside Washington in support of Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley's reelection campaign. Later, he'll travel to Chicago for events to raise money for Illinois Democrats, including Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias and Gov. Pat Quinn.

Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady said Thursday that Obama has "no coattails," even in his home state.

"In fact, both the appearance of the president and Rahm Emanuel popping his head up has done a lot to motivate our base," he said.

[Chuck Bao]

Well in all fairness, Mccain was almost as bad as Obama. He wouldn't have been a good president. But he would have been better than Obama.

We would have increased the national debt, but not nearly as deep as Obama has taken us. There wouldn't have been a take over of the auto industry or school loans etc... And ObamaCare wouldn't have passed (which in itself should make us all regret McCain lost)

In short, it would still be bad, but not as bad and not as fast.

What do you mean, landrun, by "not nearly as deep"? Given the financial bailouts engineered at the end of the lameduck Bush administration, I do not think any of that would have changed. In my opinion, McCain would have bailed out the auto manufacturers as well, which in hindsight wasn't a bad decision. Stimulus spending may not have been as big, but that also means that unemployment would be slightly worse now. Regarding health care reform, it was inevitable anyway with unemployment rising and some employed people losing at least part of their health care benefits.

[SicEmBaylor]

The thing that I often wonder about is where we'd be as a country today if McCain had won? The recession was in place well in advance of BHO's victory, so it's not (contrary to what our resident right wing loons think) his fault we entered a recession, but I really wonder what unemployment levels and GDP would look like if we had an R president against a D congress over the last two years.

Tuba, this is where you chime in with squanderer in chief, trillion, loud noises, bar graphs, etc.

Not to toot my own horn on predictions, again, but I was only 2 states off in predicting the '08 general as early as March of that year.

[landrun]

What do you mean, landrun, by "not nearly as deep"? Given the financial bailouts engineered at the end of the lameduck Bush administration, I do not think any of that would have changed. In my opinion, McCain would have bailed out the auto manufacturers as well, which in hindsight wasn't a bad decision. Stimulus spending may not have been as big, but that also means that unemployment would be slightly worse now. Regarding health care reform, it was inevitable anyway with unemployment rising and some employed people losing at least part of their health care benefits.

Well, we can only speculate as to what McCain would have done.
As far as Bush goes, the worst decision he made was the bailout at the end of his presidency. But I do think its funny how the left always admit he was a lame duck president when they want to belittle him, while at the same time wanting to blame him for the high unemployment rate we have now.

The truth is, with a Republican congress and Bush as president, the unemployment rate was outstanding. When he became a lame duck president and the democrats took control of congress, the unemployment rate was at 4.9% and dropping. Two years later, with a president who had no power and a congress and senate controlled by the left, the unemployment rate starts to skyrocket.

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp <-- The ugly truth...

The U.S. unemployment rate averaged 4.7% from 2001-2007, which is far far better than most presidents. And it didn't start to go up until the Democrats had control of congress for well over a year.

Say what you want, but the 'failed economic policies of the past' are the Democrats' policies and its only getting worse under Obama.

[SicEmBaylor]

As far as Bush goes, the worst decision he made was the bailout at the end of his presidency.

REALLY? That's the worst decision he made?

I think not.

I'd say wasting billions and billions in a war with absolutely no gain was a pretty bad decision.

Taking education policy choices out of the hands of local and state governments and expanding the role of the Federal government in local education issues was a pretty f'in bad decision.

Expanding the role of government to include funding of locally based faith based charities was a pretty f'in bad idea.

The creation of the largest new entitlement program since LBJ's Great Society was a pretty f'in bad idea.

Wasting billions more due to incompetent monetary oversight in Afghanistan and Iraq was a pretty f'in bad idea.

The financial bailout was a pretty f'in bad idea.

Encouraging banks to make high-risk low-interest housing loans so that your administration can artificially increase and brag about the rise in home ownership was a pretty f'in bad idea (this goes back to Clinton as well).

Failing to secure our borders so that his party could court hispanic voters was a pretty f'in bad idea.

Creating a giant new bureaucracy that adds layers of complexity in an effort to "streamline" national security intelligence information was a f'in bad idea.

Signing into law one of the greatest threats to American civil liberties since the Alien and Sedition acts was a pretty f'in bad idea.

....so yeah....I wish the bailout was really his only bad decision. :rolleyes:

[landrun]

....so yeah....I wish the bailout was really his only bad decision. :rolleyes:

I didn't say that. Not even close. You made that up.
I said it was the worst decision he made. Not the only bad one.

I also said that the unemployment rate under Bush and a Republican controlled congress was outstanding.

And I was right in both statements too. :D

[StoopTroup]

There was a bailout at the end of the Bush Presidency?

[Chuck Bao]

Well, we can only speculate as to what McCain would have done.
As far as Bush goes, the worst decision he made was the bailout at the end of his presidency. But I do think its funny how the left always admit he was a lame duck president when they want to belittle him, while at the same time wanting to blame him for the high unemployment rate we have now.

The truth is, with a Republican congress and Bush as president, the unemployment rate was outstanding. When he became a lame duck president and the democrats took control of congress, the unemployment rate was at 4.9% and dropping. Two years later, with a president who had no power and a congress and senate controlled by the left, the unemployment rate starts to skyrocket.

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp <-- The ugly truth...

The U.S. unemployment rate averaged 4.7% from 2001-2007, which is far far better than most presidents. And it didn't start to go up until the Democrats had control of congress for well over a year.

Say what you want, but the 'failed economic policies of the past' are the Democrats' policies and its only getting worse under Obama.

With all due respect, landrun, I don't see that at all. We came damn close to a complete global financial meltdown within the first two months of the Obama administration taking office, even before he announced his first cabinet. It scared the crap out of me at the time. The Thai banks were sending out daily updates on the list of American and European banks that they would no longer accept letters of credit for trade financing and global trade immediately plummeted. Check out those figures. I said that then and I'll say it again: Thai banks refusing to do business with major American and European financial institutions is scary and very weird, yes, but it is true.

You really can't dispute the damage done by the Republican Bush administation and then blame the aftermath on the Obama administration. Even if Obama doesn't win the next presidency election, the next president has a huge task in dealing with a whole hell lot of the pain going foward. Or, maybe that's why no credible Republicans are actually stepping up to start actively campaigning They don't have an answer either.

[Soonerfan88]

I remember when the bailout was first proposed, Obama raced back to DC from the campaign trail banging the TARP drum for an immediate vote & approval. McCain was excoriated by media and Dems because he thought they ought to at least look at it a little deeper and discuss it. To them, this obviously meant McCain didn't care about the economy or have a clue about domestic affairs.


So, it doesn't matter to me that Bush walllowed in lame duck White House status and sucked as a President. Obama and his congressional cronies were going to pass TARP regardless and every failure of this crappy piece of legislation is largely their fault.

[Jerk]

Hope so, shared governance is typically good for the nation. I have my doubts as to whether or not Republicans are actually interested in governing, but I hope I am wrong.

Gridlock is good. When Washington can't get anything done, the private sector flourishes. Which is, you know, the Golden Goose which supports all the government stuff. I bet a lot of layed off state workers have figured that out now.

Government can print money, but they can't create wealth. That is my main beef with Keynesian economics.

[GKeeper316]

there are more jobs available than there are unemployed people to fill them. the problem is that most of the available jobs require specific skills and educational background, and nobody can afford to go back to school, and business isnt willing to pony up the cash to train anyone.

if business was willing to take on more training costs, we wouldn't have nearly as many people out of work.

[tommieharris91]

there are more jobs available than there are unemployed people to fill them.


The number of unemployed persons, at 14.8 million, was essentially un-
changed in September, and the unemployment rate held at 9.6 percent.
http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

There were 3.2 million job openings on the last business day of August
2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
http://bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm

I'm not ever sure GKeeper's statement is even true during the good times.

[GKeeper316]

there's more than 3.2 million jobs available. just because the bls doesnt count em doesnt mean they arent out there...

hell i just went over to careerbuilder.com for the **** of it and thier total job listings for all states comes out to a little over 1 million... just on that website.

bls's stats are flat out wrong.

[StoopTroup]

Well in all fairness, Mccain was almost as bad as Obama. He wouldn't have been a good president. But he would have been better than Obama.

We would have increased the national debt, but not nearly as deep as Obama has taken us. There wouldn't have been a take over of the auto industry or school loans etc... And ObamaCare wouldn't have passed (which in itself should make us all regret McCain lost)

In short, it would still be bad, but not as bad and not as fast.

McCain was worse than Obama. All he had to do was pick a VP with a pulse and maybe a bit of Military Backround and instead he picked a Woman Governor from Alaska that hadn't even finished one term in Office as a Politician. There were at least a 1000 other folks who he could have put on his ticket and easily ran BHO back to the Southside of Chi Town with.

It was a no brainer and he listened to the experts who told him he needed a Woman as a running mate. Please notice that even BHO didn't pick an even more qualified Woman as his running mate.

What McCain did is a historical lesson that will be taught in Political Science Courses for decades to come. I bet you could hear a giggle from JFK's grave when McCain announced that Sarah Palin was his choice for a running mate.

[Crucifax Autumn]

there's more than 3.2 million jobs available. just because the bls doesnt count em doesnt mean they arent out there...

hell i just went over to careerbuilder.com for the **** of it and thier total job listings for all states comes out to a little over 1 million... just on that website.

bls's stats are flat out wrong.

Now go back and look at the actual listings. The job sites are flooded with work at home scams, commission only jobs, etc.

Then after you filter out all that **** you see crap like real estate jobs, high level healthcare jobs, etc.

And then there's the even wackier temp jobs, modeling jobs, acting jobs, sex industry work, and so on.

What jobs there are are either minimum wage jobs that don't hire people with an average education or super specialized jobs that don't hire people with an average education.

We're ****ed a lot deeper and harder than the people who take the aforementioned sex industry work.

One of the biggest employers aside from healthcare I've seen listed lately in Vegas was minimum wage or slightly higher positions at the new Hustler porn store opening on the strip.

[JohnnyMack]

It was a no brainer and he listened to the experts who told him he needed a Woman as a running mate.

I'm pretty sure McCain made that decision on his own. Most of his inner circle wasn't happy with the decision.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

When Rick scott was the CEO of Columbia HCA healthcare corp,they were fined almost $2BILLION for defrauding the gov't. When he testified before a congressional committee he took the Fifth more than a dozen times. Disgraced for leading a fradulent company scott is no longer HCA CEO.

What's he doing now? He's the Republican candidate for governor of Florida. Seems natural enough to me.