Reply With Quote
Looks like Illinois is going to go down to the wire
New Mexico did too.
Looks like Illinois is going to go down to the wire
LOL...
Just saw a mistake on Fox news. They list Boxer as the winner after 17% of the precincts reporting. Problem is, they list the tally at 1,247,272 to Florina's 1,248,225!
It's not a mistake - they're looking at where the votes have been counted and if the remaining precincts are strongholds for Republicans or Democrats. I mean, they projected Boxer the winner as soon as the polls closed.
Part of me is happy to see a Hispanic woman win the race for NM governor for the fist time. I hope she does a good job and stays away from social issues.
Republicans have just taken the House. They've picked up 53 seats so far. I'm disappointed with the results in the Senate, but hey, overall, it's a good night for Republicans. And, in 2 years, there will be more democrats than republicans up for re-election in the Senate. Hopefully, the Republicans will field some stronger candidates than McMahon, O'Donnell and Angle.
On a local note, it's looking like republicans are going to end up with a supermajority in the TX state house of reps. They're +20 (in a 150 member house) and counting. Significant redistricting ramifications here.
They should call Tom Delay up.
No need. The republican advantage in the state leg. in 2010 is significantly greater than it was back when the repubs needed delay to strong arm people to get their way.
Yes...
Looks like Kitzhaber is losing in Oregon.
I ing hate redistricting games that go on. Incoming Hispanic voters being ed.
Gotta love Gerrymandering...
I hate it no matter who does it.
I agree. the only reason I can stomach with making the divisions funny shapes would be to keep all current office holders in their current district when there is an expansion.
Gerrymandering should be against the law. Draw the districts according to counties or zip codes and let the chips fall where they may. No one should be protected - if you're not strong enough to win, then too bad. I have heard that it was originally done to help the minority voters - is that true?
Actually if what's happening to Ciro Rodriguez and Solomon Ortiz is any indication, Hispanic voters might not be the ones who need to worry. Blacks in Houston and Dallas; and residents of Austin on the other hand....................
No. That is most definitely not true. Minorities almost always get ed by this.
No, now they have the means to obstruct. Good talking point, though.
You're trying to say they didn't have the means to obstruct before?
House.
Senate.
Presidency.
If the Democrats believed in their agenda and believed in what they were doing, enough to say the with any potential consequence, than they could pass whatever the they wanted.
The fight wasn't with Republicans but with Democrats. Centrists or Bluedogs that didn't want to go along, or they were simply unwilling to go it alone.
All the Republicans could do was and moan.
Per Nate Silver - good Nevada analysis:
1:33 A.M. Why Did Polls Miss on Harry Reid?
The New York Times has just called Nevada for Harry Reid.
Assuming the call was not premature, there is reason to ask why the public polls in the race consistently showed a small lead for Sharron Angle in the final few weeks of the race. Five organizations -- Rasmussen Reports, Mason-Dixon, Public Policy Polling, YouGov, CNN -- polled Nevada in the final three weeks of the campaign, and all showed Ms. Angle ahead among likely voters.
Mr. Reid's campaign was insistent that the public polls were telling the wrong story in Nevada; so was Jon Ralston of The Las Vegas Sun, the state's intrepid political reporter, who boldly (and rightly) predicted that Mr. Reid would win. Private polls showed the race somewhere between a tie and a lead for Mr. Reid, I was told.
I tended to treat these comments a bit skeptically because I wasn't hearing any particular reason why the public polls were wrong. Mr. Reid's campaign talked about the "full ballot test," in which all the candidate names were included -- as well as the option to select "none of the above candidates." But the public pollsters who tested that question showed it made little difference, and Mr. Reid and Ms. Angle collectively have more than 95 percent of the vote so far.
My guess is that the error instead might have been that the polls, in essence, overestimated the enthusiasm gap.
Mr. Reid is a candidate for whom one votes grudgingly -- because his opponent is unacceptable to you, or because Nevada makes it easy to vote early on the way home from your shopping trip, or because his campaign had the money to microtarget you, or because you're a Democrat, and you vote for Democrats. He's not someone you'll necessary be happy about voting for. He's certainly not someone you'll be excited to vote for.
Polls with low response rates will sometimes miss voters like these -- their lack of enthusiasm may be mistaken for disinterest, or they may not pick up the phone in the first place. There's a somewhat analogous phenomenon called the Shy Tory Factor in British elections -- the Tories are not very fashionable, but a lot of people turn out and vote for them nevertheless, and polls there have tended to understate their support.
There could be other reasons as well. Most of Nevada's population are transplants from elsewhere in the United States, and likely voter models sometimes penalize such voters, implicitly or explicitly (by asking a question, for instance, about whether they've voted in their polling place before). And polling in many Western states may miss Spanish-speaking voters.
Nevada polls also underestimated Barack Obama's performance in 2008, so this is a pattern worth keeping in mind the next time there is a compe ive race in the state.
I think the ol' Tea Party would like to have that Angle one back.
So if 60 different Senators had been willing to agree on something then the GOP would have had no blocking power.
Great. Considering that rarely happens in reality then we can safely say that the GOP this entire time has possessed the ability to block legislation and has used that ability to do just that.
You should not accuse someone else of using a talking point if you're doing that exact thing, Blackjack. You can safely acknowledge what GOP leaders have for the past 2 years: their plan was to be obstructionist all the way. It worked, why are you hiding from it? Shame?
I'm just thankful I get the adolescent, immature and corny satisfaction to know Crapo will be on the floor of the US Senate.
So lame, yet awesome.
Go Idaho!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
