[quote]H factor wrote:
I think you may be under-valuing the GOP’s chances because of 2012 results. Midterms are different than presidential years. [/quote]
Sure, this is very likely the case.
I am worried about the GOP running fools though, and still getting their ass kicked in the culture war though, and that plays into my perception too.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I think you may be under-valuing the GOP’s chances because of 2012 results. Midterms are different than presidential years. [/quote]
Sure, this is very likely the case.
I am worried about the GOP running fools though, and still getting their ass kicked in the culture war though, and that plays into my perception too. [/quote]
Well the GOP is dumb as shit just like Democrats are. It is telling though when Democrats “best chances” are for the GOP to keep having mouth breathing morons win their primaries and then get caught saying insane shit no rational human should think.
Luckily for the GOP the left has their fair share of dumbasses who are willing to say dumbass things that will turn off voters as well. See Brayley already.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
It’s just using data to make predictions based off data. [/quote]
I’m not sure you understand the degree to which I shit on dude’s model, over and over, and over again. [/quote]
At least you are still here taking it like a man. Zeb fucking disappeared with his tail between his legs.
[/quote]
haha.
I don’t mind that I was wrong as much as I would mind if I was a jerk about it, lol.
I still have butt hurt over 2012, mainly due with the fact that my best option was Romney, but it goes beyond that. [/quote]
Just out of curiosity what do you mean hear? I didn’t want Obama to win, but I didn’t want Romney to win either. He beat a JV squad of candidates as any viable person the right had was waiting until 2016.
What do you have butt hurt over 2012 for? I wasn’t any more pissed than when the Democrats decided to run fucking John Kerry against W.
Obviously I’d love to see us do something absolutely insane like look towards a third party, but why do that when we can keep electing Democrats and Republicans we don’t approve of? That seems like a good system to keep going 
[quote]H factor wrote:
What do you have butt hurt over 2012 for? [/quote]
A lot, lol.
I don’t have time right now to really get into it. trying to get out of here.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
It’s just using data to make predictions based off data. [/quote]
I’m not sure you understand the degree to which I shit on dude’s model, over and over, and over again. [/quote]
lol. I remember those days.
The thing about his projections (and elections in general) is that, if something big happens, they can switch overnight. Remember the extent to which things changed in the days after the first debate?
As an aside, I respect the guy, because if he’d gotten things wrong in 2012, he would be pumping gas right now. The couldn’t be said of Brooks or Douthat or Noonan or Collins. His is a very “put up or shutup” kind of job.
Also, is anybody else depressed that it’s already time to start talking about the horse-race again?
I suppose the posters who aren’t into theology will be relieved though, because that’s really all that’s been on offer lately.
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
Also, is anybody else depressed that it’s already time to start talking about the horse-race again?
I suppose the posters who aren’t into theology will be relieved though, because that’s really all that’s been on offer lately.[/quote]
Honestly I started this simply to talk about something else. The entire front page is almost running the risk of being turned into “whatcha think about God.”
I’m participating in those, but a little variety never hurts.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I think you may be under-valuing the GOP’s chances because of 2012 results. Midterms are different than presidential years. [/quote]
Sure, this is very likely the case.
I am worried about the GOP running fools though, and still getting their ass kicked in the culture war though, and that plays into my perception too. [/quote]
Not a Mitch McConnell fan, but smiling near the President is now a bad thing. Lol. Race could be interesting here.
30 fucking years though. Damn.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
Also, is anybody else depressed that it’s already time to start talking about the horse-race again?
I suppose the posters who aren’t into theology will be relieved though, because that’s really all that’s been on offer lately.[/quote]
Honestly I started this simply to talk about something else. The entire front page is almost running the risk of being turned into “whatcha think about God.”
I’m participating in those, but a little variety never hurts. [/quote]
Yeah haha it’s definitely time to start talking about it. I just wish it weren’t…
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I think you may be under-valuing the GOP’s chances because of 2012 results. Midterms are different than presidential years. [/quote]
Sure, this is very likely the case.
I am worried about the GOP running fools though, and still getting their ass kicked in the culture war though, and that plays into my perception too. [/quote]
Not a Mitch McConnell fan, but smiling near the President is now a bad thing. Lol. Race could be interesting here.
30 fucking years though. Damn. [/quote]
Should have flipped Obama the bird. Anything else is ammunition.
I can see it now: “[Republican Incumbent X] was within three feet of Barack Obama, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
I can see it now: “[Republican Incumbent X] was within three feet of Barack Obama, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”[/quote]
Well, to be fair it was the leftist in 2008 saying “[Democratic Incumbent X] was within three feet of George Bush, Dick Cheney & Rumsfield, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction, arrest him for being a war criminal, nor call him a moron. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
I can see it now: “[Republican Incumbent X] was within three feet of Barack Obama, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”[/quote]
Well, to be fair it was the leftist in 2008 saying “[Democratic Incumbent X] was within three feet of George Bush, Dick Cheney & Rumsfield, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction, arrest him for being a war criminal, nor call him a moron. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”[/quote]
What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done;
and there is nothing new under the sun.
Midterms look alright for repubs. Not exactly shocking, being a midterm.
Not finding a lot of excitement within, in any event.
If I vote, it’ll require reconsideration of the party platforms; possible realignment, or a possible conservative 3rd party if available…Or, I’ll just stay home.
Edit: nevermind, I don’t feel like getting into that all over again
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
I can see it now: “[Republican Incumbent X] was within three feet of Barack Obama, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”[/quote]
Well, to be fair it was the leftist in 2008 saying “[Democratic Incumbent X] was within three feet of George Bush, Dick Cheney & Rumsfield, and he didn’t even spit in the president’s direction, arrest him for being a war criminal, nor call him a moron. Is this really the kind of Neville Chamberlain we want in Congress?”[/quote]
It’s just fucking stupid is all, both sides. It used to be work together and compromise on the issues. Now it’s smiling near a President equals we can’t trust this guy.
We’re fucked when partisanship reaches these levels as long as we’re tied to the two parties.
And two parties only is why we constantly have to point out “yeah, but the other team does the same thing.”
Americans aren’t very intelligent. Democrats and Republicans alike aren’t popular in 2014, but that’s essentially all we will elect.
This is the first year I haven’t been somewhat active with the Libertarian party and some candidates. Usually I do some stuff. Just pretty burnt out on the idea right now and got a lot of wedding stuff going on. You can only help and lose so often before you become disinterested in the entire process.
I guess I believed in my 20’s 
At this point it’s starting to look like the surprise would be the Democrats holding onto the Senate, not the Republicans taking it.
[quote]H factor wrote:
At this point it’s starting to look like the surprise would be the Democrats holding onto the Senate, not the Republicans taking it. [/quote]
The thing that stood out to me in the article, H, was that their chances we good because they were running “good” candidates.
I think that’s key.
If they put up some loons and wackos they (the GOP) will simply hand the Dems key victories.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
At this point it’s starting to look like the surprise would be the Democrats holding onto the Senate, not the Republicans taking it. [/quote]
The thing that stood out to me in the article, H, was that their chances we good because they were running “good” candidates.
I think that’s key.
If they put up some loons and wackos they (the GOP) will simply hand the Dems key victories.
Mufasa[/quote]
Maybe they learned their lesson from the last couple races? I would like to see the GOP move back towards moderate candidates on social issues. Maybe the GOP is smart enough to realize that fighting some of those culture wars battles put them in a losing situation (exception is pro life, but even that can be a loser if you word it wrong).
Will be interesting to see what happens in 2014 and 2016. The tack to the far right has clearly been a loser for some areas and a move back towards the middle may see the GOP in a much stronger position.
More like it’s a mid-term with a President whose popularity isn’t what it used to be. The opposite party is simply receiving the benefit. The Presidential election is where they’ll crush the GoP.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
More like it’s a mid-term with a President whose popularity isn’t what it used to be. The opposite party is simply receiving the benefit. The Presidential election is where they’ll crush the GoP.
[/quote]
Sloth:
Both with OR without Hillary running?
Mufasa