Election 2006 - Predictions?

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
1

I’m more looking for predictions in specific races, but feel free to spout off on who will control each house of Congress when the dust has settled.

For the Senate races in my neck of the woods, I’m thinking Allen holds the VA seat by a small margin. I’ll also go out on a limb and say Steele has a chance to pull an upset in the MD race – the MD polls look suspect, and it looks like the RNC is pouring money into that race right now, leading one to believe the RNC thinks they have a good shot at taking it.

2

I’m predicting that it doesn’t matter who wins.

3

Karl Rove will engineer another GOP victory.

4

I think the Democrats will pick up seates in both the House and Senate. They MAY pick up enough to gain the majority in the House but not the Senate.

This is a good thing folks. We need to get a good look at the Democrats in order to be reminded of what ACTUALLY happens when these fuck-heads run things. We tend to forget how insane - for lack of a better term - this group can be!

The country needs a good reminder.

This will serve to bring about the total and final disintigration of this reprehensible band of dipshits: The Democrat Party.

5

Either way we lose. The Dumbocrats will pick up some seats. The Repube-icans will probably retain control. I do not predict much will change expept we will be spared the mudslinging commercials. I don’t like the GOP, but I cannot lower myself to vote democrat. I have a vested interest in retaining some control over my own life.

6

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
This is a good thing folks. We need to get a good look at the Democrats in order to be reminded of what ACTUALLY happens when these fuck-heads run things. We tend to forget how insane - for lack of a better term - this group can be!

[/quote]
You seem to lack the ability to express yourself with out the use of random slang. These so called “fuck-heads” haven’t had control of either house in many years–so anyting that has been messed up can be blamed on the GOP. So, yes, it will be a good thing when they gain control and take back the issues that ACTUALLY matter instead of further helping to fabricate this fictional war on terror.

7

[quote]
Hack Wilson wrote:
This is a good thing folks. We need to get a good look at the Democrats in order to be reminded of what ACTUALLY happens when these fuck-heads run things. We tend to forget how insane - for lack of a better term - this group can be!

LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
You seem to lack the ability to express yourself with out the use of random slang. These so called “fuck-heads” haven’t had control of either house in many years–so anyting that has been messed up can be blamed on the GOP. So, yes, it will be a good thing when they gain control and take back the issues that ACTUALLY matter instead of further helping to fabricate this fictional war on terror. [/quote]

Are you trying to imply there aren’t any messed up laws that are still on the books from prior to 1994?

Anyway, the Republicans have had problems ever since Gingrich got his @$$ handed to him by Clinton and the media on the government shutdown in late 1995 – they haven’t been leading with a conservative agenda since that time. Then adding the domestic programs from the “compassionate conservatives” compounded the problems by decoupling tax cutting from government cutting.

8

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Are you trying to imply there aren’t any messed up laws that are still on the books from prior to 1994?

[/quote]
No. I am implying that one cannot blame an entire party for the political woes of an entire nation. I am further implying that the GOP has had ample time to “fix” whatever these “fuck-heads” seemed to have messed up–as HW states. The fact of the matter is that the only issue that the GOP has cared about since 2001.09.11 is terrorism; prior to that it was getting their moral beliefs written into law–also a form of terrorism.

So, what I guess I am getting at is that the GOP can be blamed for whatever they think is wrong with this country because they have had a more than equal share of the power since 2000.

9

From NRO:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzViMTNkMDM5NWJiZmNhYTVhZWY0ZDUwNWE1MjY2NDM=

MY GOP GURU. . . [Kate O’Beirne]
In the final days I will be bothering my elections guru for his latest take knowing how prescient he has been in the past. We just spoke and his experience tells him: This not a nationwide sweep. To explain himself, he starts talking in detail about races up and down the ballot, e.g. he’s keeping an eye on an auditor’s race in PA. He’s that kind of entrails expert.

He sees a major distinction with 1994 “when Repubicans were winning most offices in 40 states, while Democrats were doing the same in 5 and the remaining 5 were tied or mixed.” This year, Republicans are dominating in 21 states, Democrats in 22 with 7 tied or mixed. For example, Republicans are in trouble in PA with governor and senate race but Republicans might not lose a majority of the congressional delegation and will hold the state senate. Though the Republicans might lose 6 or 7 Governorships (they currently hold 28) they’ll hang on to state senates in NY, PA, OH, MI, WI, MO, AZ, TX, FL, GA and KY. He notes that even if Repubicans lose 3 House seats in Indiana and lose the majority of the delegation, they will win the majority of the popular vote for Congress. His general bottom line is that Democratic wins will be “shallow.”

His specifics at the moment (given that he is moving races in and out of his categories every day): He has 13 GOP House seats as “goners” in ths order: TX-22 OPEN, AZ-8 OPEN, CO-7 OPEN, PA-10 Sherwood, PA-7 Welson, OH-18 OPEN, IN-8 Hostettler, IN-2 Chocola, NY-24 OPEN, IA-1 OPEN, OH-15 Pryce, NM-1 Wilson, and NC-11 Taylor. He once had 20 seats in this category buts credits Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman with “buy-backs” that rescued seats once over the cliff. (e.g. He thinks there is new life in NY- Reynolds, IN-Sodrel, and PA-Gerlach, MN-6). His “super-vulnerable” (i.e. on the verge of lost) House seats number 12 and they include FL-3, CT-4, FL-16, IN-9, PA-6, CT- Johnson, KY Northrup and IL-6. He figures you have to expect Republicans to lose half of these - so they are down at least 19. Given that he has 42 total seats in play that result would be a victory of sorts. (I said “of sorts”).

He sees Democrats winning Senate seats in Ohio, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania and is “sure we will win” in Virginia, Missouri and Montana. He thinks Corker holds TN and Menendez holds NJ. The math is really hard in Maryland, but there is hope for Republicans

10

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
We tend to forget how insane - for lack of a better term - this group can be!

This will serve to bring about the total and final disintigration of this reprehensible band of dipshits: The Republican Party.

[/quote]

Damn straight.

11

The Republicans will win. They realize that this is an excellent opportunity to stick a knife into this socialistic holdover from the 20th century, thus ending it.

Unfortunately, the welfare state/ military state has spent us into virtual bankruptcy. The tribalization of public education has disconnected the poor from realising the value of education. The older cities will descend into bankruptcy, thus spreading urban violence, which will lead to abandonment of the cities by what remains of its middle class (think Detroit — which is actually all our futures). A fifth migration to exurbs like Aspen will presage the virtual collapse of the welfare state, as there’s no one left in the cities to tax (think Detroit again). Both political parties will implode and America will become a fascistic/military state, run by elites who live in distant and unreachable enclaves (think Aspen again). Thus, the libs will have created their dreamworld, where they can safely rule from on high, using the large military they created to run the country.

Of course, like Mao’s backers, they’re counting on him following the program…

12

Here’s the trigger, why cities, then states, and finally the federal government will sink into chaos and bankruptcy.

http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/27/cz_rk_0727karlgaard_print.html

13

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

No. I am implying that one cannot blame an entire party for the political woes of an entire nation. I am further implying that the GOP has had ample time to “fix” whatever these “fuck-heads” seemed to have messed up–as HW states. The fact of the matter is that the only issue that the GOP has cared about since 2001.09.11 is terrorism; prior to that it was getting their moral beliefs written into law–also a form of terrorism.

So, what I guess I am getting at is that the GOP can be blamed for whatever they think is wrong with this country because they have had a more than equal share of the power since 2000.[/quote]

He has a point. The repulican rule is a litany of missed opportunities. Better that democrats? Yes, but not as much as it should be.

14

I’ll predict:
Casey beats Santorum
Brown over Dewine
Nelson over Harris (of course!)
Tester over Burns
Cardin over Steele
Menendez over Keane
Kyl over Pederson
Lieberman over Lamont
Whitehouse over Chafee
Corker over Ford
Talent over McCaskill

Praying to Zeus for:
Webb over Allen

25 house seats picked up for Dems
5 senate seats for Dems

Predictions subject to change as soon as OBL video released.

15

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Here’s the trigger, why cities, then states, and finally the federal government will sink into chaos and bankruptcy.

http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/27/cz_rk_0727karlgaard_print.html[/quote]

I don’t see that happening as much as the author wants us to believe.

I have friends that have moved to PA so they could afford a bigger house and lower taxes but their commute costs and commute time (time is money) creates a net negative benefit.

16

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Here’s the trigger, why cities, then states, and finally the federal government will sink into chaos and bankruptcy.

http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/27/cz_rk_0727karlgaard_print.html

I don’t see that happening as much as the author wants us to believe.

I have friends that have moved to PA so they could afford a bigger house and lower taxes but their commute costs and commute time (time is money) creates a net negative benefit.[/quote]

The most recent migration has been from large cities to suburbs. As time goes on, no one has any need to go into a big city, as things like jobs, doctors, schools, and so forth follow the money. The cities thus become hellholes. This eventually spreads to the inner suburbs, causing more flight by those who can afford to move. Eventually, they figure out to simply move HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of miles away. With the internet and booming exurbs, fewer and fewer need to commute to places like Cleveland and Detroit, or Newark.

Read some of the stuff by Dr. Lessinger. He makes a pretty convincing case.

Now, gotta pack up for moving to the Bitteroot Valley in Montana…:slight_smile:

17

Don’t let the door hit you in the ass, Senator Sick Rantorum.

Hit the road, jackass!

18

Arnold will win in California.

The democrat will win in Tenesse for Senate.

The Dems will pick up seats in the House, but fall short of a majority.

The Dems will pick up seats in the Senate, but again fall short of majority.

Bush will still be attacked and maligned by the left and nothing much at all will change.

19

I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that we will still be getting final election results in some races on Friday…

Another set of predictions from a conservative – still pessimistic, but calling for Dems to fall short of a Senate takeover:

http://article.nationalreview.com/q/?f=2&q=NWRiZmU1YjMyYmVhZTA4NWY2ZWM0ODQ3OGEzMDliMWM=

20

An interesting comparison - predictions from the Daily Kos: