It seems like the Dems will be taking both houses of Congress.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Am I the only one that gets annoyed with the suffix gate being added to nonevents?

It's happened a couple of times here in NZ with Paintergate and Corngate.

I'm with ya. Especially since people will eventually end up thinking that Watergate was somekind of dark conspiracy involving crime, abuse of power...and water. Kind of like the plot of Chinatown, actually.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
When did Foley do either of these things? And what's wrong with having gay sex anyway?

Nothing except when you and your party run on an anti-gay plateform and then it turns out you've been grabbing the asses of 16 year old pages and having sex with 20 year old. After you do that it is called hypocracy.

The latest stories are that Folley has "inappropriately touching" a 16 year old boy on the floor of the Congress. That means he was playing grab ass with a boy who didn't want his ass grabbed.

[Winston]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Kind of like the plot of Chinatown, actually.

Finally, a post to this thread that makes at least some amount of sense.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Having just taken a look at the Slate article again (after a recent update), here's what's really interesting:

If the numbers hold (and 3 weeks is a lifetime in politics, so that's a big "if"), the GOP will only win two Senate races handily. One will be Arizona, where they pretty much had a lock. But the other will be Virginia, where Allen will have beaten back a serious challenge and triumphed in spite of his own gaffes.

In other words, the big winner next month could be Allen, who could come out looking more like a viable GOP nominee than ever.

[Proteus_MST]

Are Diebold voting machines involved in this election?

If yes, don´t worry, the Reps will probably win

[SpencerH]

I hope the dems do win. Having Nancy Pelosi as the speaker (and the ensuing tax rises) will ensure the dems lose in 08.

[Jon Miller]

you realise that we are spending more than we are making

JM

[Bosh]

Originally posted by Whoha
I can see the democrats taking the Senate, but I don't think that they will take the house.

Other way round. Because all of the House seats are in play it shouldn't be too hard for the Dems to take the House but with only 1/3 of the seats in play in the Senate they need to win virtually all of the close races and I don't see them pulling that off. If you count the pro-Democratic independents, I don't see the Dems topping 50 in the Senate (50/50 is my prediction).

However in 2008 the Dems will have a VERY good show at getting the Senate since there will be sooooooooooo many Republican seats to defend in two years time.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Very possiblely true. Look at the California governors race where the Republican incumbant was polling in the high 30's and the centrist Democratic candidate was polling ahead of him yet the extreme left of the party got a loser from the far left nominated. As a result an election which sound have been a slam dunk is now a losing election.

Actually, that Schwartzneger has done a remarkable job of turning his image around after getting thumped last year. He realized that instead of being confrontational, he needed to co-operate with the Legislature Democrats, and as a result, has gotten a lot of stuff done this year that makes him look pretty good. At the same time, the Democratic heads of both the Senate and House don't want to see Angelides succeed, because they both have gubentorial aspirations of their own in 2010.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
you realise that we are spending more than we are making

JM

Hush, little facts like that mean nothing to a true believer. Just because we spend more then we make doesn't mean that we should *GASP* raise taxes or cut spending. The Republicans have exploded spending and are completely unwilling to cut it in any way. The reason is their incompetence has alienated so many voters that the only thing they have left is pork and gay bashing.

Actually, they can’t even gay bash right now since the Republican leadership helped to cover up a pedophile who was molesting children on the floors of the Congress. All they have is pork but they are excellent at spending the public money on useless projects in order to buy votes. The bastards are so corrupt they can’t be trusted with a public bathroom much less the public’s money.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Actually, that Schwartzneger has done a remarkable job of turning his image around after getting thumped last year. He realized that instead of being confrontational, he needed to co-operate with the Legislature Democrats, and as a result, has gotten a lot of stuff done this year that makes him look pretty good. At the same time, the Democratic heads of both the Senate and House don't want to see Angelides succeed, because they both have gubentorial aspirations of their own in 2010.

That is true. But, Steve Westley was polling ahead of Arnold based upon his near perfect record of being a centrist and working towards the common good and not just the good of his party. Anglides has always been little better then a flip flopping party apperatchnik who loves to say buzz words at speeches but who can't ever seem to get anything done. The proof is in the pudding that only about half of registered democrats say they will actually vote for Anglides.

The far left hijacked this state's Democratic Primary and got their guy on the ballot. The problem is the vast majority of voters don't want an extremist candidate or even a guy who is willing to pretend to be an extremist. Anglides was a born loser who makes ****LOADS of promises he can't pay for. NPR did a study of what each candidate was promising and how he said he'd pay for it and not surprisingly Anglides came up with a $25-$35 billion per year hole in his budget. The bastard will say or promise anything to get elected but no one is buying it since he's so obviously out to lunch.

It's sad but there really are people who won't listen to Clinton's centrist triangulation strategy and instead think we'll get more votes if we become more extreme. Those people are disconnected from reality.

[Kuciwalker]

Just because we spend more then we make doesn't mean that we should *GASP* raise taxes or cut spending.

Quite true, it doesn't. There are plenty of other good reasons, but that isn't it.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The far left hijacked this state's Democratic Primary and got their guy on the ballot.

More likely, the left (the far left doesn't participate in the Democratic Party) got used by those who will be seaking the governorship in 2010, who did some deals to make sure that the weaker candidate won. They've also pulled the rug out from under Angelides. If the Democratic legislature decided to play hardball with Arnold, he'd be goin' down. The reason why Arnold's doing well is the party leadership has thrown their candidate under a bus.

[asleepathewheel]

As a democrat, I'm hoping for repugs to win all around, which would hopefully usher in new leadership and give Bush the full 8 years to screw his party long term.

[Dinner]

An interesting idea. Sadly when (if) the Democrats win next month then they will have to clean up the terrible mess which the Republicans have created. No doubt the Republicans will then squal that it is the "tax and spend liberals" fault taxes get raised and programs cut. When the reality is someone needs to right the ship since we're spending so much more then we make.