Christine O'Donnell Defeats Mike Castle

[Hauldren Collider]

The high schooler is more astute than you, DD.

In said high schooler's opinion, DinoDoc's arguments are usually much better informed and reasoned than mine.

[Sava]

This O'Donnell situation gives me hope for the future. As bad as things are for the Democrats right now (because they seem to be getting blamed for nearly a decade of Republican failures), these races are still competitive. Think about that. On your worst day, the best your opponent has to offer is some retarded psychotic and you are still probably going to come out ahead when all is said and done (or at worst, slightly behind).

Just think if things improve. I can't imagine a situation where a Republican would ever win an election in a civilized part of the country again. They might have to allow sane, intelligent people into their party. But really, would they even be Republican anymore if they did that?

[Boris Godunov]

Bad sign, then, HC. DD never makes arguments, he just fires off sniping one-liners that usually aren't even particularly relevant, often just regurgitating crap he picked up from some right-wing blog or another that frequently turns out to be erroneous anyway.

As for Murkowski, she's certainly running. Her staff is calling it a "campaign kick-off," she's flying back for the rally right now and Rich Lowry @ the National Review wrote that a high-placed source in the Senate has said she's running. What else would be the point of the rally, since she certainly isn't about to endorse Miller and call for party unity? She hates Miller, particularly since he's the protege of Palin, whom Murkowski probably hates more than anyone else on the planet. Whatever McConnell did/said seems pretty irrelevant: she's running.

[giblets]

Just think if things improve. I can't imagine a situation where a Republican would ever win an election in a civilized part of the country again. They might have to allow sane, intelligent people into their party. But really, would they even be Republican anymore if they did that?

Republicans have a good chance of taking the house, meaning that when things improve they will claim it was because they gained control of the house and stopped the Obama agenda, and half of the country will believe it.

[Sava]

Republicans have a good chance of taking the house, meaning that when things improve they will claim it was because they gained control of the house and stopped the Obama agenda, and half of the country will believe it.

That is one possible scenario. There are lots of possibilities. Large percentages of people are susceptible to confirmation bias. It depends how each side presents their propaganda in relation to current events.

Shifting demographics continues to play a significant role in the shifting political landscape. Angry, old white people aren't as large a percentage of the voting public as they used to be. Hispanics will continue to grow in numbers and will likely vote Democrat for generations to come due to the increasingly xenophobic rhetoric and extremist policy proposals from the Republican/Tea Party.

[DinoDoc]

Bad sign, then, HC. DD never makes arguments, he just fires off sniping one-liners ...

Threads here require a response of more value?

[Hauldren Collider]

Republicans have a good chance of taking the house, meaning that when things improve they will claim it was because they gained control of the house and stopped the Obama agenda, and half of the country will believe it.

And it will be the same sorts of gullible people that believed Obama when he said that his bull**** stimulus (stimuli?) and healthcare takeover saved the country.

[Sava]

Threads here require a response of more value?

They really should.

[DinoDoc]

They really should.

Those that do are few and far between though.

[Hauldren Collider]

They really should.

Oh christ.

Where's Drake when you need a snarky Obama bull**** filter?

EDIT: I think I misunderstood Sava's post. I'm not sure if he was saying whether they should believe Obama or something else

[Sava]

Those that do are few and far between though.

I didn't realize there were any at all.

[Boris Godunov]

Republicans have a good chance of taking the house, meaning that when things improve they will claim it was because they gained control of the house and stopped the Obama agenda, and half of the country will believe it.

That didn't help the Republicans in 1996 nor the Democrats in 1984. Both lost house seats.

[Al B. Sure!]

Anyone else think Ben has a gambling addiction? He keeps betting on stuff.

[giblets]

He has to find something to do with the vast sums of money he earns in a single hour.

[Hauldren Collider]

That didn't help the Republicans in 1996 nor the Democrats in 1984. Both lost house seats.

But if the Republicans don't get the Senate they can still point fingers at the Democrats, who still hold most of the chips. While most legislation will require cooperation, the Democrats will still have a monopoly on a number of other things. In particular, nominations (barring a filibuster which is a no-no for nominations these days) and the presidential veto, as well as control over the executive branch, in particular the State Department, Homeland Security and the military which gives the Republicans plenty of targets.