Shutdown over. Republicans blinked.

[kentonio]

Republicans would have to do much worse than they are now to not pick up 3 seats.

Uhuh.

In Georgia, voters opposed the shutdown nearly two to one, 61 percent to 31 percent. Democrat Michelle Nunn ties a generic Republican at 42 percent. After being told “her most likely opponents for next year supported the government shutdown,” Nunn opens a six-point lead over a generic Republican.

In Louisiana, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) leads Rep. Bill Cassidy (R) by 7 points, 48 percent to 41 percent, for reelection. Almost half, 47 percent, said they are less likely to vote for Cassidy because of the shutdown, compared to 32 percent who said they are more likely.

In Arkansas, Sen. Mark Pryor (D) leads Rep. Tom Cotton (R) by three, 44 percent to 41 percent, which is within the margin of error. Told that Cotton supported a shutdown, 45 percent said they are less likely to vote for him and 33 percent said they are more likely to.

In two states with open Senate seats, it is the Democratic contender that is in Washington and the Republican who is an outsider. But the automated polling still gives Democrats the edge.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/1...oll-98401.html

[Sava]

Facts

[kentonio]

Yet you seemed so confident in your predictions.

I've very confident in my predictions, but my predictions didn't include specific seat numbers.

The terms I set up aren't exactly friendly to me if your confidence was well founded.

You're asking me to predict an exact seat number result and saying that if I don't it'll cost me either 1 month or 6 months. While I admire that you've clearly been taking notes from the Tea Party: Little Book of Negotiations, I'll have to pass thanks.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

People are stupid. Fact.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think I'd **** my pants if a Democrat won for Senate in Georgia in 2014. A year is an eternity.

[DaShi]

I think the important thing here is to make sure that no one has learned anything from this. Media, we're counting on you.

[Guynemer]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...ill-isnt-blame

also

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/20...enialists.html

Perhaps I missed it, but how exactly do those articles prove your statement?

[DinoDoc]

You're asking me to predict an exact seat number result and saying that if I don't it'll cost me either 1 month or 6 months. While I admire that you've clearly been taking notes from the Tea Party: Little Book of Negotiations, I'll have to pass thanks.

It costs me 6 months if you win. It costs you 1 month if you loose. I thought that was clear.

[Guynemer]

Uhuh.



http://www.politico.com/story/2013/1...oll-98401.html

Again: polls today mean precisely ****-all when assessing an election a year away.

Jesus Christ, how many times do I have to say it?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

We learned that US defaulting is good, and while those damn liberal communists won this round, the good fight is not over.

[PLATO]

I think the important thing here is to make sure that no one has learned anything from this. Media, we're counting on you.

Ain't that the sad truth.

[Guynemer]

Perhaps I missed it, but how exactly do those articles prove your statement?

For instance, courtesy of Nate Silver:

[Sava]

Perhaps I missed it, but how exactly do those articles prove your statement?

Actually, I think the TIME article you mentioned before was the one that said the Dems have more safe seats due to gerrymandering.

Those other ones just showed that gerrymandering didn't and won't affect either party's ability to win or keep the House.

So yeah, gerrymandering isn't the problem. It's been here. It's always been here. It's not particularly more effective than it's been historically.

So yeah.

[Sava]

For instance, courtesy of Nate Silver:

Yes. Politics is more polarized now. Pretty much everyone thinks that.

[Guynemer]

Actually, I think the TIME article you mentioned before was the one that said the Dems have more safe seats due to gerrymandering.

That is not my recollection.