You're gonna look really stupid if/when all the votes are cast and the Democrats maintain control of both chambers.
With Strife, Republicans Induced Their Own Poor Showing
- Thread starter martin
- Start date
You're gonna look really stupid if/when all the votes are cast and the Democrats maintain control of both chambers.
I guess you will look stupid if they do not.
Either way, my main point will still be true--the president's party will lose seats. (Democrats can lose seats and still control both houses).
The Republicans winning the house is just a personal opinion and not established pattern. Since the average seats lost by the incumbent president is 27 and Republicans only have to win 5 it seems a rational prediction.
I don't have a prediction about the Senate. We all know it could go either way.
George Will is now a liberal? He never was a Trumper, but he is anything but left of center
And he is correct, Democrats shouldn’t get too cocky over Tuesday, nor read it as a confirmation of Biden, and the GOP has to realize looking ahead that the hate and division rhetoric hurt them in the election
You are correct, the GOP will win the House, majority of still uncalled seats favor Republicans, and the Senate is still a toss up, Democrats picked the wrong candidate in Wisconsin
I don't see the Will commentary anywhere in the link. I'd probably agree with it though.
Bet it's similar to Time's commentary and to Victor David Hanson's.
Well, I think Wisconsin loves Ron and supports his policies, I don’t think it has anything to do with the candidate. It’s like Ohio, Ryan was a moderate and they picked the lazy Trump guy.
Well actually no, because I've been saying this whole time that I don't know what is going to happen, ultimately. All I am looking at are the facts.
You're the one offering certainty on things before all votes have been counted.
So maybe take a chill pill and wait until all votes are counted before opening your big, fat mouth.
This is Flash's typical, lowest common denominator argument...basically, apples and oranges are the same thing because they're both fruit.
While technically true, it's not really a statement that means much.
Flash didn't think there would be a small Pervert GOP gain, because Flash was listening to pundits and polls and thought it would be a red wave like what happened in 2010.
It wasn't, but you know...Flash has gotta save face and he does that by making statements of certitude before all the votes have been counted.
So you're rushing to retcon yourself before you even know the final result. It's just that insecurity you have that always bubbles up whenever your judgment and credibility are thrown into question.
I only offered certainty on the president's party will lose seats. I never claimed the Democrats might hold both houses. Nobody knows what will happen but the polls came pretty close to getting it right. See Larry Sabato's University of Virginia center on politics for pretty good analysis.
Perhaps, but hard to think anyone loves Ron, all but one State wide Democrat won, Barnes just didn’t seem a good candidate
But there was no world in which you thought the loss would be this small...or even no loss at all, because we still need to count all the votes.
So I'm not sure why you are even running your mouth about this before all the votes have been counted.
Didn't you learn that lesson two years ago, or have you had your head up your ass this entire time?
Such lies. I know no pundit or poll predicting a "red wave." Which pundits and polls were those?
You are the biggest liar on JPP or you can show us my posts that claimed the Republicans would win big with a red wave.
LV426 is such a liar he has to make up posts that don't exist and he cannot find.
When the president's party loses seats and the Republicans win the house LV426 will be on here telling us why he got it wrong because, you know, math and apples and oranges and false equivalency, and inversion fallacy.
Still waiting for those posts where I claimed a wave.
Literally Nate Silver said the day before the election that a red wave was coming.
Here's a bunch of others...all the usual suspects: https://theweek.com/2022-election/1...redictions-from-the-nations-leading-pollsters
Here's one from your Pervert pals at the National Review: Midterm Predictions: The ‘Red Tsunami’ Comes into View Once More
And here's another one, this time from CNN: A Republican wave in the House is still quite possible
Oof, and here's yet another one, one week before the election after 40M people had already voted: How the impending red wave could become a tsunami
So you can clearly see that the media narrative was a red wave, and it was supported by bullshit polls and historical precedent that didn't play into anything. When all is said and done and the votes have been counted, the Democratic aggregate popular vote margin will probably be closer to the 2018 margin than the 2020 margin.
Last edited:
You probably don’t know the pundits who were predicting a „red wave“ because they were all on Fox. Watters bet Rivera $1,000 that there would be one.
It wasn't just Fox that was making that shitty prediction; The Hill, 538, CNN, The National Review...they all got it wrong because of the polling and the lazy historical precedent.
Historical precedent didn't play into this election at all, since the #1 issue for most voters was either abortion or democracy, not the economy and not punishing the President.
Biden wasn't even an issue in this election. His name barely came up. Trump's name came up more.
BidenPresident
Verified User
Yeah, I heard some of those conservative talk radio people try to drum up the vote by telling the audience they had a chance to really win big. And, as usual, "this is the most important election in our lifetime" which we hear every single election.
How would they define whether a wave occurred? Republicans could pick up the House and Senate and still win fewer seats than the midterm average (27). I wouldn't call that a wave (unless I was Watters).
I have learned from JPP about the excessive optimism toward one's side. And, as the election got closer, both sides started making predictions about bigger and bigger wins for their side.
Now, they are on here predicting Trump's win in 2024.
Will is still conservative, and still sensible. It’s possible to be both.
Was asked to post Will's column. Here it is:
In a pre-election flourish, President Biden bragged to Floridians that this year’s 8.7 percent increase in Social Security benefits is the largest in four decades. That is true — because of the cost-of-living adjustment. Inflation is the highest in four decades. Biden’s thank-me-for-inflation plea exemplified his autumn struggles, which called to mind the title of Stevie Smith’s poem “Not Waving but Drowning.”
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
Yet even a president dramatically more disapproved than approved, and who a majority of his party wishes would not seek another term, did not provoke even a red wavelet. Could it be that the label “Republican,” from an association with something or someone, carries an aroma of putrefaction? If so, the electorate’s discernment should be celebrated. Elections are increasingly nationalized and president-centric, even ex-president-centric.
Tickling a message from Tuesday’s muddy results is risky, but here is a tentative one: The immediate future can be won by a party prudent enough to offer a “deep breath, everybody” presidential candidate. One who says that to the nation, and adds, from Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address, “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.”
Which means turning down the hysteria rheostat. The nation was not built by fragile people and is not fragile, and it is safe to suppose that Biden’s reiterated rubbish to the contrary (“democracy is on the ballot”) motivated few voters. His implicit “Democracy c’est moi” message surely seemed highfalutin’ to Americans reluctant to believe that he is the thin reed on which the institutions bequeathed by the Founding now lean.
The nation’s immediate predicament is more banal. Republicans cannot win with former president Donald Trump defining them or inflaming their nominating electorates to select preposterous candidates. Democrats cannot win without invoking Trump’s specter to stifle debates about some of their policies (“no cash bail”; “greed” causes inflation) that stroke their base’s erogenous zones.
In this centennial of T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land,” recognize Trump as “dry sterile thunder without rain.” When, however, he is scrubbed from the public square — an entertainer with a stale act is as perishable as vaudeville — this cleansing will be welcomed by an exhausted electorate but will be discomfiting to both parties. Republicans will be forced to articulate an agenda beyond retrospective grievances and prospective pugnacity, and Democrats will be at first speechless, then forced to defend their agenda.
For example, Biden’s election-eve promise of a “fundamental shift” on the economy was, coming from the head of the party that controls the executive and legislative branches, a repudiation of the rascals who implemented his policies.
Although culture conflicts are still at a rolling boil, they come and go, and none are forever. In 2004, President George W. Bush’s reelection campaign worked to drive conservatives to the polls by getting anti-same-sex marriage measures on the ballots in 11 states. All passed. Eighteen years and a 2015 Supreme Court decision later, calm has descended where controversy had raged, which is evidence of two encouraging facts: The source of the court’s power, its prestige, is not as attenuated as some suppose, and the American mind is more accommodating than some anger-mongers would prefer.
When Tuesday’s results are sifted, it will be interesting to see how much has changed since 2020, when the gimlet-eyed Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report noticed this: Biden won 85 percent of counties with a Whole Foods and 32 percent of counties with a Cracker Barrel. Excluding counties that have both, Biden won 95 percent that have only a Whole Foods and 18 percent with only a Cracker Barrel. America’s class conflicts, arising from society’s allocation of status, also are not forever, and in this continental country, the Whole Foods and Cracker Barrel cohorts can coexist.
Tuesday’s elections should move both parties to introspection. Journalists could benefit from emulation. Many of them believe that the nation does not just have problems but has “existential” crises: Democracy is a guttering candle, dying before climate change snuffs out the remainder of life. Progressives, because of their mind meld with journalists, talk to voters a tad too much about existential this and that, and too little about voters’ existence.
Journalism, of sorts, did, however, provide comic relief, of sorts. Five days before the election, MSNBC, interviewing Mandela Barnes, the Democrats’ U.S. Senate nominee in Wisconsin, ran this banner at the bottom of the screen: “Extreme Gerrymandering Taints Wisconsin Senate Race.” If Republicans managed that — by redrawing the shape of the state? — they really are clever rapscallions.
In a pre-election flourish, President Biden bragged to Floridians that this year’s 8.7 percent increase in Social Security benefits is the largest in four decades. That is true — because of the cost-of-living adjustment. Inflation is the highest in four decades. Biden’s thank-me-for-inflation plea exemplified his autumn struggles, which called to mind the title of Stevie Smith’s poem “Not Waving but Drowning.”
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
Yet even a president dramatically more disapproved than approved, and who a majority of his party wishes would not seek another term, did not provoke even a red wavelet. Could it be that the label “Republican,” from an association with something or someone, carries an aroma of putrefaction? If so, the electorate’s discernment should be celebrated. Elections are increasingly nationalized and president-centric, even ex-president-centric.
Tickling a message from Tuesday’s muddy results is risky, but here is a tentative one: The immediate future can be won by a party prudent enough to offer a “deep breath, everybody” presidential candidate. One who says that to the nation, and adds, from Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address, “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.”
Which means turning down the hysteria rheostat. The nation was not built by fragile people and is not fragile, and it is safe to suppose that Biden’s reiterated rubbish to the contrary (“democracy is on the ballot”) motivated few voters. His implicit “Democracy c’est moi” message surely seemed highfalutin’ to Americans reluctant to believe that he is the thin reed on which the institutions bequeathed by the Founding now lean.
The nation’s immediate predicament is more banal. Republicans cannot win with former president Donald Trump defining them or inflaming their nominating electorates to select preposterous candidates. Democrats cannot win without invoking Trump’s specter to stifle debates about some of their policies (“no cash bail”; “greed” causes inflation) that stroke their base’s erogenous zones.
In this centennial of T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land,” recognize Trump as “dry sterile thunder without rain.” When, however, he is scrubbed from the public square — an entertainer with a stale act is as perishable as vaudeville — this cleansing will be welcomed by an exhausted electorate but will be discomfiting to both parties. Republicans will be forced to articulate an agenda beyond retrospective grievances and prospective pugnacity, and Democrats will be at first speechless, then forced to defend their agenda.
For example, Biden’s election-eve promise of a “fundamental shift” on the economy was, coming from the head of the party that controls the executive and legislative branches, a repudiation of the rascals who implemented his policies.
Although culture conflicts are still at a rolling boil, they come and go, and none are forever. In 2004, President George W. Bush’s reelection campaign worked to drive conservatives to the polls by getting anti-same-sex marriage measures on the ballots in 11 states. All passed. Eighteen years and a 2015 Supreme Court decision later, calm has descended where controversy had raged, which is evidence of two encouraging facts: The source of the court’s power, its prestige, is not as attenuated as some suppose, and the American mind is more accommodating than some anger-mongers would prefer.
When Tuesday’s results are sifted, it will be interesting to see how much has changed since 2020, when the gimlet-eyed Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report noticed this: Biden won 85 percent of counties with a Whole Foods and 32 percent of counties with a Cracker Barrel. Excluding counties that have both, Biden won 95 percent that have only a Whole Foods and 18 percent with only a Cracker Barrel. America’s class conflicts, arising from society’s allocation of status, also are not forever, and in this continental country, the Whole Foods and Cracker Barrel cohorts can coexist.
Tuesday’s elections should move both parties to introspection. Journalists could benefit from emulation. Many of them believe that the nation does not just have problems but has “existential” crises: Democracy is a guttering candle, dying before climate change snuffs out the remainder of life. Progressives, because of their mind meld with journalists, talk to voters a tad too much about existential this and that, and too little about voters’ existence.
Journalism, of sorts, did, however, provide comic relief, of sorts. Five days before the election, MSNBC, interviewing Mandela Barnes, the Democrats’ U.S. Senate nominee in Wisconsin, ran this banner at the bottom of the screen: “Extreme Gerrymandering Taints Wisconsin Senate Race.” If Republicans managed that — by redrawing the shape of the state? — they really are clever rapscallions.
People who read The Washington Post and certain other outposts of journalism apparently do.