Dems to lose Senate.

maineman said:
a fan? not at all.... but laws are like sausages.... it's not pretty watching them get made. If republicans were at all concerned about having the filibuster misused against them, perhaps they should have been a bit more prudent when they misused it against the democrats, doncha think?
Click to expand...


Now how did Defective Truth put it earlier?

BINGO!!
 
Jarod said:
The pendulum does have to swing, we have made HUGE liberal advances in the last 5.5 years. I would rather the pendulum swing in the midterms than in a presidential year.
Click to expand...

If you were not such a historical dunce, you wouldn’t make such dimwitted claims.

Democrats have been steadily losing the once complete control they had on the Congress for decades. For five decades they ruled the House and almost constantly in the Senate. It has only been since the 1996 slaughter of Democrats, thanks to their beloved Clinton, that have swung things in the Republicans direction. Yet we still see and hear plenty of stories about how the Republicans are a vanishing breed; then low and behold, the same media now predicts that Republicans might gain control of the Senate once again.

I am amused that Democrats think that by electing the first black, and most inept, man as President this suddenly portends a swing back in the wrong direction. Yet the media and Liberals ignore the facts that in a majority of State Houses and Governorships, Republicans have been steadily gaining.

Jarod said:
Maybe if the R's get big advances this November it will mean we will ride the backswing in '16.
Click to expand...

LMAO

Jarod said:
It would be great if President Clinton could have a Democratically Controlled House and Senate her first two years.
Click to expand...

It would be a disaster. But I am very doubtful we will ever see another Clinton in the White House.
 
maineman said:
a fan? not at all.... but laws are like sausages.... it's not pretty watching them get made. If republicans were at all concerned about having the filibuster misused against them, perhaps they should have been a bit more prudent when they misused it against the democrats, doncha think?
Click to expand...

ZappasGuitar said:
Now how did Defective Truth put it earlier?

BINGO!!
Click to expand...

Nothing can be more entertaining than watching to leftist dunces who have seldom been right about anything having a dunces circle jerk.

Hell, you’re too stupid to have an original thought of your own shit-for-brains.
 
maineman said:
I think her coattails will be as long as a bridal train.
Click to expand...
If she can avoid her past as well as BO did you may be right. That may be difficult as she was far more public, national and unpopular all the while. But people are stupid and gop has not demonstrated much skill at communication so we will just have to see. Of course coattails can work two ways...
 
Hillary President? let's not forget it was she that wanted the kind of healthcare reform we are now experiencing, not in a good way mind you. Her foreign affairs skills suck (Benghazi anyone) she should have no fans in the Jewish corner. what will be her platform?
 
Jarod said:
The pendulum does have to swing, we have made HUGE liberal advances in the last 5.5 years. I would rather the pendulum swing in the midterms than in a presidential year.

Maybe if the R's get big advances this November it will mean we will ride the backswing in '16.

It would be great if President Clinton could have a Democratically Controlled House and Senate her first two years.
Click to expand...


People might need a little refresher course to remind them of some of the obstructionist nonsense Congressional Righties have pulled since 08.
 
maineman said:
the good part is that, even with the house AND the senate, they won't be able to override an Obama veto, so the damage they can do will be limited.
Click to expand...

oh joy. then we'll get to hear all about a democrat president obstructing the peoples will and that elections have consequences, blah blah blah.
 
cawacko said:
Why? (since I know tone can be hard to deduct I'm not asking that in a condescending or confrontational way. I'm curious what makes you think she'll have the same type appeal as candidate Obama did in '08.)
Click to expand...

Did you happen to notice black voter turnout in '08?

Now imagine female voter turnout in '16.
 
maineman said:
Did you happen to notice black voter turnout in '08?

Now imagine female voter turnout in '16.
Click to expand...

Couldn't that have happened in '08 though? Women voters far outnumber black voters. I'm not saying it won't happen in '16 but I don't see it as a sure thing that the same effect will occur.
 
Secretary Clinton is not dumb, she has already begun the process of tacking to the Right of President Obama. She knows that she will have the liberal wing of the party sewn up by simply getting nominated. She wont have the problem the Republican candidate will have, she wont have to try to pull an etch-a-sketch like Romney unsuccessfully tried.

She is not my first choice for the Democratic nomination, but that wont stop her from getting the nomination, and I think very likely the Presidency.
 
Celticguy said:
If she can avoid her past as well as BO did you may be right. That may be difficult as she was far more public, national and unpopular all the while. But people are stupid and gop has not demonstrated much skill at communication so we will just have to see. Of course coattails can work two ways...
Click to expand...

BINGO!!
 
cawacko said:
Couldn't that have happened in '08 though? Women voters far outnumber black voters. I'm not saying it won't happen in '16 but I don't see it as a sure thing that the same effect will occur.
Click to expand...

Secretary Clinton will get a smaller percentage of women votes than Obama got in black votes, but the excitement factor of being a part of the history of electing the first women President will be huge, it will be one of the best motivators to get out the vote, and we all know that if you can excite your electorate, you are more likely to win... If you can get your people excited about voting, and keep their people bored... you win.
 
Jarod said:
Secretary Clinton is not dumb, she has already begun the process of tacking to the Right of President Obama. She knows that she will have the liberal wing of the party sewn up by simply getting nominated. She wont have the problem the Republican candidate will have, she wont have to try to pull an etch-a-sketch like Romney unsuccessfully tried.

She is not my first choice for the Democratic nomination, but that wont stop her from getting the nomination, and I think very likely the Presidency.
Click to expand...

Translation; Hillary will be pretending she is something she is not and avoiding her past to dupe gullible low information voters into voting for her in droves.

The media, who now practices malfeasance and has shed any hint of objectivity, will do everything in their power to sling mud at any Republican opponent and brand them as uncaring, haters of the poor, homophobes, women haters and racists; anything that will deflect away from Hillarie’s failures, lies and ignorance.
 
Truth Detector said:
Translation; Hillary will be pretending she is something she is not and avoiding her past to dupe gullible low information voters into voting for her in droves.

The media, who now practices malfeasance and has shed any hint of objectivity, will do everything in their power to sling mud at any Republican opponent and brand them as uncaring, haters of the poor, homophobes, women haters and racists; anything that will deflect away from Hillarie’s failures, lies and ignorance.
Click to expand...

Any candidate with a chance will be pretending to be someone they are not to get low information voters to vote for them in droves.

That part about the media is simply a lie told to try to make yourself feel better.
 
Jarod said:
Secretary Clinton will get a smaller percentage of women votes than Obama got in black votes, but the excitement factor of being a part of the history of electing the first women President will be huge, it will be one of the best motivators to get out the vote, and we all know that if you can excite your electorate, you are more likely to win... If you can get your people excited about voting, and keep their people bored... you win.
Click to expand...

So you are admitting the only reason to elect her is she would be the first woman President. Thanks for the honesty, because she has nothing else to run on
 
Jarod said:
Any candidate with a chance will be pretending to be someone they are not to get low information voters to vote for them in droves.

That part about the media is simply a lie told to try to make yourself feel better.
Click to expand...

Really? see that is what gives you away as a paid hack for the democrats.
 
Jarod said:
Any candidate with a chance will be pretending to be someone they are not to get low information voters to vote for them in droves.
Click to expand...

Wrong; only if they are Democrats trying to run away from the record and glaring economic stupidity.

Jarod said:
That part about the media is simply a lie told to try to make yourself feel better.
Click to expand...

Wrong; it is fairly accurate and the last Presidential election was a great example of the lengths the media will go to in order to impugn Republicans like Romney and drag inept inexperienced dunces like Obama across the finish line.

The massive coverage of how his dog was strapped to the roof of a car 20 years ago the best example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top