Trouble for R's?

Thing1 said:
Really?

You heard the GOP was in trouble in a year that Obama won? And then in an off-year election when the Dems had the Presidency, and the opposition party would be expected to win?

Got any links for that, PMP?
Click to expand...

seriously?......has there been an election since Watergate that the liberals didn't claim they were going to gain seats in Congress?......go back and sit in your corner with your finger up your nose, it makes you look smarter than what you are currently doing.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
seriously?......has there been an election since Watergate that the liberals didn't claim they were going to gain seats in Congress?......go back and sit in your corner with your finger up your nose, it makes you look smarter than what you are currently doing.......
Click to expand...

No links, eh?

Generally, parties who are in power - in terms of the executive branch - understand that they're going to lose seats in off-year elections. Sorry 'bout that.

Looks like you were just shooting from the hip again. Not much of what you say here has any substance or foundation in the truth.
 
Thing1 said:
Yep, I do.

Poor bravs. I started my thread after the Kansas election - it was noteworthy that the Republican won by such a thin margin in what is normally safe deep red territory.
Click to expand...

It's more noteworthy to note that Republicans won an election the Democrats thought they were going to win.
 
I love how liberals turn all their egotistical predictions into a win even when they lose. You guys were supposedly meant to crush this election.

jr364qk.jpg
 
Hot girls in my avatar said:
I love how liberals turn all their egotistical predictions into a win even when they lose. You guys were supposedly meant to crush this election.

jr364qk.jpg
Click to expand...

The Republican still won the seat that a Republican is expected to win. Hillary didn't win the election that the Democrats claimed they were going to win.
 
I just don't know if people on JPP are really this dumb or they are that intellectually dishonest. As if a random special election for a random congressional seat is anyway comparable to the gravitas and hype of a national presidential election. Turnout for actual midterms is usually staggeringly lower from presidential elections. A one off congressional election for one district will no doubt have even lower turnout then said midterms. And then dems apparently were extra motivated to make the guy lose whereas the repubs probably much more blaze' about the whole thing. And in the end of course the democrats still failed, but they got their participation trophey so I guess that's what really matters.
 
Hot girls in my avatar said:
I just don't know if people on JPP are really this dumb or they are that intellectually dishonest. As if a random special election for a random congressional seat is anyway comparable to the gravitas and hype of a national presidential election. Turnout for actual midterms is usually staggeringly lower from presidential elections. A one off congressional election for one district will no doubt have even lower turnout then said midterms. And then dems apparently were extra motivated to make the guy lose whereas the repubs probably much more blaze' about the whole thing. And in the end of course the democrats still failed, but they got their participation trophey so I guess that's what really matters.
Click to expand...

It's not all dreamy wishfullness to recognize that there is a lot more energy on the left right now. They're breaking records in some states already in terms of recruitment for candidates.

Do you really believe - even from the most objective point you can get to - that the energy on the Dem side won't be through the roof in a little over a year & a half?

And you know full well that a 7% loss in DEEP red territory is more than a participation trophy. No one serious thought that there would be an actual win. A 20 point gain in a few months is noteworthy. I mean, it all really shows what a rightie hack you are that you can't even acknowledge these kinds of basics.
 
Thing1 said:
It's not all dreamy wishfullness to recognize that there is a lot more energy on the left right now. They're breaking records in some states already in terms of recruitment for candidates.

Do you really believe - even from the most objective point you can get to - that the energy on the Dem side won't be through the roof in a little over a year & a half?



And you know full well that a 7% loss in DEEP red territory is more than a participation trophy. No one serious thought that there would be an actual win. A 20 point gain in a few months is noteworthy. I mean, it all really shows what a rightie hack you are that you can't even acknowledge these kinds of basics.
Click to expand...

There was serious thought by many that the Democrat could win. That you refuse to acknowledge it doesn't mean it didn't occur.

A 304 - 227 electoral vote LOSS by the left in 2016 is far more significant especially when a LOSS wasn't supposed to have happened. You make a big deal out of a win when even you acknowledge it was supposed to be a win focusing on the margin of victory while ignoring a LOSS when a win was supposed to happen.

It proves you're a left wing hack that can't acknowledge the simple truth.
 
nope I don't believe in dem energy. I think it's massively overrated. A big immigration protest was supposed to happen in march and it completely fizzled to the point you didn't even hear about it in the media.

And no I don't consider a 7% loss by the democrats as a victory no matter where it was. You cannot compare a random congressional election as a 1:1 ratio with regards to a national presidential election and all the hype that carries. If we had actual data about midterms having huge turnouts that would be one thing, but we know that not to be true. To expect a congressional special election to carry the same weight is intellectual dishonesty.
 
Thing1 said:
And you know full well that a 7% loss in DEEP red territory is more than a participation trophy. No one serious thought that there would be an actual win. A 20 point gain in a few months is noteworthy. I mean, it all really shows what a rightie hack you are that you can't even acknowledge these kinds of basics.
Click to expand...

its not a 20 point gain stupid because the two elections aren't even remotely comparable in terms of attention/motivation/knowledge of it even existing. This is where you are being an either a liar or dumb.
 
Hot girls in my avatar said:
its not a 20 point gain stupid because the two elections aren't even remotely comparable in terms of attention/motivation/knowledge of it even existing. This is where you are being an either a liar or dumb.
Click to expand...

Funny how Thingy focuses on an election he admits the Republicans were supposed to win emphasizing a margin of victory yet ignores that Hillary LOST an election she was supposed to win.
 
Hot girls in my avatar said:
nope I don't believe in dem energy. I think it's massively overrated. A big immigration protest was supposed to happen in march and it completely fizzled to the point you didn't even hear about it in the media.

And no I don't consider a 7% loss by the democrats as a victory no matter where it was. You cannot compare a random congressional election as a 1:1 ratio with regards to a national presidential election and all the hype that carries. If we had actual data about midterms having huge turnouts that would be one thing, but we know that not to be true. To expect a congressional special election to carry the same weight is intellectual dishonesty.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't care. Even Ted Cruz was issuing the alarm to the GOP this week.

You can bury your head in the sand and gloat for another 18 months or so. Wake up call's a comin'....
 
Thing1 said:
Well, I don't care. Even Ted Cruz was issuing the alarm to the GOP this week.

You can bury your head in the sand and gloat for another 18 months or so. Wake up call's a comin'....
Click to expand...

That's what you fuckheads said about the Presidential election. Why should we believe you now, motherfucker?
 
it's always good to not get overconfident and keep oneself grounded. that's a good lesson that I wish some democrats would have learned. Many haven't though.
 
Hot girls in my avatar said:
it's always good to not get overconfident and keep oneself grounded. that's a good lesson that I wish some democrats would have learned. Many haven't though.
Click to expand...

Just based on long history, it's reasonable & realistic to expect the party out of power to gain in an off-year election. There have been some exceptions, but those have had some backlash related (i.e. Clinton's impeachment).

This is going to be '94 in reverse. I have zero doubt.
 
Thing1 said:
Just based on long history, it's reasonable & realistic to expect the party out of power to gain in an off-year election. There have been some exceptions, but those have had some backlash related (i.e. Clinton's impeachment).

This is going to be '94 in reverse. I have zero doubt.
Click to expand...

we'll see but it's too early to tell. you've had zero doubt about a lot of things and you've been wrong. And things were just as "clear" to you then as they are to you today. You need to adjust your zero-doubt-a-meter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top