BidenPresident
Verified User
Right wingers care about Will.
With Strife, Republicans Induced Their Own Poor Showing
- Thread starter martin
- Start date
Right wingers care about Will.
It was actually George Will who said, "The current GOP is behaving like the Germans of the 1930's.".
Yep, Americans have grown tired of the MAGA hate, bigotry and lies. The midterms proved that.
You got your ass handed to you last night. Your tears are delicious. Give us more!
Good thing a couple of those red state legislatures flipped to blue, Tuesday. Yep, it will be gridlock and a clown show for 2 years, but that's what it was Obama's last 2 years. We'll survive.
It's amazing how many JPP members moved their goalposts yesterday morning
MAGA posters spent the last six months eagerly anticipating that Democrats would be despondent on November 8. Having six months of anticipation get flushed down the toilet in one afternoon was hard for MAGA to accept
I think what's making them the most furious - they were looking forward to gloating and us being miserable this week. We're all celebrating and it's making their little heads explode
Those who understand the definition of big words.
I think what's making them the most furious - they were looking forward to gloating and us being miserable this week. We're all celebrating and it's making their little heads explode
Personally , I'm relieved that this is probably the beginning of the end for Trump.
I was right.
What do you think he'll announce next week? He's going to make some "big announcement" on 11/15.
That he knows something about DeSantis.
No, wait. He already did that.
He'll reveal what he knows about DeSantis that nobody else knows except his wife.
What a dick. 8th graders are more mature than that.
OHH. Save this post! I can't wait. What do you thin Ronnie did? Party with Epstein? Steal money from a charity? That's what MAGAs usually do.
Historical precedent predicted correctly. It eliminates those subjective evaluations like the president's approval rating, a "referendum on Biden," abortion, democracy, inflation, or any of those other factors that everybody interprets differently.
If something is a well-established precedent it eliminates all those predictions by people who are convinced their side will win big.
You would know that is not true if you actually read my posts rather than making up lies about things I never said. I said several times I thought the Democratic loss would be in the 20's. That is lower than the average loss of 27 seats in the first midterm. I said the Senate was too close for a rational opinion.
Sure, if you're going to lower the bar to the floor because you don't want to drill into the specifics of this election.
And how do you know that the shift in seats was truly historical precedent and not an effect of gerrymandering? Because losing seats to gerrymandering is a lot different than losing seats due to historical precedent.
The only way we will be able to tell for sure is only after all the votes are counted; but I suspect that the aggregate vote margin will again favor the Democrats by millions of votes, just like it did in 2018 and 2020, which means it wasn't historical precedent that flipped those seats, it was gerrymandering.
I bet you never even thought of that because of your habitually lazy nature.
You always, ALWAYS do this...you always go to the lowest common denominator in your arguments because you're a lazy person by nature and someone who thinks he's entitled to his own version of reality because no one in your entire fucking pathetic life has ever challenged you to be a better version of the putrid, garbage, and pompous ass that you show to everyone here every fucking day as you sniff your own farts.
What led you to this conclusion? "historical precedent"...which is just a nicer way of saying that you're too fucking lazy to do the work necessary to understanding this particular midterm dynamic.
Because you are trying to credit the loss of seats to some "historical precedent against the sitting President" when the loss of seats was clearly due to partisan gerrymandering since the aggregate vote total will once again show Democrats won by a wide margin for the third consecutive election.
The only bar was that the president's party would lose seats. You always bring up trivia unrelated to the issue to divert from the main point. It doesn't matter whether the loss was due to gerrymandering or those other factors because they are too varied to ever reliably predict anything.
The aggregate vote count is irrelevant to the main point, but let's look at the aggregate vote count:
Democrats: 45,846,105 (46.4%)
Republicans: 51,415,367 (52.1%)
No doubt you will argue with this because I didn't include their hair color.