IDBillzFan Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Leaders that lost the Senate... And yest STILL gained 8 gubernatorial seats. Unlike, y'know, yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Exactly! And Eisenhower http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_1954 The lesson here is that you Conservative morons are caught up in the drive by media hype about this low turn out election. How many does it take to Tango? But this election wasn't just the loss of the Senate. It was a major ass whoopin all the way down the line. As big of a pu$$y as he is (and he is most definitely a huge pu$$y) Mark Warner has a lot of support in VA and was the incumbent. That race shouldn't have even been close. But here it is Thursday and it's too close to call. That's the kind of thing that should have you worried. Like I say, I hope the DNC fails to heed the warning of this election too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 As big of a pu$$y as he is (and he is most definitely a huge pu$$y) Mark Warner has a lot of support in VA and was the incumbent. That race shouldn't have even been close. But here it is Thursday and it's too close to call. If I were Gillespie, I'd start opening up car trunks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Exactly! And Eisenhower http://en.wikipedia....elections,_1954 The lesson here is that you Conservative morons are caught up in the drive by media hype about this low turn out election. How many does it take to Tango? Analyze the low turn out. Was it the winner's side who had the low turn out or the loser's side? Losers can go "sit in the back of the bus" because "elections have consequences". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Analyze the low turn out. Was it the winner's side who had the low turn out or the loser's side? Losers can go "sit in the back of the bus" because "elections have consequences". Old people vote. Old people are Conservative. Big deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 How many does it take to Tango? I takes one President. Too bad we don't have one now. And yeah, Reagan was welcomed with open arms by Tip O'Neill. Old people vote. Old people are Conservative. Big deal Keep the justifications flowing!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 If Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina isn't already on 2016 GOP VP shortlists, perhaps he should be. His appearance on today's Morning Joe could hardly have been a more impressive audition. When Scott expressed his concern for kids growing up in poverty, Roberts equated such concern with supporting a laundry list of liberal agenda items, implictly faulting Scott for his opposition to them. Scott responded by taking Roberts to school in an entirely undefensive manner. He reminded Roberts that 40 years of Dem congressional rule and a bigger-than-ever government, actually led to a significant increase in black poverty. Individual freedom, economic opportunity and education--not more government programs--are the keys to progress, explained Scott. - See video at: http://newsbusters.o...h.JSAt4hMG.dpuf I'm telling everyone, hitch on to the Carolina's for 2016 and you'll do right.NC isn't offering much - maybe if Hagan won she would be a good VP choice but it'd be smart to get someone from at least our Southern bastard neighbor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I takes one President. Too bad we don't have one now. And yeah, Reagan was welcomed with open arms by Tip O'Neill. Keep the justifications flowing!! I miss our intelligent liberals. It would be interesting to see an honest take on the Democratic Party's hammering from their point of view. Instead, we get gatorman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 If there’s one thing the MSM agrees on, it’s that Republican victories in the 2014 midterm elections were caused by low turnout. From the linked article: A sharp drop in turnout, a wave of voter unhappiness with both parties and a geographically favorable slate of Senate races combined to give the GOP the advantage it needed to pull off an unexpectedly strong victory Tuesday, according to exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and television networks. [Emphasis added.] The Washington Post called it a “low turnout election”: http://wapo.st/1tAA8Jy Sounding a similar theme, the NY Times’ Derek Willis emphasized low turnout in Maryland It’s true that turnout was low in some states. There seems to have been a big drop-off in California, New Jersey and New York — three large, deep-blue states where there were no close Senate or gubernatorial races. That dragged down turnout numbers nationally. But in nearly a dozen states where Republicans won big statewide races, turnout was up relative to the 2010 mid-term elections. Here’s a state-by-state breakdown: http://53eig.ht/10WeLcm So the “sharp drop in turnout” described by AP was actually a turnout increase in battleground states Colorado, North Carolina, Arkansas, Kansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Louisiana, Florida, Kentucky, Alaska, and Maine — all places in which the GOP performed well. The numbers are preliminary estimates based on the AP’s own numbers. Turnout may rise even more once all the absentee ballots are counted. Perhaps AP and other national MSM outlets should read what local MSM outlets have been saying about turnout in battleground states: Record high turnout in North Carolina, where Republican Thom Tillis prevailed over Democrat Kay Hagan. High turnout in Maine, where incumbent Republican Gov. Paul LePage defeated Democratic U.S. Rep. Mike Michaud by 5 percentage points. High turnout in Kentucky, where Sen. Mitch McConnell defeated Democrat Alison Grimes by a mere 15 percentage points. High turnout in Arkansas. Somehow that didn’t prevent Republican Tom Cotton from winning a U.S. Senate seat, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 If there’s one thing the MSM agrees on, it’s that Republican victories in the 2014 midterm elections were caused by low turnout. From the linked article: A sharp drop in turnout, a wave of voter unhappiness with both parties and a geographically favorable slate of Senate races combined to give the GOP the advantage it needed to pull off an unexpectedly strong victory Tuesday, according to exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and television networks. [Emphasis added.] The Washington Post called it a “low turnout election”: http://wapo.st/1tAA8Jy Sounding a similar theme, the NY Times’ Derek Willis emphasized low turnout in Maryland It’s true that turnout was low in some states. There seems to have been a big drop-off in California, New Jersey and New York — three large, deep-blue states where there were no close Senate or gubernatorial races. That dragged down turnout numbers nationally. But in nearly a dozen states where Republicans won big statewide races, turnout was up relative to the 2010 mid-term elections. Here’s a state-by-state breakdown: http://53eig.ht/10WeLcm So the “sharp drop in turnout” described by AP was actually a turnout increase in battleground states Colorado, North Carolina, Arkansas, Kansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Louisiana, Florida, Kentucky, Alaska, and Maine — all places in which the GOP performed well. The numbers are preliminary estimates based on the AP’s own numbers. Turnout may rise even more once all the absentee ballots are counted. Perhaps AP and other national MSM outlets should read what local MSM outlets have been saying about turnout in battleground states: Record high turnout in North Carolina, where Republican Thom Tillis prevailed over Democrat Kay Hagan. High turnout in Maine, where incumbent Republican Gov. Paul LePage defeated Democratic U.S. Rep. Mike Michaud by 5 percentage points. High turnout in Kentucky, where Sen. Mitch McConnell defeated Democrat Alison Grimes by a mere 15 percentage points. High turnout in Arkansas. Somehow that didn’t prevent Republican Tom Cotton from winning a U.S. Senate seat, . Well...yeah. In states where people would rather die that vote Republican, the choices are "Democrat" or "stay home." So of course low turnout was responsible in those states. It's the only explanation that makes sense in the MD gubernatorial race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I miss our intelligent liberals. It would be interesting to see an honest take on the Democratic Party's hammering from their point of view. Instead, we get gatorman. Freaking Juror#8 disappeared again. BigFatBills fan is still getting his feet wet and probably a little scared still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/republican-c-span-caller-says-elections-were-about-tha-1655464154 Slip! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 http://fortressameri...-tha-1655464154 Slip! Your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Your point? Just showing what a drove Republicans to the polls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 (edited) Just showing what a drove Republicans to the polls Based on one person? So is the Obama Phone girl representative of all Obama voters? Edited November 6, 2014 by meazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 Based on one person? So is the Obama Phone girl representative of all Obama voters? One person? Ya right, the fight to take away health insurance from poor people is the same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 War on Women Update: Democrats scrap ad buys for Mary Landrieu. They don’t need you anymore, Mary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 One person? Ya right, the fight to take away health insurance from poor people is the same thing Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 Just showing what a drove Republicans to the polls You keep telling yourself that, Skippy. Over and over and over. Keep telling all your friend and anyone else who will listen to you: the reason for the unprecedented mid-term slaughter that took place last week is because an entire country that twice elected a black man President has suddenly decided it hates black men. The depths of your stupidity are breathtaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts