That is... what will the Democrats gain control of? I'm confident that they will get at least one. And I'm still considering both as a possibility, but I'm not expecting it to happen, either.

No, the Dems will not win either. They will gain seats, but not enough to gain control of either the House or the Senate.

it's over...
we've lost... but i don't surrender

Santorum is going to win Pennsylvania (aka beat Casey), and that alone should make all Democrats pretty fucking pessimistic about the mid-terms.

Santorum is going to win Pennsylvania (aka beat Casey), and that alone should make all Democrats pretty fucking pessimistic about the mid-terms.
Whaaaat?

Why do you think this?

And why do you think the Democrats aren't going to win even one?

it's all about the campaign money... the republicans have already raised more than 4 times the amount that the dem.party has raised...
i can't wait to see the commercials.

Democrats have gains on every single issue EXCEPT terrorism.

The way I see it is if the people fall for Dick Cheney and co.'s "if you vote for the godless liberals, TERRORISTS WILL KILL YOU" bullshit, then Democrats are fucked.

If not, and if people really see the Republicans are behind on everything else (literally every other issue), enough people will vote for them to make some significant gains, one of them being the House or Senate.

Hell, even Republicans who want to remain nameless know they're going to get their asses kicked, they've been running to the media over the past couple weeks crying about it.

There's not a chance in hell tricky Ricky is gonna get in this time. No way. He still has one of the lowest approval ratings in the US Senate.

alas, this is the same crowd that voted in Bush jr.
the situation has changed minimally.... sad, but true.
to win the necessary seats, all the stars have to be properly aligned.
although the democrats have the upper hand on almost every issue at this point in time, it will have to continue in this way to have an actual effect on the election.

if anything, the house is the Dem's best bet.

Unlike 2004, there's growing disdain for the Iraq war. People are getting fed up.

Whaaaat?

Why do you think this?

And why do you think the Democrats aren't going to win even one?
Because he's shrunk Casey's lead from 24 points to 4 within two months, and he's now got the governor giving him major props - and he's got MAJOR money flowing in.

Unlike 2004, there's growing disdain for the Iraq war. People are getting fed up.


those factors will be used by the dem. while campaigning...
but is that enough? and what does the Rep. Party have hidden up their sleeves?
and of course, values and morals will come into play...


it's hard to predict.

you can be optimistic and hope for the best...

Because he's shrunk Casey's lead from 24 points to 4 within two months, and he's now got the governor giving him major props - and he's got MAJOR money flowing in.
Yeah, I can't believe Rendell did that. What a fucking idiot. If he doesn't have anything negative to say, he shouldn't be kissing his ass, either. Jesus.

Santorum is Satan. He cannot win.

wah wah wah wah

wah wah wah wah
.

wah wah wah wah
What?

The major problem this year is turnout. If the primaries are any indication, turnout on Nov. 7th will be insanely low, much lower than typical for an off-year election. The Repubs have immigration as their hot button issue. The Dems have minimum wage as their hot button issue. Immigration is winning and it is pulling in not only swing voters but also moderate Dems. The war is actually not a deciding issue. No Repubs are going to vote for a Dem candidate because they dislike the war. However, Dems will not vote for a Dem candidate because that Dem candidate is too anti-war. You have to be against the war but not for withdrawl and a lot of Dem candidates have not figured that out yet. There will be some gains, but not enough for the Dems to gain the majority.

If the democrats can't win against this terrible, terrible excuse for a GOP - then they have got a real disconnect. I can't believe a majority of people go to the polls saying:

yup I want a candidate who:
- supports war
- supports corporate welfare
- supports pork projects
- is against gay marriage

The Democrats have a disconnect? NO, IT CAN'T BE!

Pretty much any capable person could've beat Bush in '04 ... except the two bafoons the Democrats danced around. Go figure.

I really, really dislike the Republicans policies, but I also really, really, really dislike the joke that currently is the Democratic party.

That said, I shook Santorum's hand and watched him take a $100,000 check this morning (check not mine, duh). Good times!!!!!!

I can't believe a majority of people go to the polls saying:

yup I want a candidate who:
- supports war
- supports corporate welfare
- supports pork projects
- is against gay marriage

The majority of Americans disapprove of the course of the war but are not for withdrawl. Pork projects, so long as they benefit them and their state or district, are good - and the projects the average voter mostly hears about are the ones that benefit them. The majority of Americans are against gay marriage. So yeah, the majority of voters do go to the polls saying that.

This is like a sports thread. I say we take the House, even though there's still plenty of time for the Dems to mess things up.

The major problem this year is turnout. If the primaries are any indication, turnout on Nov. 7th will be insanely low, much lower than typical for an off-year election. The Repubs have immigration as their hot button issue. The Dems have minimum wage as their hot button issue. Immigration is winning and it is pulling in not only swing voters but also moderate Dems. The war is actually not a deciding issue. No Repubs are going to vote for a Dem candidate because they dislike the war. However, Dems will not vote for a Dem candidate because that Dem candidate is too anti-war. You have to be against the war but not for withdrawl and a lot of Dem candidates have not figured that out yet. There will be some gains, but not enough for the Dems to gain the majority.

Where are you hearing this? All Ive read has said the Dem base is more energized than the Repub base, for one, and that immigration is like 3rd or 4th highest on voters mind, I think gas prices out polled it. Plus I dont see how minimum wage is the Dem hot button issue, since I rarely see or hear it talked about, which could just be them doing a piss poor job of it.

Where are you hearing this? All Ive read has said the Dem base is more energized than the Repub base, for one, and that immigration is like 3rd or 4th highest on voters mind, I think gas prices out polled it. Plus I dont see how minimum wage is the Dem hot button issue, since I rarely see or hear it talked about, which could just be them doing a piss poor job of it.

Exactly, what you've read. What you read and what is actually happening on the ground are two different things. Immigration is the issue that can cause Dems to vote for Repubs. As long as it remains a top 5 issue this election cycle and no bill is passed in the House or Senate before Nov. 7th, the Repubs are looking good. (Of course, this does vary from state to state and from district to district, but this holds true for a lot of battleground races.) There are minimum wage initiatives on the ballot in several states. It is with these initiatives that the Dems are hoping to boost turnout. The issue of minimum wage is the best plan the Dems currently have for turnout on Nov. 7th. And while, of course, everyone cares about gas prices, it is, essentially, a non-issue. There is very little a member of Congress can do about gas prices specifically and, thus, there is little candidates can say or promise (outside of a broader plan with regards to energy anyways).

This is like a sports thread. I say we take the House, even though there's still plenty of time for the Dems to mess things up.

The Dems need to gain 15 seats for a majority. I say they'll gain 5 for sure and not more than 10.

That said, I shook Santorum's hand and watched him take a $100,000 check this morning (check not mine, duh). Good times!!!!!!
Huh? What do you do?

I am an administrator for Netphoria, Inc.

haha

Latest Mason-Dixon poll numbers for the top 10 Senate races (9/22-9/28, margin or error is 4%)...

Maryland
Cardin (D) 47
Steele (R) 41

Missouri
Talent (R) 43
McCaskill (D) 43

Montana
Burns (R) 40 (42)
Tester (D) 47 (45)

New Jersey
Menendez (D) 44
Kean (R) 41

Ohio
DeWine (R) 43 (47)
Brown (D) 45 (36)

Pennsylvania
Santorum (R) 40
Casey (D) 49

Rhode Island
Chafee (R) 41
Whitehouse (D) 42

Tennessee
Corker (R) 42 (49)
Ford (D) 43 (36)

Virginia
Allen (R) 43 (46)
Webb (D) 43 (42)

Washington
Cantwell (D) 50
McGavick (R) 40

However, these races are actually much closer than these poll numbers indicate.

Reuters/Zogby just released polling data on 15 of the most competitive House races and it shows Democrats leading in 11 of the 15 races.

Here are the results:

ARIZONA 8 - Democratic former state Sen. Gabrielle Giffords holds a 45-37 percent lead over Republican anti-immigration activist Randy Graf, who won a heated September 12 primary over a more moderate candidate backed by the national party.

COLORADO 7 - In this swing suburban Denver district, Democrat Ed Perlmutter leads Republican Rick O'Donnell by 45-34 percent.

CONNECTICUT 2 - Republican Rep. Rob Simmons leads Democratic challenger Joe Courtney 44-41 percent in this heavily Democratic district, where Simmons has touted helping to save a local submarine base from closing.

CONNECTICUT 4 - Republican Rep. Christopher Shays, a staunch advocate of the Iraq war who emphasizes his independence in a Democratic-leaning district, trails Democrat Dianne Farrell by 46-41 percent.

ILLINOIS 6 - Democrat Tammy Duckworth, a veteran who lost both her legs in Iraq, leads Republican Peter Roskam 43-38 percent in suburban Chicago battle to replace retiring Republican Rep. Henry Hyde.

INDIANA 2 - Democrat Joe Donnelly leads Republican Rep. Chris Chocola, one of the party's three endangered incumbents in normally Republican Indiana, by 48-39 percent.

INDIANA 9 - In a rematch of a close 2004 race, Democratic former congressman Baron Hill leads Republican Rep. Mike Sodrel by 46-38 percent.

IOWA 1 - Republican businessman Mike Whalen leads Democratic lawyer Bruce Braley 47-34 percent for the open seat of Republican Rep. Jim Nussle, who is running for governor.

KENTUCKY 4 - Republican Rep. Geoff Davis leads former Democratic Rep. Ken Lucas 42-36 percent in a heated rematch of their 2002 race.

MINNESOTA 6 - Republican Michele Bachmann leads Democrat Patty Wetterling 46-43 percent in the race to succeed Rep. Mark Kennedy, who is running for senator.

NEW MEXICO 1 - Five-term Republican Rep. Heather Wilson trails Democrat Patricia Madrid 50-40 percent in this Albuquerque-based swing district.

NORTH CAROLINA 11 - Democrat Heath Shuler, a former pro football player, leads Republican Rep. Charles Taylor 51-40 percent.

OHIO 18 - Republican state Sen. Joy Padgett, who won a special primary September 14 to replace scandal-scarred Republican Rep. Bob Ney, trails Democrat Zack Space 45-35 percent.

PENNSYLVANIA 6 - Moderate Republican Rep. Jim Gerlach narrowly trails Democrat Lois Murphy 43-41 percent in a rematch of their close 2004 race, one of three key House contests in the Philadelphia suburbs.

VIRGINIA 2 - First-term Republican Rep. Thelma Drake trails Democrat Phil Kellam 46-42 percent in this conservative and military-oriented Virginia Beach district.

Again, I still don't think the Dems can pull this off, particularly with the anticipated dismal turnout among Dem voters. However, the latest polls are all showing a similar trend, so that's a good sign.

Oh, never say never.

is 15 seats alot? on cspan the democrats keeping bringing up they need that much win the senate ... is this unprecendented?

PA crew holla!

But this says Santorum isn't looking good:

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/091505.html

That was in Sept. though. What are numbers looking like more recently? I imagine the gap's closing... but I don't think anybody like Santorum could win in his current position.

How about Swann though, eh? Eh? Sorry, I had to. I feel really bad for Swann... Even my most ultra-christian conservative friends refuse to vote for him.

Hahaha, dude, did you see the Swann and Rendell debate? Rendell kicked his ASS. Swann has absolutely no experience and he dodges every single obstacle thrown at him. Rendell knows his shit. He thinks he has the answers, then Ed tells him like it is. For example, Swann says Rendell blames everything on the legislature, and Rendell said "it's not like you're a king, you can't always get the legislature to do what you want." And it's true. Swann has no idea what he's talking about. Because he has absolutely no experience in anyhting politically realted whatsoever. It would be dangerous to elect a guy that has no idea what he's doing. You can't fuck with Rendell. I think this one is in the bag for him. He even had people laughing at Swann a couple times.

Not to mention, once you get to the middle of the state, being a Steeler hurts Swann bad. And Pittsburgh is an overwhelmingly Democratic area, so that doesn't help him either. Philly loves Rendell too. So that's three strikes against Swann already. He's not going to be able to get as many votes in what is commonly described as the "T" in the middle of the state.

And not to sound like a racist, but there are a lot of really closed-minded grumpy old people in the middle of the state who would never vote for a black man. Seriously, you might as well refer to Central PA as "Pennsyltucky".

is 15 seats alot? on cspan the democrats keeping bringing up they need that much win the senate ... is this unprecendented?

The Democrats need to gain 15 seats in the House and 6 in the Senate to have a majority. 15 seats is not really a lot, considering there are 435 seats in the House. However, not all 435 races are necessarily competitive. This year, I would say about 50 of them are competitive. Far less than that are highly competitive. It is typical that in midterm elections, the party that is not the party of the president will gain majority in the House and sometimes the Senate. The House is what is considered to be more fluctual and easier to get a majority in since all 435 seats are up for election every midterm election (unlike the Senate, which has 6-year terms).

Diebold.

Republicans I know aren't buying the immigration thing. They know that with total control of government for the past several years nothing changed, especially after 911. I don't buy that as an issue. But again, Diebold.

PA crew holla!

But this says Santorum isn't looking good:

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/091505.html

That was in Sept. though. What are numbers looking like more recently? I imagine the gap's closing... but I don't think anybody like Santorum could win in his current position.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/05/santorum.spopularity.ap/index.html

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/POLITICS/10/05/santorum.spopularity.ap/vert.santorum.ap.jpg

Quite possibly the worst Senator of our time.

I just sat in on a Repub strategy/internal polling conference call for Repub campaign staffers...

Senate:
Repubs are doing better recently in MO, MT, TN, and VA
Repubs are doing ever so slightly better, but it is still rough going in OH and PA
Only real opposition from Dems is in OH, RI, and PA
Dems will likely lose NJ

House:
Clay Shaw (FL) is doing better
Heather Wilson (NM) is doing better
The key races to watch are in IN, OH, KY, NY, and CT

There has been no movement in the internal polls because of the Foley scandal.

The Repubs anticipate absolutely maintaining a majority in the Senate and likely maintaining a majority by at least 5 seats in the House.

Had conferce call w/ Santorum/his aides this morning before our press conference with him.

His campaign said they feel very confident at this moment - better than they have thus far. They are polling minus two points, which is a win in their eyes.

He then went on to say NK isn't the problem and we shouldn't worry about them, instead we must put all attention on Iran.

Had conferce call w/ Santorum/his aides this morning before our press conference with him.

His campaign said they feel very confident at this moment - better than they have thus far. They are polling minus two points, which is a win in their eyes.


Of course they're going to say that, they were talking to press people.

Of course they're going to say that, they were talking to press people.
I don't know what I have to do to get it into your head, but I no longer work for the press. I haven't since January.

I don't know what I have to do to get it into your head, but I no longer work for the press. I haven't since January.

It still wasn't an internal only phone call - there was spin. Unless, of course, you now work for his campaign or the PA Repub party (and there was absolutely no prepping for a press conference going on, etc.). In which case, my bad. And if so, perhaps you should let him and his campaign staff know that his own party (when not speaking publicly or to outsiders) thinks he is not doing all that well.

It wasn't an internal only phone call. Unless, of course, you now work for his campaign or the PA Repub party. In which case, my bad. And if so, perhaps you should let him and his campaign staff know that his own party thinks he is not doing all that well.
It was an internal call we were on for monitary-only reasons. He got into a semi-argument with a staff member of his about where they needed to go next, and the aide dropped that number. They're being helped by the fact that Casey has the charisma of a shark and the brains of a muppet.

His staff, like most, suck ass. His campaign manager's a prick and his publicist is one of the worst PR people I've come across.

I just sat in on a Repub strategy/internal polling conference call for Repub campaign staffers...

Senate:
Repubs are doing better recently in MO, MT, TN, and VA
Repubs are doing ever so slightly better, but it is still rough going in OH and PA
Only real opposition from Dems is in OH, RI, and PA
Dems will likely lose NJ

House:
Clay Shaw (FL) is doing better
Heather Wilson (NM) is doing better
The key races to watch are in IN, OH, KY, NY, and CT

Well this sucks. Fuckin' hell people, vote the Dems back in to give them a majority in either one or the other.

Well this sucks. Fuckin' hell people, vote the Dems back in to give them a majority in either one or the other.

Well, they could be wrong about it all.

The major problem this year is turnout. If the primaries are any indication, turnout on Nov. 7th will be insanely low, much lower than typical for an off-year election. The Repubs have immigration as their hot button issue. The Dems have minimum wage as their hot button issue. Immigration is winning and it is pulling in not only swing voters but also moderate Dems. The war is actually not a deciding issue. No Repubs are going to vote for a Dem candidate because they dislike the war. However, Dems will not vote for a Dem candidate because that Dem candidate is too anti-war. You have to be against the war but not for withdrawl and a lot of Dem candidates have not figured that out yet. There will be some gains, but not enough for the Dems to gain the majority.

Poll: Voter interest highest in decade (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/11/motivated.voters.ap/index.html)

Poll: Voter interest highest in decade (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/11/motivated.voters.ap/index.html)

That goes against the internal DNC, DCCC, and RNC polls and against what has happened in all of the primaries. Which is typical - these types of polls always show much higher interest than there really is. And, of course, voter interest does not in any way equate actually casting a vote. The best turnout you can hope for in an off-year election is 50%. Vote goals for this year are being calculated based on an anticipated 43% turnout for Dems (and that this the high estimate, the low end estimate is 34%). And that article pretty much sums this all up...

In the past, high levels of voter interest haven't always translated into votes, especially in midterm elections.

Im changing my mind, well take them both.

i have to take off work to vote for Casey.

my boss is gay so he was in favor of it.

After watching last night's debate, anyone who votes for Bob Casey needs to reexamine their voting record.

Santorum might be the devil incarnate, but holy shit Casey's a colossal douche with no platform, charisma or charm.

What the fuck are you talking about, Santorum looked like a big fat baby. Casey is not that bad. Boo hoo, no charisma or charm, this isn't Hollywood dude. Yeah, he might not be the most ambitious guy in the world, but he's not the "devil incarnate" either. I'd rather have a Senator who's less active and more neutral in things than Rick Santorum and his destructive power tripping stride through the Senate. Anyone who votes for Santorum are the ones who are fooling themselves. There is absolutely nothing wrong with supporting Bob Casey.

Effloresce,

When you watched the debate with Rendell, did he mention healthcare managed by the state government for all our citizens?

As you know, a large majority of Americans support the government managing a system of healthcare with democratic input that covers all citizens. The current system managed by insurance companies deliberately reduces quality care to maximise their profits. Doctors today are pushed to speed through their practice, to patients' detriment.

Republican candidate Swann says he wants to lower health care costs by limiting what you can sue an insurance company for. That would be great for insurance companies' bank accounts, but it would make them even less accountable for their failings.

We should have democratically-managed healthcare for all citizens as president Harry Truman demanded 50 years ago.

Watching BlueStar and Sppunk try and one-up each other with their "inside info" is pretty funny but also kind of sad.

Big Democratic wins likely on Election Day
NBC/WSJ poll: Public's opinion of GOP hits record low
By Mark Murray
Political reporter
NBC News

WASHINGTON - Just 20 days until Election Day, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds approval of the GOP-held Congress is at its lowest mark in 14 years, the Republican Party's favorability rating is at an all-time low and President George W. Bush's approval rating remains mired in the 30s -- all ominous signs for a party trying to maintain control of Congress.

In fact, according to the poll, Republicans are in worse shape on some key measures than Democrats were in 1994, when they lost their congressional majorities.

"There is not a single number in here that would suggest the Democrats will not have their best showing in a decade -- and maybe two decades," says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican Bill McInturff.

Landslide of bad GOP news
The poll, which was taken of 1,006 registered voters from Oct. 13-16 and has a margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points, comes a few weeks after Republicans encountered a series of setbacks, including the release of an intelligence estimate calling the Iraq war a "cause célèbre" for Islamic militants, journalist Bob Woodward's unfavorable portrayal of the Bush administration's handling of Iraq, and the news that former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., had inappropriate correspondence with teenage congressional pages.

In the survey, Bush's approval rating is at 38 percent, a one-point decline from a previous NBC/Journal poll released earlier this month after the Foley news first broke. Perhaps more revealing, only 16 percent now approve of the job Congress is doing -- its lowest mark since 1992.

Both sets of numbers suggest that the Republican Party is on more unstable ground than Democrats were in 1994, when they lost 52 House and 8 Senate seats. In October of that year, President Bill Clinton's approval rating among registered voters was at 46 percent, and 24 percent approved of the job the Democratic-controlled Congress was doing.

Dems a 'marginally accepted alternative'
What's more, in this latest poll, just 32 percent of respondents see the Republican Party in a positive light, while 49 percent view it negatively. Those are the party's worst marks in the history of the poll. In contrast, voters -- by a 37-35 percent margin -- view the Democratic Party positively.

McInturff, the GOP pollster, observes that after several months when both parties have had net-negative ratings on this question, this is second-straight NBC/Journal survey in which a plurality of voters see Democrats in a positive light. Hart adds that Democrats have become a "marginally accepted alternative."

"It might be grudging admiration," he says, "but it is enough admiration to make it through."

Moreover, 52 percent say they prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress, compared with 37 percent who want Republicans to maintain power. It is the first time ever in this poll when a majority has sided with one party on this particular question. Earlier this month, Democrats held a nine-point advantage (48-39 percent).

The final GOP straw
Indeed, the poll finds that the events of the last few weeks -- such as the Foley scandal, the Woodward book, and the intelligence estimate -- have taken a toll on the GOP. Forty-seven percent say that these events have given them a less favorable impression of Republicans maintaining their majorities in Congress. Only 14 percent say they've given them a more favorable impression.

While Republicans were already in a precarious position before the Foley scandal, Hart explains, it has become a final straw of sorts that might have sealed their fate. "It is the event that allowed certain voters to say, 'Enough.'"

McInturff adds that the scandal took Republicans by surprise, and he expects them to be able to regroup and spend the next three weeks trying to disqualify Democrats on taxes and social issues.

The war in Iraq also continues to be a drag on Republicans and the White House. In the poll, a whopping 68 percent say they feel less optimistic about how things are going there, compared with only 20 percent who feel more optimistic. That's a significant shift from June, when voters were evenly split on this question.

Control of Congress
All of these numbers seem to suggest that Democrats are poised to pick up a sizable number of seats in November, and maybe even regain control of Congress. Hart says it's been clear for the last several months that an electoral hurricane would be arriving on Election Day. The only question was how big it was going to be.

This new poll, he observes, signals that it will be a Category 4 or Category 5 storm. "Simply put, the low lying areas are [going to be] under water."

-----------------------------------------

Another good poll. Of course, polls are polls, but they are all showing the same trend. However, I'm still a little skeptical (there will definitely be gains, but there may not be enough of them) since such dissatisfcation doesn't always translate down to the the state and district level. In other words, a lot of voters have that "it's the rest of Congress that are screwing things up, I like my Represenative" mentality. And, of course, there is still the issue of voter turnout. But yeah, the chances of winning back the House at least are looking better and better.

ElectionProjection.com is currently predicting...

Senate
Current: 55 GOP, 44 DEM, 1 IND
Projected: 50 GOP, 48 DEM, 2 IND
DEM +4, GOP -5, IND ***
http://www.electionprojection.com/images/SenateMap06.gif

House
Current: 232 GOP, 202 DEM, 1 IND
Projected: 213 GOP, 222 DEM, 0 IND
DEM +20, GOP -19, IND -1
http://www.electionprojection.com/images/HouseMap06.gif

That was in Sept. though. What are numbers looking like more recently? I imagine the gap's closing... but I don't think anybody like Santorum could win in his current position.

Here's a chart recapping most of the polls...

http://www.electoral-vote.com:2006/evp2006/Sen_graphs/pennsylvania.png
http://www.electoral-vote.com:2006/evp2006/Sen_graphs/legend.png

Trend lines have both of them moving up.

Wait, Lieberman's really projected to win Connecticut? Who the hell is still voting for this dolt?

Haha Bob Casey's having a pre-victory rally in his office right now.

Wait, Lieberman's really projected to win Connecticut? Who the hell is still voting for this dolt?

The moderate Dems and Repubs and Independents (there are more registered Independents in CT than Dems or Repubs). Lieberman has always had good crossover support and is well-liked by those not of the Dem and Repub party core.

if the Dem's get the house, you can expect impeachment proceedings on Bush which, unfortunately, will charge the country to be further polarized and better enable the patient Jihadist to follow through on their plans.

That's the one thing the Republicans have to scare the moderates with: all the congressional elections come down to The Big Plan with a democrat and all their offerings and the Republicans goes, "he's gonna raise your taxes and you'll be less safe..." and that alone is the reason the Dem's are not in control right now.

it always bites them in the ass. no pun intented. this time though, with the press hammering Bush for some years now, looks like the media will win one for their side at this time.

if the Dem's get the house, you can expect impeachment proceedings on Bush

Not going to happen - the Dems will not make any moves to impeach Bush.

don't bet on it and don't put it past Pelosi either.

They better investigate the hell outta Iraq, or...something.

don't bet on it and don't put it past Pelosi either.

You say it's all they have as a scare tactic, and then you fall for it. Funny.

It's Pelosi!Run!

the scare tactic is more what reasonable arguement that could be made for the war in Iraq by the Repbulicans and shift the argument. Since their political capital is just about used all up, so is their time as majority in congress.

The Pelosi factor is that she's pubicly stated she would consider impeachment if that's where the law leads. take it for what you will.

I despise Pelosi.

Ive never cared for her much. But she aint devil either.

Ive never cared for her much. But she aint devil either.
She's close enough.

She wouldn't be anywhere close to being as bad as Tom DeLay was, I don't wanna hear it.

Latest electionprojection.com predictions (Dem gains have gone down):

Current: 55 GOP, 44 DEM, 1 IND
Projected: 51 GOP, 47 DEM, 2 IND
DEM +3, GOP -4, IND ***
http://www.electionprojection.com/images/SenateMap06.gif

Current: 232 GOP, 202 DEM, 1 IND
Projected: 216 GOP, 219 DEM, 0 IND
DEM ***7, GOP -16, IND -1
http://www.electionprojection.com/images/HouseMap06.gif

These numbers/gains are pretty much what I would bet on as the election results (as of right now, of course - who knows what will happen this week, something could change the political landscape).

www.electoral-vote.com has the Democratic lead in the House shrinking by one every day. I guess that's to be expected, races get tighter as election day draws near.

I despise Pelosi.

what did she do?

It's not her policies as much as her personality. She comes across as a party hawk, something that we sure as hell don't need at this moment.

A few of the latest polls for some of the more interesting/key races...

Pennsylvania Senate Race
Keystone Poll 10/25 - 10/29
Santorum (R) 39% , Casey (D) 56%
Casey ***7.0%

Strategic Vision 10/28 - 10/30
Santorum (R) 39% , Casey (D) 49%
Casey ***0.0%

Connecticut Senate Race
Quinnipiac 10/24 - 10/30
Lieberman (I) 49% , Lamont (D) 37%
Lieberman (I) ***2.0%

Tennessee Senate Race
Rasmussen 10/30 - 10/30
Corker (R) 49% , Ford (D) 47%
Corker +2.0%

Virginia Senate Race
CNN 10/26 - 10/29
Allen (R) 46% , Webb (D) 50%
Webb +4.0%

Missouri Senate Race
CNN 10/26 - 10/29
Talent (R) 49% , McCaskill (D) 49%
Tie

Zogby 10/23 - 10/27
Talent (R) 49% , McCaskill (D) 47%
Talent +2.0%

New Mexico District 1
Reuters/Zogby 10/24 - 10/29
Wilson (R) 44% , Madrid (D) 53%
Madrid +9.0%

Indiana District 9
Reuters/Zogby 10/24 - 10/29
Sodrel (R) 46% , Hill (D) 48%
Hill +2.0%

Hey dude, did you get my email last week about how I am thinking about third parties?

After Chavez implied in a joke that Bush was the devil Pelosi and Rep. Rangell said to Chavez "You don't criticize my president and you don't come to my district."

Now if we - of any party- joke that Pelosi and Rangell are the devil, will Bush return the favor and deport us to Venezuela?

Or would such a severe action be anti-democratic and devilish? :smoke:

Colorado District 7
Reuters/Zogby 10/24 - 10/29
O'Donnell (R) 40% , Perlmutter (D) 54%
Perlmutter ***4.0%

And so the Repubs have dropped this mail piece...

http://www.wonkette.com/assets/resources/2006/11/sexoffmailer-thumb.jpg

Apparently, Republican Dottie Wham, the Denver Senator who sponsored the legislation that the mailer references, said that the tactic was "sleazy" and pointed out that the bill was tabled at the request of law enforcement, and that she and Perlmutter passed a more-comprehensive bill on sex-offender notification the next year. O'Donnell has so far refused to condemn the piece, claiming that he had no knowledge or control of it.