Could lose one House seat there, but I guess Walz seems safer now. For the Gov race, if it were not for the Republican running, would not likely go Dem. But yea, good point. What an outlier state; where the Dems are taking over-- can't see how this helps Pawlenty.
Here in Virginia, we have Boucher now on the table for losing now. Could see 4 seats go Republican. I think Moran is going to be in the low 50's.
Have you read Woodword's 'Obama's War'? Its not dumbness; its his inability to get attract advisors that are any different than the status quo. Its tragic, really. He's stuck, he knows he's stuck, he ask why he's stuck... and no one answers... so he goes with what they tell him.
At one point, Obama says "so does anyone here think we should get out of Afghanistan" and no one answers yes. His reply: "OK then, that is off the table." I mean, WTF, he can't even figure out that if he has no one there that is telling him about that option, he doesn't even have the capacity to realize that he's living inside the box and needs to get a different opinion?
Quite maddening at first, but by the end, he's become a tragic figure of his own inability-- not of imagination, but of recruitment beyond the CW ladder of establishment group-think. He's DOA right there.
Voters would RANK a number of candidates from a list in order of preference. If a candidate wins more than half of the ‘1st preference’ votes, a winner is declared. If not, the least popular candidates are progressively eliminated from the contest, and their supporters’ 2nd and subsequent preferences counted and shared accordingly among the remaining candidates in successive rounds of voting. This process continues until an outright winner is declared. Electors won’t have to rank all candidates if they don’t want to and the winner won’t necessarily get more than 50% of all votes cast.
I was like that too once, in 2002, and even though I could see the late shift happening, I was able to allow myself to say what I saw, and change the races. So I was terribly wrong. I actually stopped blogging and thought about quiting all together. My feeling is that if I don't feel like I can say what I really see, truthfully, why bother.
Am just going off of #2 by the Gallup poll that was done. The point being that it found 21% of those who 'like' the Tea Party, or say 'yea' or whatever to it (being its so decentralized) are conservative dems and independents that traditionally, like in 2008, vote Democratic.
You may not like it, but those are the poll findings.
Ben Nelson will get his due in '12, and yea, the Cornhusker Kickback was a killer.
Part of Obama's win was due to Independent moderates and actual Republicans, which he's now lost. He's probably not getting them back either. So, can he up the base of youth and african-americans even more for 12? That's really doubtful too. His re-elect is stuck right now at 39 percent.
I'm wondering if Steny Hoyer is going to have the votes there, given a lot of Blue Dogs are going to be defeated. If 60-70 D's are ousted, I am begining to doubt that the House turns to him.
that's funny, cause Markos and I have shared in some very big success of late together with SBnation.
I'm not sure why you have such a visceral personal reaction toward a post that is just pointing at my opinion of why this is about to happen.
Nothings changed, I always tell the truth, and have always put that ahead of being on a team or any other partisan nonsense.
I've also never really cared about having a big blog or many readers. Having tuned this on and off multiple times over the years, and given the ad revenue to others. Its a side gig for spouting off on the state of things political.
I'm much more interested in working internationally than with Democrats any more. Or with renegades or 3rd party efforts going forward.
Thing is, none of the individual polling is reflecting the generic landslide. So, I would counter that a non-gap has been built in already, assuming it will happen. Here's an article to explain the dis-connect. It's probably not even close.