# Election Predictions



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gents,

Lets see who the best pundit at Ask Andy is. Predictions after midnight PDT won't count. 

House - Dems + 25
Comment: Hello Speaker Pelosi and Chariman Hastings (fomerly known as an impeached federal judge)

Senate: Dems + 4
Comment: Corker in TN, Allen in VA and Talent in MO save the GOP's bacon. Lieberman re-elected in CT but Bush taps him as new SecDef and CT's GOP governor names a Republican to fill the vacancy. Net result: GOP 52 Dems 48

Should be an interesting night that could turn into several weeks of recounts. A friend who has worked with the RNC before is telling me lawyers from both sides are flooding into the tight races.

So what do you think?

Karl


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Why would Lieberman even think about being Secretary of Defense for 2 years, when he could serve 6 years in the Senate?

This thread looks like Interchange Dynamite, so I won't venture an opinion. I have not studied it much anyway, and am still undecided on who I will vote for RE Senator and Governor (in Michigan.)


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

I think the Senate is safe for Republicans (52/48) and there's a 50/50 chance that we'll hold on to the House (if we do it will be by three or four seats). Clearly there are a lot of Republicans who are upset with the current state of the party, and on a phone survey it's very simple to express that disgust without consequence. However, in the voting booth there is a consequence. I think there's a good chance that Republican protest voters will step in to the booth and reconsider what a Democratic House would mean.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

forsbergacct2000,

Bc his country needs him! We need a new SecDef and one who is a Democrat would even be better. I think if asked Lieberman would serve and if someone like McCain won in 2008 they would probably extend Lieberman's tenure or offer him another cabinet position. 

Karl


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

I think the Democrats would kick Lieberman out of the party if he was offered and accepted the Sec of Defense position.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

Relayer said:


> *I think the Democrats would kick Lieberman out of the party* if he was offered and accepted the Sec of Defense position.


They already did.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

I have only really followed the Missouri and Illinois races, so here are my predictions for those. 

Illinois: Blagojevich defeats Topinka.

Missouri: McCaskill defeats Talent.
Amendment 2 (stem cell research) passes by narrow margin.

My guess is that the Democrats will take a narrow lead in both the House and Senate.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Dems gain the House, about 8 seat majority.
Repubs keep Senate, 48/52 or maybe 47/1/52 but he already said he'd caucus with the Dems.

Other predictions: 

1) On hearing "Speaker Pelosi" for the first time, Katie Couric has a terminal multiple orgasm.
2) John Conyers sheds all facade of being sane and launches drive to have Dubya drawn and quartered in Hart Plaza.
3) Barry Obama takes credit for Dems winning the House. A substantial number of people believe him and he appears on the cover of Time again.
4) Dade County voters finally realize Dubya can not run again for Prez.
5) Cheney never quite gets Dubya to understand why losing the House was "bad".


----------



## Garfield (Jan 29, 2006)

I'll guess that at least one close race will have problems with the e-voting, and lawsuits will follow.

What would really be funny (in a sad way) is if there are two contested races, one for each party. Then each party would have to argue against one re-count, and for another.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

I predict that whoever wins, things will stay the same. Sad but true.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

If Lieberman had made it into the last Presidentual race I would have voted for him. But the Democrats have to prove there is no middle road or conservatives among their party, anymore.

hopkins_student's is the closest to what will happen, I think. But, maybe the Republicans will hold both Houses. Hope so. The thought of any House being controled by the Democrats should get the Republicans out to vote big time. As bad as the Republicans have missed up the Democrats are worse.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Dems take the House handily. Take the Senate by a hair. 

A recent STRATFOR assessment suggested that the Democrats might actually be better off only taking one chamber as doing so will advance their investigatory powers and their ability to stop Bush initiatives without complicating things by potential intra-party conflicts between Senate and House. Meanwhile, they prepare for the big game in 2008.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

D's take the House.

In the Senate:

Tester wins Montana
Webb wins Virginia
McCaskill wins Missouri
Whitehouse wins Rhode Island
Corker wins Tennessee
Lieberman wins Connecticut.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

Well, if Tester wins in Montana, I hope to God that somebody will come up with a better haircut for him. He looks like an eight year old.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

He sure doesn't look like any organic farmers I know in Vermont.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

Wayfarer said:


> 3) Barry Obama takes credit for Dems winning the House. A substantial number of people believe him and he appears on the cover of Time again.


Or better yet, Men's Vogue.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

Duplicate post


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

My prediction is the Republicans maintain control and the Dems blame someone/something other than thier own policies. 

Time will tell.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Largely due to all the negative campaigning, voter turn out, for this election, will be even more dismal than in past election cycles. But hey, we're Americans...apathetic is our way of doing politics! At least participants in this forum care enough to talk about it...see ya at the polls!


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

There is a rumor that if Chafee wins he will jump ship and declare himself a Dem.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

https://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/07/opinion/07tierney.html?hp

"But what really happens when people discuss politics? Consider an experiment last year, when groups of Coloradans convened separately in Boulder and Colorado Springs to discuss global warming, affirmative action and civil unions for same-sex couples. Before the discussions, the people in Boulder were on average more liberal than the ones in Colorado Springs, but there were also moderates in both places whose opinions overlapped.

After the group discussions, the people in Boulder moved to the left, and those in Colorado Springs moved to the right. The researchers - David Schkade, Cass Sunstein and Reid Hastie - concluded that "the major effect of deliberation was to make group members more extreme than they were before they started to talk."


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

Three links that could be of interest.

A pundit: Larry Sabato, https://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
(non-partisan site)

An electoral map using an objective formula (average of the last week of polls): 
(comments show the site-owner is a liberal, but he chooses not to use political polls commissioned by either party)

Another electoral map using a more complex (and more subjective) formula (a mix of the polls, the popularity of the incumbent and pundits' view): https://www.electionprojection.com/
(the site-owner is very clearly a conservative and his comments are very partisan)

The second site has a table showing the predictions of various outlets (his own formula's prediction, his personal feeling, various pundits including Sabato).

I have been reading those three every day for quite a while now... Yes, I am a political junkie, and I am throwing an "election-night-party" tonight at my house.


----------



## agnash (Jul 24, 2006)

I predict fewer annoying political commercials, fewer recorded messages telling me why one scum bag politician is better than the other scum bag politician, and plenty of talking heads explaining why their predictions were correct even though none of their predictions came true.

My ancestors fought on the winning side of the American Revolution, but our modern politicians make me long for the days of monarchy.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

As I was leaving for work this morning, I noticed that someone had stolen my McCaskill for Senator sign from our yard last night. I hope they enjoy the campaign sign of their new (hopefully) Senator.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*No Predictions*

No predictions, but I do hope the Democrats at least take the House and that Conrad Burns gets soundly defeated in Montana.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Should the Democrats fail, DNC chairman Dean will encore his hatchetman job on the Green party and Dickie Gephardt again ignore my offer to meet him mano a mano after his threatening revenge for Nader 'costing' them the election.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

> On hearing "Speaker Pelosi" for the first time, Katie Couric has a terminal multiple orgasm.




I think the GOP will do better than people expect.

I heard a great number of Democratic ads talking about people being fed up with the direction of the economy...so I have some questions...

Is lower unemployment bad? Heck it's at a super low 4.4%

Are lower taxes bad? Do we really want to give the government more money to waste?


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Artisan Fan said:


> I heard a great number of Democratic ads talking about people being fed up with the direction of the economy...so I have some questions...


When one's only tool is a hammer everything begins to look like a nail!!


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Artisan Fan said:


> Are lower taxes bad? Do we really want to give the government more money to waste?


I was talking to someone today that I had always felt was fairly reasonable and intelligent. I expressed to her that all I really wanted out of this election, was for my taxes not to be raised. She had a litany of why taxes actually needed to be raised. I asked her, "So you are fine with paying more money in taxes?" Her reply was, "Oh! It's not my taxes they will raise!"

That says many, many, many things about her and people that think like her.

Regards


----------



## rnoldh (Apr 22, 2006)

*GWB gets right with God!*

I predict GWB appeals to his Heavanly Father as he commonly alludes to. And after great reflection, he resigns the Presidency to become the Commisioner of Baseball!

The new President, who of course will be Dick Cheney, immediately announces that he is retaining Don Rumsfeld, and will "Stay the course!".

New speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is greatly disappointed that she won't have GWB to knock around, and she announces a new spirit of Bi-partisan cooperation. As an example of the new era of bi-partisanship, Cheney fires GWB favorite Condi Rice as Sec. of State, and appoints Jesse Jackson!

How's that for a prediction!


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*Sorry*



Wayfarer said:


> I was talking to someone today that I had always felt was fairly reasonable and intelligent. I expressed to her that all I really wanted out of this election, was for my taxes not to be raised. She had a litany of why taxes actually needed to be raised. I asked her, "So you are fine with paying more money in taxes?" Her reply was, "Oh! It's not my taxes they will raise!"
> 
> That says many, many, many things about her and people that think like her.


Sorry, but I am one of those leftist liberals who think you need government to do things for society as a whole. I don't like what the current bunch are doing with my tax money, but considering the alternatives, I don't object to higher taxes for things like public schools, environmental clean up, adequately funded local governments, transportation, etc.

I am pleased at the prospect of Speaker Pelosi being third in line for the presidency. Perhaps the half wit currently in the White House will resign rather than face impeachment and then Speaker Pelosi will be second in line for the Oval Office.

Regards and sleep well,
Gurdon


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gurdon,

Just what America needs - Marin County Values! Pretty good night for the Dems but the Senate is still in play. Paul Begala called Rush Limbaugh a bloated drug addict (or something like that) and that may be true but I wonder if Mr. Begala has some kind words for the newly re-elected Ted Kennedy?

Karl


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Marin Co. smells like freedom. The pines, the salt air. Beautiful.



Karl89 said:


> Gurdon,
> 
> Just what America needs - Marin County Values! Pretty good night for the Dems but the Senate is still in play. Paul Begala called Rush Limbaugh a bloated drug addict (or something like that) and that may be true but I wonder if Mr. Begala has some kind words for the newly re-elected Ted Kennedy?
> 
> Karl


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

BertieW,

Marin County is beautiful but I dont kneel at the altar of the State like some do. I wonder if rmembers of Marin County's nomenklatura took advantage of the Bush tax cuts or if, out of principle, they continuted to pay the Clinton era tax rates to fund all their beloved statist endeavors. And waitt until Speaker Pelosi faces her first revolt from all the newly elected Democratic members of Congress who are a lot closer to the GOP line than Marin County Values. But 2008 and will tell if this was a blip or a new Democratic trend in the US.

Karl


----------



## rnoldh (Apr 22, 2006)

*11:30 P.M. CDT, Senate going Democrat!*

Here's a prediction before 12:00 PM.

Bye, Bye, Rummy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even "Stay the Course GWB" won't be able to keep you on now.

Question is, "Who will replace him?".

BTW: It might seem like I detest Rumsfeld (and I do, for what he has done to my beloved country)!

Though he can never say it publicly, I have it from highly placed Houston sources that GHWB detests him as much as I do! As I've consistently said, the Father is much better than the son. Oh well, time for a change!


----------



## iammatt (Sep 17, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> BertieW,
> 
> Marin County is beautiful but I dont kneel at the altar of the State like some do. I wonder if rmembers of Marin County's nomenklatura took advantage of the Bush tax cuts or if, out of principle, they continuted to pay the Clinton era tax rates to fund all their beloved statist endeavors. And waitt until Speaker Pelosi faces her first revolt from all the newly elected Democratic members of Congress who are a lot closer to the GOP line than Marin County Values. But 2008 and will tell if this was a blip or a new Democratic trend in the US.
> 
> Karl


As somebody who lives just across the bridge from Marin county, I will agree that it is beautiful.

One thing that has always bugged me though is this. Marin has been in the lead as far as environmentalism for years, yet they have a higher cancer rate for women than any other county in the US and it isn't even close. All reaseachers are convinced that it is somehtig environmenal, but they cannot pinpoint it. Should we tae teir lead before they figure it out???


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

Karl, you've got the wrong buzz word. It's "San Francisco liberal Nancy Pelosi". That way they get the gay-bashing in without being too overt about it.


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> but I wonder if Mr. Begala has some kind words for the newly re-elected Ted Kennedy?


You truly have an amazing obsession with the person of Senator Kennedy.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

agnash said:


> My ancestors fought on the winning side of the American Revolution, but our modern politicians make me long for the days of monarchy.


_Vivat Regina!

_


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

rnoldh said:


> I predict GWB appeals to his Heavanly Father as he commonly alludes to. And after great reflection, he resigns the Presidency to become the Commisioner of Baseball!
> 
> The new President, who of course will be Dick Cheney, immediately announces that he is retaining Don Rumsfeld, and will "Stay the course!".
> 
> ...


You forgot one more event:


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Étienne said:


> You truly have an amazing obsession with the person of Senator Kennedy.


Karl secretly admires the Kennedy family, and is miffed that Ted declined to sign an autograph for him.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Etienne,

Be glad I do. Otherwise I would set my sights on the continued foibles of the Fifth Republic. It seems Le Pen is enjoying some new found popularity. How embarassed will you be if he makes it to the second round of Presidential voting this spring?

Karl


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> Be glad I do. Otherwise I would set my sights on the continued foibles of the Fifth Republic.


Engaging in constructive discussion might be seen as another alternative rather than moving from one obsession/mantra to another.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Just watching the President's press conference on c-span and I must say its the first time that reporters have actually asked real and thoughtful questions. Very few "gotcha" questions and many very insightful policy questions. Kudos to the WH press corps on this one!


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Gurdon said:


> Sorry, but I am one of those leftist liberals who think you need government to do things for society as a whole. I don't like what the current bunch are doing with my tax money, but considering the alternatives, I don't object to higher taxes for things like public schools, environmental clean up, adequately funded local governments, transportation, etc.
> 
> I am pleased at the prospect of Speaker Pelosi being third in line for the presidency. Perhaps the half wit currently in the White House will resign rather than face impeachment and then Speaker Pelosi will be second in line for the Oval Office.
> 
> ...


As always, there are two sides to any equation. One can limit spending vs. increasing taxes, a quaint idea I know, but a valid one IMO. I have no problem funding things like public schools, in fact, I often defend the need for them on this very forum (which you seem not to notice) and with an increase in the quality and expectation of teachers, would have no problem increasing spending there. If you were to actually read the forum, you would see that I am also a proponent of a basic universal healthcare policy. However, as usual, people pick and chose what they wish to see in others.

I thought Pelosi promised no impeachment? Libs already breaking promises? My, my.

Have no fear about my sleeping patterns, I win pretty much no matter who runs the country, from a pragmatic basis. However I go beyond the personal and just continue to hope for a reasonable and bi-partisan government.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Gurdon said:


> Sorry, but I am one of those leftist liberals who think you need government to do things for society as a whole. I don't like what the current bunch are doing with my tax money, but considering the alternatives, I don't object to higher taxes for things like public schools, environmental clean up, adequately funded local governments, transportation, etc. Gurdon


Gurdon you are one of those brainwashed liberals that has no idea what people on the right want and believe. Who does not want these- public schools, environmental clean up, adequately funded local governments, transportation, etc.

I have even seen both parties flipflop on how to do these. I have even seen the Liberal Democrats get their bills past that cut wages for the poor and give the extra to the people at the top (million$), and then blame the Rebpulicians, Knowing You Will Never Look, and the wicked liberal media jumps right in to help with the scandal.

About the Environmental Clean Up; Why increase taxes from the corporations to pay for the clean up? Shouldn't that company that did the pollution clean it up? Or, pay out of their own pocket? The only thing you liberal know is tax tax tax.

Back in the early 80's a person could live off of $5,000. Reagan wanted to make it so that people who made $7,000 didn't even pay federal tax. After all, why would you make somebody who makes $2,500 pay taxes and then pay him back that tax money? The liberals back then even wanted people to pay on less income, which is ridiculous. The liberals want you to live on an allowance that they set for you- that is not liberty, so the Statue of Liberty should be shipped to some other country that likes Liberty. In the US the government is not to own you!


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

WA said:


> I have even seen the Liberal Democrats get their bills past that cut wages for the poor and give the extra to the people at the top (million$), and then blame the Rebpulicians, Knowing You Will Never Look, and the wicked liberal media jumps right in to help with the scandal.


How come you never seem to be able to provide links from a respectable source to substantiate your ravings? So why don't you list _even one bill_ since you claim there have been multiple bills. Name just one. I'll bet you can't because you just make up stuff. And while you're at it, learn to spell.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

crs said:


> How come you never seem to be able to provide links from a respectable source to substantiate your ravings? So why don't you list _even one bill_ since you claim there have been multiple bills. Name just one. I'll bet you can't because you just make up stuff. And while you're at it, learn to spell.


CRS, I'm not going to try and find it and I did stretch the trueth a little about the bills, being there is at least one, but it seems like I heard of 1-2 more.

So, CRS, how come Gurdon thinks liberals are the only ones that want public schools, environmental clean up, adequately funded local governments, transportation, etc.? Does he never read newspapers or watch the news on tv? Or, is it that the media is left and lies saying right does not want those things? In a balanced media, then Gurdon could not come away saying what he said, which means the media is extremely to the left and dishonest.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

WA said:


> I did stretch the trueth


Truth? Man, you can't even spell it, let alone recognize it.


----------

