Boehner: '1 In 3 Chance' Republicans Lose Control Of The House

[Lakhota]

By Luke Johnson

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) admitted there's a "1 in 3" chance that the Republicans will lose their majority in the House of Representatives in an interview to be aired Tuesday on Fox News' "America’s Newsroom."

"I would say that there is a 2 in 3 chance that we win control of the House again. But there’s a 1 in 3 chance that we could lose. And I’m being myself, frank, we’ve got a big challenge and we’ve got work to do," he said Monday to Fox News' Bill Hemmer.

Expanding on tough races, Boehner said, "We have 50 of our members in tough races; 89 freshmen running for their first re-elections. And we have 32 districts that are in states where there is no presidential campaign going to be run, no big Senate race and we call these orphan districts."

He went on, "You take 18 of them -- California, Illinois and New York, where you know we’re not likely to do well at the top of the ticket -- and those districts are frankly pretty vulnerable."

Boehner also dismissed top Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod's comment on Sunday that House Republicans are under a "reign of terror" brought about by the far right of their party. "That that is just outrageous talk," Boehner said. "They’re trying to make this election, as I said earlier, about anything other than the president’s failed economic policies. And so they’re going to look for every boogeyman known to man," he said.

"Listen, if Republicans were walking in lockstep, my job would be a whole lot easier," he added.

John Boehner: '1 In 3 Chance' Republicans Lose Control Of House

 

[Lakhota]

I think it's more like a 1 in 2 chance that Republicans will lose control of the House.

 

[The Infidel]

Was he crying as well?

 

[Toro]

I think it's more like a 1 in 2 chance that Republicans will lose control of the House.

You should bet on it then. Intrade has the odds of the Republicans retaining control at 3 in 4.

 

[Charles_Main]

I think it's more like a 1 in 2 chance that Republicans will lose control of the House.

Seems like a bit of Wishful Thinking. No more than a 25% chance of it happening.

 

[occupied]

I wonder what craziness they are going to pull this year to beat the debt ceiling disaster of last year and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Someone is going to be a jackass if not the whole bunch of them. They always have to ratchet up the stupid stunts in an election year.

 

[Peach]

I wonder what craziness they are going to pull this year to beat the debt ceiling disaster of last year and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Someone is going to be a jackass if not the whole bunch of them. They always have to ratchet up the stupid stunts in an election year.

The UNEMPLOYMENT rate may hold the answer.

 

[candycorn]

By Luke Johnson

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) admitted there's a "1 in 3" chance that the Republicans will lose their majority in the House of Representatives in an interview to be aired Tuesday on Fox News' "America’s Newsroom."

"I would say that there is a 2 in 3 chance that we win control of the House again. But there’s a 1 in 3 chance that we could lose. And I’m being myself, frank, we’ve got a big challenge and we’ve got work to do," he said Monday to Fox News' Bill Hemmer.

Expanding on tough races, Boehner said, "We have 50 of our members in tough races; 89 freshmen running for their first re-elections. And we have 32 districts that are in states where there is no presidential campaign going to be run, no big Senate race and we call these orphan districts."

He went on, "You take 18 of them -- California, Illinois and New York, where you know we’re not likely to do well at the top of the ticket -- and those districts are frankly pretty vulnerable."

Boehner also dismissed top Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod's comment on Sunday that House Republicans are under a "reign of terror" brought about by the far right of their party. "That that is just outrageous talk," Boehner said. "They’re trying to make this election, as I said earlier, about anything other than the president’s failed economic policies. And so they’re going to look for every boogeyman known to man," he said.

"Listen, if Republicans were walking in lockstep, my job would be a whole lot easier," he added.

John Boehner: '1 In 3 Chance' Republicans Lose Control Of House

I think he's trying to fire up the base; there is NO chance of the GOP losing the house. Mitt will need every vote and then some.

 

[Peach]

By Luke Johnson

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) admitted there's a "1 in 3" chance that the Republicans will lose their majority in the House of Representatives in an interview to be aired Tuesday on Fox News' "America’s Newsroom."

"I would say that there is a 2 in 3 chance that we win control of the House again. But there’s a 1 in 3 chance that we could lose. And I’m being myself, frank, we’ve got a big challenge and we’ve got work to do," he said Monday to Fox News' Bill Hemmer.

Expanding on tough races, Boehner said, "We have 50 of our members in tough races; 89 freshmen running for their first re-elections. And we have 32 districts that are in states where there is no presidential campaign going to be run, no big Senate race and we call these orphan districts."

He went on, "You take 18 of them -- California, Illinois and New York, where you know we’re not likely to do well at the top of the ticket -- and those districts are frankly pretty vulnerable."

Boehner also dismissed top Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod's comment on Sunday that House Republicans are under a "reign of terror" brought about by the far right of their party. "That that is just outrageous talk," Boehner said. "They’re trying to make this election, as I said earlier, about anything other than the president’s failed economic policies. And so they’re going to look for every boogeyman known to man," he said.

"Listen, if Republicans were walking in lockstep, my job would be a whole lot easier," he added.

John Boehner: '1 In 3 Chance' Republicans Lose Control Of House

I think he's trying to fire up the base; there is NO chance of the GOP losing the house. Mitt will need every vote and then some.

I agree, the president takes the heat during bad economic times, not members of the House.

 

[candycorn]

John Boehner: '1 In 3 Chance' Republicans Lose Control Of House

I think he's trying to fire up the base; there is NO chance of the GOP losing the house. Mitt will need every vote and then some.

I agree, the president takes the heat during bad economic times, not members of the House.

You're right about that.

Why do you think Gingrich should still get SS protection? You said because he's in a Republican primary? How does that warrant SS protection?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"I would say that there is a 2 in 3 chance that we win control of the House again. But there’s a 1 in 3 chance that we could lose. And I’m being myself, frank, we’ve got a big challenge and we’ve got work to do," he said Monday to Fox News' Bill Hemmer.

Pfft – no kidding; if the GOP loses the House they have only themselves to blame.

The ‘big challenge’ is keeping the radical right from making the entire Party appear as if it’s a loony bin of misogynistic nitwits.

 

[Peach]

I think he's trying to fire up the base; there is NO chance of the GOP losing the house. Mitt will need every vote and then some.

I agree, the president takes the heat during bad economic times, not members of the House.

You're right about that.

Why do you think Gingrich should still get SS protection? You said because he's in a Republican primary? How does that warrant SS protection?

He is a candidate, thus subject to nut cases wanting to "make a name" for themselves; remember RFK & Wallace?

 

[Dot Com]

I wouldn't be surprised if they lose it. All the Dem's need is @ 25 seats

 

[candycorn]

I agree, the president takes the heat during bad economic times, not members of the House.

You're right about that.

Why do you think Gingrich should still get SS protection? You said because he's in a Republican primary? How does that warrant SS protection?

He is a candidate, thus subject to nut cases wanting to "make a name" for themselves; remember RFK & Wallace?

So? There are candidates from all sorts of political parties running. Does he get special treatment because he's a republican? Buddy Roemer was running as I recall. He hasn't dropped out as far as I know....should he get SS protection due to his running as a Republican?

I'm sure you'll agree that Gingrich, Roemer, Paul, and every other 2 bit candidate has zero chance of ever seeing the White House; whats the difference? Being a Republican?

It seems that waste is hated until it is spent on one of your own.

Can you explain?

 

[Peach]

You're right about that.

Why do you think Gingrich should still get SS protection? You said because he's in a Republican primary? How does that warrant SS protection?

He is a candidate, thus subject to nut cases wanting to "make a name" for themselves; remember RFK & Wallace?

So? There are candidates from all sorts of political parties running. Does he get special treatment because he's a republican? Buddy Roemer was running as I recall. He hasn't dropped out as far as I know....should he get SS protection due to his running as a Republican?

I'm sure you'll agree that Gingrich, Roemer, Paul, and every other 2 bit candidate has zero chance of ever seeing the White House; whats the difference? Being a Republican?

It seems that waste is hated until it is spent on one of your own.

Can you explain?

I'm a Democrat actually, Gingrich has won primaries. He must be protected, he is also well known as the former Speaker of the House.

 

[candycorn]

He is a candidate, thus subject to nut cases wanting to "make a name" for themselves; remember RFK & Wallace?

So? There are candidates from all sorts of political parties running. Does he get special treatment because he's a republican? Buddy Roemer was running as I recall. He hasn't dropped out as far as I know....should he get SS protection due to his running as a Republican?

I'm sure you'll agree that Gingrich, Roemer, Paul, and every other 2 bit candidate has zero chance of ever seeing the White House; whats the difference? Being a Republican?

It seems that waste is hated until it is spent on one of your own.

Can you explain?

I'm a Democrat actually, Gingrich has won primaries. He must be protected, he is also well known as the former Speaker of the House.

He should pay for it if the wants protection. He has no chance at winning the office he's running for. Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Which is why he had SS protection initiated.

If being Speaker is the turning point, does Jim Wright still get SS protection? Dennis Hastert? What if Nancy Pelosi was campaigning in her state--come to think of it she may be right now....would you be okay with her spending $40K of your own money based on "she used to be speaker" and has a higher than average profile?

 

[Peach]

So? There are candidates from all sorts of political parties running. Does he get special treatment because he's a republican? Buddy Roemer was running as I recall. He hasn't dropped out as far as I know....should he get SS protection due to his running as a Republican?

I'm sure you'll agree that Gingrich, Roemer, Paul, and every other 2 bit candidate has zero chance of ever seeing the White House; whats the difference? Being a Republican?

It seems that waste is hated until it is spent on one of your own.

Can you explain?

I'm a Democrat actually, Gingrich has won primaries. He must be protected, he is also well known as the former Speaker of the House.

He should pay for it if the wants protection. He has no chance at winning the office he's running for. Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Which is why he had SS protection initiated.

If being Speaker is the turning point, does Jim Wright still get SS protection? Dennis Hastert? What if Nancy Pelosi was campaigning in her state--come to think of it she may be right now....would you be okay with her spending $40K of your own money based on "she used to be speaker" and has a higher than average profile?

Newt was a serious contender at one point; now, Romney may pretty much lock it up today. I do not begrudge SS protection while he remains in the race.

 

[candycorn]

I'm a Democrat actually, Gingrich has won primaries. He must be protected, he is also well known as the former Speaker of the House.

He should pay for it if the wants protection. He has no chance at winning the office he's running for. Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Which is why he had SS protection initiated.

If being Speaker is the turning point, does Jim Wright still get SS protection? Dennis Hastert? What if Nancy Pelosi was campaigning in her state--come to think of it she may be right now....would you be okay with her spending $40K of your own money based on "she used to be speaker" and has a higher than average profile?

Newt was a serious contender at one point; now, Romney may pretty much lock it up today. I do not begrudge SS protection while he remains in the race.

So you agree it's a waste but don't have a problem with the waste....wow.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"I would say that there is a 2 in 3 chance that we win control of the House again. But there’s a 1 in 3 chance that we could lose. And I’m being myself, frank, we’ve got a big challenge and we’ve got work to do," he said Monday to Fox News' Bill Hemmer.

Pfft – no kidding; if the GOP loses the House they have only themselves to blame.

The ‘big challenge’ is keeping the radical right from making the entire Party appear as if it’s a loony bin of misogynistic nitwits.

No....the "big challenge" is whether-or-not ol' Boner can have his bags packed (booze, and all), and be out-the-door, before his ass is THROWN outta the Speaker's-office.​

April 25, 2012

Jettisoning BONER​

"Boehner should be concerned that holding the House is going to be a challenge because the American people, although ignorant at times, certainly understand the reality that the country is better today than it was when the President took office. They also understand Republicans have spent three years obstructing economic and job growth just to ensure that “Obama is a one-term president,” and that the GOP spent the past year attempting to impose harsh austerity measures that adversely affect tens-of-millions of Americans while fighting to give more to the wealthy. Boehner’s biggest concern, though, should be the real self-inflicted damage from Republicans’ war on women that shows no signs of ending anytime soon, and when women vote against state legislators, they will also vote against Republicans in Congress.

It is possible that Republicans imagined they could assault the American people without any real consequences, and based on their continued battering of the poor, women, seniors, and children, it appears they don’t have a grip on reality. The reality is Americans are not falling for the GOP’s false portrayal of President Obama any more than they think austerity and more entitlements for the wealthy are the path to prosperity and if Republicans cannot accept that simple truth, it will be more than a challenge to hold the House, it will be an impossibility."

 

[Peach]

He should pay for it if the wants protection. He has no chance at winning the office he's running for. Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Which is why he had SS protection initiated.

If being Speaker is the turning point, does Jim Wright still get SS protection? Dennis Hastert? What if Nancy Pelosi was campaigning in her state--come to think of it she may be right now....would you be okay with her spending $40K of your own money based on "she used to be speaker" and has a higher than average profile?

Newt was a serious contender at one point; now, Romney may pretty much lock it up today. I do not begrudge SS protection while he remains in the race.

So you agree it's a waste but don't have a problem with the waste....wow.

He's gone, I want all serious candidates protected. I don't like spending tax dollars on Gingrich, but it is moot point now, thank goodness.