Post Vote Spin Cycle

[Dr.Traveler]

If I had to bet money right now (as in, gun to my head), I would bet that the Dems keep majorities in both houses next fall (although they'll lose some seats in both, for sure), and that Obama gets reelected in 2012. On the other hand, I'd bet as little as the guy with the gun let me

I'm willing to give the GOP the benefit of the doubt and say they'll mount an impressive 2010 comeback. They may fall just short of winning control of the House and Senate, but it'll be impressive.

I doubt very seriously Obama gets beat in 2012. There'd have to be a "rock star" Republican to beat him and there's no one in the field that can both appeal to the moderates and get past the Conservative wing. Until the moderates and the Conservatives find middle ground, the GOP won't hold the Oval Office.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If I had to bet money right now (as in, gun to my head), I would bet that the Dems keep majorities in both houses next fall (although they'll lose some seats in both, for sure), and that Obama gets reelected in 2012. On the other hand, I'd bet as little as the guy with the gun let me

I'm willing to give the GOP the benefit of the doubt and say they'll mount an impressive 2010 comeback. They may fall just short of winning control of the House and Senate, but it'll be impressive.

I doubt very seriously Obama gets beat in 2012. There'd have to be a "rock star" Republican to beat him and there's no one in the field that can both appeal to the moderates and get past the Conservative wing. Until the moderates and the Conservatives find middle ground, the GOP won't hold the Oval Office.

I have to agree. And I'd go further to say that social and environmental issues are what is at the center of the divide. I think lots of moderates can get behind fiscal conservatism. Personally, I think a lot of folks on these boards consider me pretty far to the left, but even I can get behind Paygo, balanced budget, etc...

Maybe if the GOP fields a candidate who really preaches THIS and skirts the social and environmental issues, he could hold the factions together??????

 

[theHawk]

Please explain how the conservatives would of "won" if Dede Scozzafava would had won? She was a liberal. She voted with Obama and the Dems, she even backed the democrat after dropping out!

Who said that a Scozzafava victory would be a victory for the Conseravtives? Scozzafava winning would have just meant the GOP held on to a GOP seat.

Instead Sarah got involved and the GOP imploded. Just like in 2008.

This was a victory for conservatives, it was a message to the Republican Party that they'd had better stop nominating these shitbag liberals in an attempt to be "moderate", which is just code word for liberal.

That's why the GOP lost in 2008, and why they'll lose in 2012. You do not win without the Moderates and Independents. Go too far to the right or left and you'll alienate the middle. Sarah is all about the Right Wing, and because of that when Sarah gets involved the GOP loses in states and districts that should be easy pick ups.

Not everyone is driven by their "Party" wins. It isn't a "win" if the person is just going to vote with the other party.

Any party that tries to win "moderates" is just going to lose more of their base. Liberal republicans keeps their conservative base at home. Just as more conservative democrats keep their liberal base at home. The left wing blogs have already started to grill Democrats for not being socialist enough, warning them if they don't wise up they will stay home.

Right now, its not the GOP that is "imploding", its the Democrats. They fully controll Congress and the White House yet they can't get anything on their radical agenda done. Now they know that the anger around the country is real, and if they continue their socialist agenda they will get thrown to the wolves in the next election.

 

[nodoginnafight]

That's an interesting spin Hawk - you say the Democrats hold majorities in the House and in the Senate and they hold the White House. They also elected a representative to a district that has been solid Republican since the 1850s, in large part because Republicans couldn't decide who their candidate should be, but you say the Democrats are the ones imploding because they haven't passed a healthcare reform bill yet?

Interesting perspective, but I think the evidence seems to contradict your conclusion.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Pretty funny stuff.

Everything from " a HUGE win for Palin" even though the candidate she was backing lost to "Democrats gain one more seat in their congressional majority" (which may be true but they also lost a governorship that has traditionally been pretty solid.

So here's MY spin:

I think Americans want something different. I think they expressed that in the presidential nominations and election by selecting a newcomer and a guy with a reputation for bucking the party line (up until the last 8 years anyway)

I also think a third party candidate gathered steam in New York because of the desire for something different. This was a seat the GOP held since the 1850s or something and the Republican pulled out a few days before the election.

IMHO if candidates want to do well in 2010 - they will show that they can reject the typical and predictable hyper-partisan, party-line blather that has done such damage to this nation. Doesn't matter if the have a D, a R, an I, or a C, or any other letter of the alphabet behind their name - they are going to have to project the strength to champion their constituency no matter whose feathers they have to ruffle to do it.

Just MHO.

I agree