Blue Wave Drought: Reuters Shows a SIX POINT LEAD for Republicans

[DOTR]

When the economy is growing solidly and steadily, as it is right now, this always helps the incumbent party.

In my area, there are "help wanted" signs just about everywhere you go. I'm also hearing a bunch of radio ads from recruiting firms telling businesses that they can find them the employees they need.

It's just very strange that liberals can't wrap their minds around the simple, time-tested truth that when you let people and businesses keep more of the money they earn, increased economic growth always follows. Similarly, when you make the regulatory burden on businesses lighter and less expensive, businesses have more money to hire people, to expand, to pay bonuses, etc., etc. Really, why can't liberals grasp this time-tested reality?

Nancy Pelosi said about the huge boom we are experiencing "...strong employment numbers mean little to the families..." Sour Pelosi poo-poos booming economy: 'Strong employment numbers mean little' - The American Mirror

She of the "$1000 is just crumbs". Jobs and keeping more of what you work for mean nothing to these rich elites who run the Democrat Party.

And that is the answer to your question...the elites in the swamp do not work for a living.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Pelost hates this country to the core and libs love that she does.

 

[Muhammed]

heres your blue wave ..

there are 10 seats in the Senate that could flip from Red to Blue - Dems need 2 of those to to take control.

if that happens any law Trump even thinks about pushing through is history ... he might as well go to florida and crawl on his old knees looking for golf balls.

There may be 10 senate seats currently controlled by Republicans that could theoretically flip to Democrat in the November 6, 2018 election.

However, there are 25 senate seats held by Democrats that are up for grabs.

10 Republican senate seats up for grabs.
25 Democrat seats up for grabs.

THINK!

 

[Muhammed]

When the economy is growing solidly and steadily, as it is right now, this always helps the incumbent party.

In my area, there are "help wanted" signs just about everywhere you go. I'm also hearing a bunch of radio ads from recruiting firms telling businesses that they can find them the employees they need.

It's just very strange that liberals can't wrap their minds around the simple, time-tested truth that when you let people and businesses keep more of the money they earn, increased economic growth always follows. Similarly, when you make the regulatory burden on businesses lighter and less expensive, businesses have more money to hire people, to expand, to pay bonuses, etc., etc. Really, why can't liberals grasp this time-tested reality?

Nancy Pelosi said about the huge boom we are experiencing "...strong employment numbers mean little to the families..." Sour Pelosi poo-poos booming economy: 'Strong employment numbers mean little' - The American Mirror

She of the "$1000 is just crumbs". Jobs and keeping more of what you work for mean nothing to these rich elites who run the Democrat Party.

And that is the answer to your question...the elites in the swamp do not work for a living.

View attachment 196352

Pelosi is not really a Democrat. She's a Kleptocrat. Like Clinton, she is only involved in politics for the money.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

When the economy is growing solidly and steadily, as it is right now, this always helps the incumbent party.

In my area, there are "help wanted" signs just about everywhere you go. I'm also hearing a bunch of radio ads from recruiting firms telling businesses that they can find them the employees they need.

It's just very strange that liberals can't wrap their minds around the simple, time-tested truth that when you let people and businesses keep more of the money they earn, increased economic growth always follows. Similarly, when you make the regulatory burden on businesses lighter and less expensive, businesses have more money to hire people, to expand, to pay bonuses, etc., etc. Really, why can't liberals grasp this time-tested reality?

Nancy Pelosi said about the huge boom we are experiencing "...strong employment numbers mean little to the families..." Sour Pelosi poo-poos booming economy: 'Strong employment numbers mean little' - The American Mirror

She of the "$1000 is just crumbs". Jobs and keeping more of what you work for mean nothing to these rich elites who run the Democrat Party.

And that is the answer to your question...the elites in the swamp do not work for a living.

View attachment 196352

Without Her Daddy's Power, She'd Be a Gum-Chewing Waitress

No one in the heiristocrats' media is allowed to bring this up, but the secret to Princess Pelosi's attitude is that her Daddy was the mayor of Baltimore. Her brother also inherited that job; Feminism is solely motivated by the gullotine-fodder fantasy that ruling-class daughters should get the same unearned position their brothers have always gotten.

 

[DOTR]

When the economy is growing solidly and steadily, as it is right now, this always helps the incumbent party.

In my area, there are "help wanted" signs just about everywhere you go. I'm also hearing a bunch of radio ads from recruiting firms telling businesses that they can find them the employees they need.

It's just very strange that liberals can't wrap their minds around the simple, time-tested truth that when you let people and businesses keep more of the money they earn, increased economic growth always follows. Similarly, when you make the regulatory burden on businesses lighter and less expensive, businesses have more money to hire people, to expand, to pay bonuses, etc., etc. Really, why can't liberals grasp this time-tested reality?

Nancy Pelosi said about the huge boom we are experiencing "...strong employment numbers mean little to the families..." Sour Pelosi poo-poos booming economy: 'Strong employment numbers mean little' - The American Mirror

She of the "$1000 is just crumbs". Jobs and keeping more of what you work for mean nothing to these rich elites who run the Democrat Party.

And that is the answer to your question...the elites in the swamp do not work for a living.

View attachment 196352

Without Her Daddy's Power, She'd Be a Gum-Chewing Waitress

No one in the heiristocrats' media is allowed to bring this up, but the secret to Princess Pelosi's attitude is that her Daddy was the mayor of Baltimore. Her brother also inherited that job; Feminism is solely motivated by the gullotine-fodder fantasy that ruling-class daughters should get the same unearned position their brothers have always gotten.

Yes her family has run Baltimore for decades...turned it into this...

 

[DOTR]

Democrats and pelosi have made Baltimore a haven and paradise...for animals...

 

[Rexx Taylor]

6 or 16 point lead?

 

[Circe]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

 

[Circe]

notice how RWs ignore a 2 seat win in the Senate and they are totally screwed ?

two seats ... pig shit eaters, TWO SEATS

They don't notice anything unless it comes out of Sarah Sander's mouth, Donald Trump's shit hole in the middle of his face or Judge Jeanine and Sean Hannity. That's it. That's their reference for everything.

I'm thinking that I am going to have to put every leftist here on ignore, because of totally worthless posts, like these. Then see if the rightists make more sense and have more courtesy and civility.

 

[Circe]

I actually thought a hoard of snowflakes would flock to this thread to tell me how the poll is meaningless.

Polls are meaningless. People, it IS time that we accepted that. I'd have thought 2016 polls of Brexit and the U.S. presidential election would have taught everyone to JUST STOP TRUSTING POLLS.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

I wish someone would ask pelosi how she feels about the GOP having a 10 point lead going into the midterms

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

The polls close to the election predicted a popular vote win for 4 to 6 percent for Hillary. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. Seems that the polls were not that far off. The polls do not predict the outcome of the EC vote, as it would be impossible for a national poll to do so.

 

[bripat9643]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

The polls close to the election predicted a popular vote win for 4 to 6 percent for Hillary. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. Seems that the polls were not that far off. The polls do not predict the outcome of the EC vote, as it would be impossible for a national poll to do so.

Actually, the polls did try to predict the EC. They predicted the popular vote in each state. The predicted wrong in states like Wisconsin and Penssylvania.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

When the economy is growing solidly and steadily, as it is right now, this always helps the incumbent party.

In my area, there are "help wanted" signs just about everywhere you go. I'm also hearing a bunch of radio ads from recruiting firms telling businesses that they can find them the employees they need.

It's just very strange that liberals can't wrap their minds around the simple, time-tested truth that when you let people and businesses keep more of the money they earn, increased economic growth always follows. Similarly, when you make the regulatory burden on businesses lighter and less expensive, businesses have more money to hire people, to expand, to pay bonuses, etc., etc. Really, why can't liberals grasp this time-tested reality?

Nancy Pelosi said about the huge boom we are experiencing "...strong employment numbers mean little to the families..." Sour Pelosi poo-poos booming economy: 'Strong employment numbers mean little' - The American Mirror

She of the "$1000 is just crumbs". Jobs and keeping more of what you work for mean nothing to these rich elites who run the Democrat Party.

And that is the answer to your question...the elites in the swamp do not work for a living.

View attachment 196352

Without Her Daddy's Power, She'd Be a Gum-Chewing Waitress

No one in the heiristocrats' media is allowed to bring this up, but the secret to Princess Pelosi's attitude is that her Daddy was the mayor of Baltimore. Her brother also inherited that job; Feminism is solely motivated by the gullotine-fodder fantasy that ruling-class daughters should get the same unearned position their brothers have always gotten.

Yes her family has run Baltimore for decades...turned it into this...

View attachment 196724

View attachment 196725

Egorger Vos Fils!

Hereditary privileges are the well-hidden cancer that destroys all civilizations.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

The polls close to the election predicted a popular vote win for 4 to 6 percent for Hillary. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. Seems that the polls were not that far off. The polls do not predict the outcome of the EC vote, as it would be impossible for a national poll to do so.

Actually, the polls did try to predict the EC. They predicted the popular vote in each state. The predicted wrong in states like Wisconsin and Penssylvania.

Both states were won by just about 1%. So again not a massive failure by the polls.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Faun]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

The polls close to the election predicted a popular vote win for 4 to 6 percent for Hillary. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. Seems that the polls were not that far off. The polls do not predict the outcome of the EC vote, as it would be impossible for a national poll to do so.

Actually, the polls did try to predict the EC. They predicted the popular vote in each state. The predicted wrong in states like Wisconsin and Penssylvania.

Out of 50 states, Wisconsin was the only one in which the polls were wrong. Well within the 95% expected accuracy within a margin of error. And Pennsylvania was not wrong. The polls there showed Hillary would win by 1.9 points and she lost by 0.7 points, within the margin of error.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - Pennsylvania: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein

 

[buckeye45_73]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

The polls close to the election predicted a popular vote win for 4 to 6 percent for Hillary. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. Seems that the polls were not that far off. The polls do not predict the outcome of the EC vote, as it would be impossible for a national poll to do so.

So them why are people trying to predict congressional elections with the same polls?

 

[Sahba]

I've had money tied up in predictit.org for a while now & find that when the 'pool' actually has a vested stake... the tracking, even for the population at large, is better than what I get from the Dick Morrises' / Steels' of the industry.

 

[bripat9643]

Polls are fake. The President said so.

And he sure ought to know, after 83,000 newsies and pollsters gave Hillary a 90% chance to win. I never read any article with a poll in it since 2016, didn't read this one. It's truly pointless, you know. You can't poll a hostile population. The newsies and pollsters were on the left and so the people on the right wouldn't cooperate, and then we won. Surprise!

The polls close to the election predicted a popular vote win for 4 to 6 percent for Hillary. She won the popular vote by 2.1%. Seems that the polls were not that far off. The polls do not predict the outcome of the EC vote, as it would be impossible for a national poll to do so.

Actually, the polls did try to predict the EC. They predicted the popular vote in each state. The predicted wrong in states like Wisconsin and Penssylvania.

Out of 50 states, Wisconsin was the only one in which the polls were wrong. Well within the 95% expected accuracy within a margin of error. And Pennsylvania was not wrong. The polls there showed Hillary would win by 1.9 points and she lost by 0.7 points, within the margin of error.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - Pennsylvania: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein

In other words, they were wrong.