Quote:Overall, the Democrats will have an advantage in 2008 in having to defend far fewer seats than the Republicans. Only twelve seats held by Democrats will be up compared to 22 for Republicans. And several of those Republicans were elected during the peculiar post-9/11 circumstances of the 2002 election, when President Bush used his immense popularity and the threat of a terrorist attack to boost the chances of several Republican underdogs.

If the Republicans have anything going for them, it is that 17 of those 22 seats are in states that Bush won in 2004. Most of these states--for instance, Alaska, Alabama, and Wyoming--are likely to support the Republican presidential candidate next year, which should help Republican candidates lower on the ballot. Still, Democrats are poised to pick up more seats than Republicans.

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w070827&s=judis083107

Oklahoma will put Repubs back in spare one seat held by a democrat, but thats little dixie.

I'd be interested in seeing how a democratically controlled congress with an 18% approval rating can generate a landslide for dems.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:I'd be interested in seeing how a democratically controlled congress with an 18% approval rating can generate a landslide for dems.

Because even with a low approval rating, Democrats are polling better than Republicans. In many polls, they are leading by double digits.

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong2008.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_dem.htm

http://www.pollingreport.com/congress.htm#misc

The Democrats may not be polling well, but the Republicans numbers are much, much lower.

You add more weight to polls than I do. And I'm not sure what logic tells you 7% is "much much lower".

You also didn't think critically about what the polling numbers said either. On one hand you have 7% more saying they'll vote Dem over republican, yet you've got 7% more say it's "time for a change" when asked if they'll vote for the person in office now. Well dems control the majority of seats so clearly there's a disconnect wouldn't you say?

The republicans aren't in power now. The only reason they are polling worse now is because Bush is polling low and drags the numbers down. However Bush isn't on the ticket in '08, though no doubt the dems will run against him anyway.

The dems will not be able to put together a "landslide" unless they actually come up with an agenda to present to the american people or unless the ticket they put together is so overwhelmingly popular it pulls in seats on its coat tails. I don't see anyone running right now that does that for them.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:You add more weight to polls than I do. And I'm not sure what logic tells you 7% is "much much lower".

You also didn't think critically about what the polling numbers said either. On one hand you have 7% more saying they'll vote Dem over republican, yet you've got 7% more say it's "time for a change" when asked if they'll vote for the person in office now. Well dems control the majority of seats so clearly there's a disconnect wouldn't you say?

The republicans aren't in power now. The only reason they are polling worse now is because Bush is polling low and drags the numbers down. However Bush isn't on the ticket in '08, though no doubt the dems will run against him anyway.

The dems will not be able to put together a "landslide" unless they actually come up with an agenda to present to the american people or unless the ticket they put together is so overwhelmingly popular it pulls in seats on its coat tails. I don't see anyone running right now that does that for them.

The current leading candidate for the Republicans is Guiliani. He trails Hillary in almost every poll you can find. Fred Thompson may overtake Guiliani for the nomination, but Hillary is leading him as well.

It's tough for conservatives to admit it, but Dubya (along with the Congressional and Senate majorities he enjoyed) probably poisoned the well for Republicans for a while.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:The current leading candidate for the Republicans is Guiliani. He trails Hillary in almost every poll you can find.

Or not

Obama actually polls much better than Hillary against Rudy. Also don't forget Hillary highs disapproval ratings in the mid 4o's in some polls.

Quote:Fred Thompson may overtake Guiliani for the nomination, but Hillary is leading him as well.

That's because he's not been campaigning in full blown mode. Head to head polls right now don't mean anything when talking about the general.

Also remember the reason the dems were able to take back congress was because republicans stayed home in droves. Dems put Hillary on the ticket as their presidential nominee and they will flock to the polls.

Quote:It's tough for conservatives to admit it, but Dubya (along with the Congressional and Senate majorities he enjoyed) probably poisoned the well for Republicans for a while.

I actually agree with this. The only consolation we have is the dems are just as worthless.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:Or not

Obama actually polls much better than Hillary against Rudy. Also don't forget Hillary highs disapproval ratings in the mid 4o's in some polls.

Even your link shows Hillary leading in 3 of 5 polls, with the average margin still favoring her.

Quote:That's because he's not been campaigning in full blown mode. Head to head polls right now don't mean anything when talking about the general.

I doubt he builds that much momentum. He's been considered a non-declared candidate for months now. In fact, he may have waited too long to declare.

Quote:Also remember the reason the dems were able to take back congress was because republicans stayed home in droves. Dems put Hillary on the ticket as their presidential nominee and they will flock to the polls.

So they can vote for a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, adulterous Guiliani? No, they'll either stay home or vote third party.

Quote:I actually agree with this. The only consolation we have is the dems are just as worthless.

They're still better than Republicans. Every single day.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:

Ninerfan1 Wrote:You add more weight to polls than I do. And I'm not sure what logic tells you 7% is "much much lower".

You also didn't think critically about what the polling numbers said either. On one hand you have 7% more saying they'll vote Dem over republican, yet you've got 7% more say it's "time for a change" when asked if they'll vote for the person in office now. Well dems control the majority of seats so clearly there's a disconnect wouldn't you say?

The republicans aren't in power now. The only reason they are polling worse now is because Bush is polling low and drags the numbers down. However Bush isn't on the ticket in '08, though no doubt the dems will run against him anyway.

The dems will not be able to put together a "landslide" unless they actually come up with an agenda to present to the american people or unless the ticket they put together is so overwhelmingly popular it pulls in seats on its coat tails. I don't see anyone running right now that does that for them.

The current leading candidate for the Republicans is Guiliani. He trails Hillary in almost every poll you can find. Fred Thompson may overtake Guiliani for the nomination, but Hillary is leading him as well.

It's tough for conservatives to admit it, but Dubya (along with the Congressional and Senate majorities he enjoyed) probably poisoned the well for Republicans for a while.

Not tough for me to admit. Democrats have a great shot at winning everything in 08. That being said as usual Democrats are over confident and misread the polls and the situation. It has everything to do with the war and nothing to do with Democrat policies. It has always been amazing to me that Americans reject Democrat policies because they basically offer to give everything to people instead of them doing for themselves. I guess that is a credit to the American work ethic.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:Even your link shows Hillary leading in 3 of 5 polls, with the average margin still favoring her.

Yes it does. However I was clearly showing that "not every single poll you can find" puts her ahead. 3 compared to 2. That's hardly "nearly every single"

Quote:I doubt he builds that much momentum. He's been considered a non-declared candidate for months now. In fact, he may have waited too long to declare.

Of course you doubt that because you lack any and all ability to objectively look at the situation. We're a full 13 months out from the general election. Polls swing dramatically in the course of a year. Much to your dismay, the election isn't tomorrow.

Quote:So they can vote for a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, adulterous Guiliani? No, they'll either stay home or vote third party.

I believe it's safe to say I know a touch more about the republican base since I'm part of it. And if Hillary is the nominee, they'll still vote for Rudy. If nothing else because of his stance on national defense and the fact that he isn't Hillary.

Quote:They're still better than Republicans. Every single day.

LOL!! You go right on believing that hero.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:Yes it does. However I was clearly showing that "not every single poll you can find" puts her ahead. 3 compared to 2. That's hardly "nearly every single"

First, I said "almost every." That did not imply "all." Second, you used a smaller number of polls than I did, so your "3 compared to 2" is a weak example since you cherry picked the results to skew them in your favor.

Quote:Of course you doubt that because you lack any and all ability to objectively look at the situation. We're a full 13 months out from the general election. Polls swing dramatically in the course of a year. Much to your dismay, the election isn't tomorrow.

You claim polls can swing dramatically, but you also say that the people already have their minds made up about Hillary. You can't have it both ways.

Quote:I believe it's safe to say I know a touch more about the republican base since I'm part of it. And if Hillary is the nominee, they'll still vote for Rudy. If nothing else because of his stance on national defense and the fact that he isn't Hillary.

I believe it's safe to say there are some evangelicals out there that will either stay home or vote third party if their only choice for a Repubican candidate is a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, adulterous Guiliani. Unless, of course, they're full of crap about all that "family values" talk they've been spouting for years.

The real question is how many seats on both sides are open seats. Even in disatisfied years incumbents win somewhere around 90% of the time.

And it's likely that the evangelicals that Rudi turns off will be more than matched by the libertarian leaning Republicans & independents who have been increasingly marginalized by the growth of the big government moral majority wing of the Republican party lately.

the other Greg Childers Wrote:First, I said "almost every." That did not imply "all." Second, you used a smaller number of polls than I did, so your "3 compared to 2" is a weak example since you cherry picked the results to skew them in your favor.

Yeah I didn't. I used the polls that the majority of people look to. I'm sorry I didn't pull an internet poll off of democratic underground for you.

Quote:You claim polls can swing dramatically, but you also say that the people already have their minds made up about Hillary. You can't have it both ways.

I would invite you to point out where I said people have already made up their minds about Hillary. I have not. So once again, you're lying and twisting my words because, well you just aren't capable of anything else.

What I said is that Hillary has huge negatives in polls, over 40% in most. She is a lightening rod. That's difficult to overcome. That was my point.

Quote:I believe it's safe to say there are some evangelicals out there that will either stay home or vote third party if their only choice for a Repubican candidate is a pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, adulterous Guiliani.

Yes some will. That's a fact. However there are a number of conservatives that aren't evangelical. And if the choice is Hillary our Rudy for them, they'll take Rudy every time. Some will vote 3rd party. However jh brings up a good point. Rudy is attractive to libertarian voters as well.

The fact of the matter is, it's a very long way til 2008 and a lot can happen. So don't uncork your $5 bottle of champagne just yet junior.

Ninerfan1 Wrote:Yeah I didn't. I used the polls that the majority of people look to. I'm sorry I didn't pull an internet poll off of democratic underground for you.

Again, you fabricate what you cannot challenge. I never use Democratic sources in debate. Polling report, which I do use, pulls together polls from many different sources, some of which lean left and some of which lean right.

Making blatantly false statements which can so easily be disproven really hurts your case. Maybe you should try, oh I don't know, real information and not self-invented fiction?

Quote:I would invite you to point out where I said people have already made up their minds about Hillary. I have not. So once again, you're lying and twisting my words because, well you just aren't capable of anything else.

What I said is that Hillary has huge negatives in polls, over 40% in most. She is a lightening rod. That's difficult to overcome. That was my point.

Dubya had a sub-50% approval rating but somehow managed to retain office. She's polling a lot better than he was in 2004. The turnout issue won't help the Republicans as much as you think, because Democrats will likely turn out in record numbers as well just to throw off the yoke of Republicans.

Quote:Yes some will. That's a fact. However there are a number of conservatives that aren't evangelical. And if the choice is Hillary our Rudy for them, they'll take Rudy every time. Some will vote 3rd party. However jh brings up a good point. Rudy is attractive to libertarian voters as well.

If you're counting on libertarians to tip the balance, then you've already lost. Plus, Hillary is polling better with independents than any Republican candidate.

Quote:The fact of the matter is, it's a very long way til 2008 and a lot can happen. So don't uncork your $5 bottle of champagne just yet junior.

It is a long way until the election. Don't be so sure that the Republicans won't screw it up further and lose even more seats than I predicted.