Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congress

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
WASHINGTON - In an ominous election-year sign for Republicans, Americans are leaning sharply toward wanting Democrats to take control of Congress, an AP-Ipsos poll finds. Democrats are favored 49 percent to 36 percent.

ADVERTISEMENT

The poll was taken this week as Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to tax evasion, fraud and corruption charges and agreed to aid a federal investigation of members of Congress and other government officials.

President Bush's job approval remains low — 40 percent in the AP-Ipsos poll. About as many approve of his handling of Iraq, where violence against Iraqis and U.S. troops has been surging.

"I don't think anyone is hitting the panic button," said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman. "But there is an acute recognition of the grim environment that both parties are operating in."

"If the Democrats had any leadership or any message, they could be poised for a good year," Bond said. "But in the absence of that, they have not been able to capitalize on Republican woes. Because of the size of the GOP majority, Democrats have to run the board, and I don't see that happening."

The public's unease with Republican leadership in the White House and Congress creates a favorable environment for Democrats, said Democratic consultant Dane Strother.

"The problem is you don't vote for a party," Strother said. "You're voting for a member of Congress. And we're a year away."

About a third of the public, 34 percent, approves of the job Congress is doing, and nearly twice as many, 63 percent, disapprove, according to the poll of 1,001 adults taken Jan. 3-5. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points. Public opinion of both Democrats and Republicans in Congress has been mixed, recent polling found.

"Neither one of the parties has done a very good job so far," said Cristal Mills, a political independent from Los Angeles. "They get away with murder, they get paid to pass certain things. It's the good ol' boy syndrome."

In the Senate, 33 seats will be on the ballot in November, 17 of them currently in Democratic hands, 15 controlled by Republicans, and one held by Sen. James Jeffords, a Vermont independent. Democrats now have 44 Senate seats, and need to pick up seven to gain a majority, six if Vermont independent Bernie Sanders replaces Jeffords.

All 435 House seats are on the ballot this fall, and Democrats need to gain at least 15 to become the majority party and take control of the House.

While many House races are noncompetitive, Republican strategists fear that fallout from the Abramoff scandal will give Democrats fresh opportunity for gains. But they dismiss suggestions that Democrats could take control of the House.

Republicans became the dominant party in the House in 1994, when the GOP picked up more than 50 seats held by Democrats. In that midterm election, Democrats won four open seats that previously were held by the GOP.

Carl Forti, a spokesman for the GOP's congressional campaign committee, said about 30 House seats are competitive this year, compared with more than 100 a dozen years ago. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (news, bio, voting record) of Illinois, who heads the Democrats' campaign efforts, put the competitive number in 2006 at 42, and he suggested ongoing scandals improve Democratic recruitment of candidates by "making the environment more conducive. It helps move them along in the process."

Some people say they are leaning toward giving Democrats control of Congress because they want to see changes.

"I just don't like the direction our country is going in," said Steve Brown, a political independent from Olympia, Wash. "I think a balance of power would be beneficial right now."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060107/ap_on_go_co/politics_ap_poll

And this was done by a Republican firm. Must be a bad sign for Bush. :D
 

I think not

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 12, 2005
10,506
33
48
The Evil Empire
Re: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

 

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
Re: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

So hopefully some reins will be put on Bush on whatever policy he wishes to think of that God told him to enact.

Now Bush is either a Prophet or either an insane nut-job if he can hear god talk to him.
 

zoofer

Council Member
Dec 31, 2005
1,274
2
38
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

I doubt America wants the cut 'n run party to control congress.

They need to purge the crackers first. Kennedy, Dean, Pelosi, Murtha, Schumer, Reid, Fidel Castro..
 

Texas1

Electoral Member
Sep 23, 2005
112
0
16
Re: RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Co

zoofer said:
I doubt America wants the cut 'n run party to control congress.

They need to purge the crackers first. Kennedy, Dean, Pelosi, Murtha, Schumer, Reid, Fidel Castro..

You forgot Kerry and Clinton.
 

karra

Ranter
Jan 3, 2006
158
3
18
here, there, and everywher
Re: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

It' going to be fun watching Demonrats scurry from the site of their own ground-zero with regard to Alito.

Why, I understand the Dems star witness against Alito during next weeks hearings has adopted the same color of trousers issued the French army - and is blazing his own trail while evacuating down his leg - good to know he's in good company with the brief list below. . . .

As usual, the Democrats will look particularly partisan, cheap and unethical (how can that be you ask?) when thier debacle is exposed and they've finished shooting each other in the pieds. . . .
 

zoofer

Council Member
Dec 31, 2005
1,274
2
38
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

I heard a blip on the noos that the High Court Judges want in on the discussions. They are perturbed by the Dems dissing Alito who is eminently more suited to be on the Supreme Court than most of themselves.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Judicial Conventions

Wouldn't it be considered "inappropriate" for Justices to enter into a discussion or debate for possible future Justice appointments? That would seem to "cross the line," in my opinion, between the independent and impartial affairs of the Judiciary and the politicized affairs of the Executive.
 

zoofer

Council Member
Dec 31, 2005
1,274
2
38
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

I never caught the full report. May be in tomorrow's papers.

I suspect the Dem slurs on Alito are carrying over to the regular Judges and they want them to smarten up.
.
 

karra

Ranter
Jan 3, 2006
158
3
18
here, there, and everywher
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

The Supremes have never before stood as one to contended this rabid pack of dogs - but they are in for a surprise as their star witness/accusor has no credibity having contributed to Kerry.

So, when the bell tolls for thee - watch the scurry as adult men and woeman try to find the missing star witness. . . . There could be great entertainment value watching these proceeding, , , ,
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

Few Senate and House seats are competitive.
Normally the incumbent wins.

The Congressional elections will not be a sea change.

More likely it will be a little nibbling change.

One thing I'd like to see the Democratic Party do
and that is follow the party rules procedure
Newt Gingrich, that hated Republican, do to freshen
up the Republicans.

He inaugurated term limits for committee chairmans.

But this only applies to the Republicans.

The Democrats do not force their octogenarians out
of a Committee Chairmanship. Their chairmans only
leave upon voluntary resignation or death.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

Keep in mind the country is pretty evenly
divided, and both recent Presidential elections
showed more votes on both sides than ever before
and the records keep getting broken.

Gore, the electoral college loser, won more votes than Clinton each time Clinton ran.

Bush, the electoral college winner, but popular
vote loser, won more votes than Clinton each time
Clinton ran.

Kerry won more votes than did Gore.

And Bush won even more votes in the popular vote
than all of them this past election.

But still the country is roughly evenly divided.

So I don't think it's a matter of incompetence
of getting or not getting votes.

I guess incompetence for me lies in not getting
a leader that really has the charisma and the
depth of philosophy to unite both sides of this
divide.
 

Finder

House Member
Dec 18, 2005
3,786
0
36
Toronto
www.mytimenow.net
Re: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

you gotta love the electoral collage... or hate it... or just be confused by it.

We could have a whole new topic on the electoral collage. But anyhow there is hope. There are many seats which are too close to really call. All be it 2 or 3 dozen seats. If the Dems win them all (doubtful) we could see the Congress going into the Democrats hand.

Besides I think Congress should be the Democrats. I mean when you look at how the government was made, the Democrats fit the philophy behind the congress well and the Republicans the Senate. *shrugs*
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Electoral College

I know very little about how the Electoral College works. It seems to me a strange, exotic and mysterious institution, cloaked in veils of secrecy — simply because I've never come across an article describing how it works. :lol:

It is as unknown to me as Her Majesty's Privy Council might be to another.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Congre

The electoral college involves the WINNER TAKE
ALL SYSTEM.

That means, who ever wins the most votes,
the biggest plurality, (not necessarily a true majority)
wins all the electoral votes of that state.

In Wyoming it would mean 3 votes.
This is based on 2 Senators and 1 congressman.

In Pennsylvania it would mean 21 votes.

That's the main idea, sans some exceptions in
some states.

Some states require the elector to follow the
will of the people, and some don't. Some provide
for various penalties if the elector does not
follow the popular vote. Some states leave it
to the idea of tradition: That's what You the elector
are supposed to do.

Two states, Maine and Nebraska, have a combination
of Winner takes all and proportional, whereby
Winner Takes 2 elector votes and the loser gets 1
elector vote.
 

Finder

House Member
Dec 18, 2005
3,786
0
36
Toronto
www.mytimenow.net
Re: RE: Democratc will soundly defeat Republicans in Next Co

jimmoyer said:
The electoral college involves the WINNER TAKE
ALL SYSTEM.

That means, who ever wins the most votes,
the biggest plurality, (not necessarily a true majority)
wins all the electoral votes of that state.

In Wyoming it would mean 3 votes.
This is based on 2 Senators and 1 congressman.

In Pennsylvania it would mean 21 votes.

That's the main idea, sans some exceptions in
some states.

Some states require the elector to follow the
will of the people, and some don't. Some provide
for various penalties if the elector does not
follow the popular vote. Some states leave it
to the idea of tradition: That's what You the elector
are supposed to do.

Two states, Maine and Nebraska, have a combination
of Winner takes all and proportional, whereby
Winner Takes 2 elector votes and the loser gets 1
elector vote.

Well it is best to read history on this one. Why the founding fathers, BELIEVED this system to be best. It's a little disappointing, but I'll let people form there own opinions on that one.

Though as a studier of the Old Roman System, you have to love how true the american founding fathers moduled the US government after that of the Roman government.