Poll: Election Day, November 7, 2006

Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.

Democrats will...

Poll ended at Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:08 pm

win the House and Senate
1
11%
win the House but narrowly miss winning the Senate
7
78%
want to move to Canada
1
11%
 
Total votes: 9

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Postby David R. Modny » Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:04 am

For the love of Jefferson Smith...hang on Montana Jonny...hang on.

User avatar
Jeff T.
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Location: Blueberry Hill

A Loud Message for Bush - from the NY Times this morning

Postby Jeff T. » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:10 am

By ROBIN TONER
Published: November 8, 2006
Everything is different now for President Bush. The era of one-party Republican rule in Washington ended with a crash in yesterday’s midterm elections, putting a proudly unyielding president on notice that the voters want change, especially on the war in Iraq.

Mr. Bush now confronts the first Democratic majority in the House in 12 years and a significantly bigger Democratic caucus in the Senate that were largely elected on the promise to act as a strong check on his administration. Almost any major initiative in his final two years in office will now, like it or not, have to be bipartisan to some degree.

For six years, Mr. Bush has often governed, and almost always campaigned, with his attention focused on his conservative base. But yesterday’s voting showed the limits of those politics, as practiced — and many thought perfected — by Mr. Bush and his chief political adviser, Karl Rove.

In the bellwether states of Ohio and Pennsylvania, two Republican senators, both members of the legendary freshman class of 1994, were defeated by large margins. Across the Northeast, Republican moderates were barely surviving or, like Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, falling to Democrats who had argued that they were simply too close to a conservative president.

Most critically, perhaps, Republicans lost the political center on the Iraq war, according to national exit polls. Voters who identified themselves as independents broke strongly for the Democrats, the exit polls showed, as did those who described themselves as moderates.

Senator Olympia J. Snowe, a Maine Republican who was re-elected yesterday, said that with the election’s results, the administration’s Iraq policy “has to change.”

“It absolutely has to change,” Ms. Snowe said. “And that message should have been conveyed by the administration much sooner.”

Mr. Bush’s allies could argue that history was working against Republicans, that in a president’s sixth year in office, his party was ripe for big losses. They could also argue that Congressional Republicans brought their own vulnerabilities and scandals to the table. But this was a nationalized election, and Mr. Bush and Iraq were at the center of it.

Nearly 4 in 10 voters said they saw their ballot as a vote against Mr. Bush, about twice as many as those who said they had cast their ballots for him. It was a remarkable turnaround for a president who just two years ago emerged triumphant from his re-election campaign, declaring that he had earned political capital and intended to spend it.

That capital slowly drained away with an ill-fated fight on Social Security, a furor over the government’s mishandling of Hurricane Katrina, an aggressive intervention for conservative causes like the right-to-die case of Terri Schiavo, and, more than anything, pollsters said, the war in Iraq. In the final days of the campaign, Mr. Bush’s travels to some of the most Republican and least competitive regions in the country were a portrait of his political isolation.

Geoffrey Garin, a Democratic pollster, said, “An important feature of this election, with implications for 2008, is that the center of the electorate clearly doesn’t like to be ignored in an era of base politics. The Republicans played to the base at their great peril among the middle.”

After a campaign that only escalated the tension between Mr. Bush and Congressional Democrats, the president will now face overwhelming pressure to take a more conciliatory approach. For example, he will be under increasing pressure to re-evaluate his support for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, which he so publicly restated in the closing days of the campaign.

Bruce Buchanan, a political scientist at the University of Texas at Austin, said Mr. Bush certainly had the capability to practice more bipartisan politics; he governed that way often in Texas, and also occasionally in Washington, on legislation like the No Child Left Behind Act.

Other analysts pointed out that on issues like energy and immigration, Mr. Bush can find common ground with many Democrats. Vin Weber, a former Republican congressman and lobbyist who is close to the administration, said, “They’ll be able to pivot quite easily on this and adapt to political reality.”

But much of Mr. Bush’s domestic agenda, which was not exactly gliding through the current Congress, will face even tougher prospects now. That includes any effort to overhaul entitlement programs like Social Security, already heavily shadowed by his failed effort to push through private investment accounts for Social Security in 2005, as well as any effort to extend all of his tax cuts, which Democrats say were heavily skewed to the most affluent.

Moreover, with a greater Democratic presence in the Senate, Mr. Bush will have far less latitude in his judicial nominees.

Even if Mr. Bush makes the grand gestures, Democrats heading into the 2008 presidential campaign may not be in the mood to reciprocate. Still, on Iraq, some change is almost inevitable, analysts say.

There is already a vehicle for a new bipartisanship, experts noted. A commission headed by James A. Baker III, former secretary of state, and Lee H. Hamilton, former Democratic representative from Indiana, is exploring policy alternatives for Iraq and is expected to make recommendations this winter.

House Democratic leaders have already indicated that they will not cut off financing for the war; in many ways, their greatest power will be their ability to investigate, hold hearings and provide the oversight that they asserted was so lacking in recent years.

Experts point out that Mr. Bush is hardly the first president to confront a House controlled by the opposition; since World War II, some form of divided government has been the norm. President Bill Clinton, through a combination of negotiation, brinksmanship and bluffs, produced major legislation with the Republican Congress after 1994, including an overhaul of the welfare system and a huge balanced budget law.

Mr. Bush could try to do the same. But first he would have to abandon the political worldview that he drew, by many accounts, from his father’s defeat — to never cross his base. President George H. W. Bush lost conservatives when he broke his “no new taxes pledge.”

The younger Bush has rarely made that mistake. His circle had clearly hoped that the conservative base would come through in the end, saving the Republican majority even in the face of an unpopular war. But this time, it was not enough.

User avatar
MK
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:24 pm
Location: North America

Postby MK » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:59 am

SUCK IT JUNIOR!
"When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war." – Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Neither slave nor tyrant." - Basque motto

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:59 am

A slightly mixed bag here in WI. Dems retained the governorship (the first time a Dem's been re-elected here in 32 years, apparently), won back the State Senate, and made some Congressional gains, but lost the AG (incumbent Dem lost in the primary) by fewer than 10,000 votes out of over 2 million, and anti-gay marriage (state constitutional amendment) and death penalty (advisory) referenda passed.

Possibly most sweet is the Congressional seat for Green Bay. It had been held for 8 years by Republican Mark Green, but as he was running for Governor, he didn't seek re-election. The Republican candidate was John Gard, speaker of the Assembly. Definition of right-wing nutjob. He lost by over 6,000 votes...
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:28 am

Here in KY, Republican Anne Northup (Louisville area) was defeated. She's a Republican in Name Only, but apparently dissatisfaction with BushCo in Louisville was high enough that she lost based on party affiliation.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

Bennett Cerf
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm

Postby Bennett Cerf » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:28 am

Image

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:39 pm

Perhaps my favorite moment of the night (I watched Wolf's beard) was when Lou Dobbs was talking to Ken Mehlman, about the time that it was becoming obvious that it was a very bad night to be a Republican. Mehlman said something about commenting on the Northup race "when the real numbers come in" or something like that (100% of the precincts had reported at that point). Then he launched into an extended diatribe about how Steele was going to "make history" in Maryland. He never really got to the point where explained exactly *how* Steele was going to "make history" (I assume it had something to do with race), but he seemed very insistent about it.

Of course, that race had already been called with Steele losing.

The GOP got a big dose of reality-based medicine last night.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Postby David R. Modny » Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:07 pm

12:30pm - Tester declared winner in Montana.

1:00pm - Rumsfeld resigns

1:00pm - Virginia looking good with a recount most likely coming.



Amazing.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:16 pm

If the two currently undecided Georgia House races go Dem, the Democrats will have lost *nothing* in this election. No House seats, no Senate seats, no governorships. That would be incredible.

If Webb prevails and the Dems win the Senate, I will be astonished but happy.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Xenu
Sellout
Posts: 2209
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:15 pm

Postby Xenu » Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:18 pm

The current spin from Mehlman seems to be "oh, this *always* happens in midterm elections." Hah! Where're those rosy predictions now?

The milquetoast bipartisan talk is already beginning. Fuck. So much for progressivism.
-------------
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:27 pm

Me and a bunch of Democrats are going to go break into someone's house, turn their son gay, force their daughter to have an abortion, burn their Bible, and finally steal their SUV and send it to Osama.

The Republicans were right all along! Too late now! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Postby David R. Modny » Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:45 pm

Xenu wrote:The milquetoast bipartisan talk is already beginning. Fuck. So much for progressivism.


If anything, the Dems have learned -- most notably from the '94 Pub takeover and beyond -- that one can't run around screaming about a "partisan revolution" without scaring the shit out of the electorate.

They have to play this skillfully. Personally, I have all the confidence in Nancy Pelosi standing up for the interests of the left when necessary (i.e. health-care reform, wage and tax equity). Yet, still being able to work with her increasingly moderate, and sometimes right-leaning, new Dem posse on the so-called wedge issues. Change comes slowly...sometimes painfully slow.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:26 pm

IMO, the media is making too much of the "social conservative Democrats" in their quest to convince us that anything to the left of Joe Lieberman is "the loony fringe."

Pro-life and anti-gay marriage Dems are nothing new. Heck, Harry Reid is pro-life. The important thing is that if the Dems run Congress, those sorts of bills are a lot less likely to make it to a vote in the first place.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

Aftermath
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:48 pm

Postby Aftermath » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:41 pm

Rspaight wrote:If Webb prevails and the Dems win the Senate, I will be astonished but happy.


No joke. An amazing turn of events so far, esp. with the Rumsfeld bonus.

Here in Florida, voters added some Dem seats to the state house and senate, but approved a theme park a mile from my little hamlet. Fuck.

User avatar
Beatlesfan03
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 11:45 pm
Location: Another red state :(

Postby Beatlesfan03 » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:40 pm

Wow.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061109/ap_ ... ection_rdp

Dems complete election sweep of Congress

By LIZ SIDOTI
5 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Democrats completed an improbable double-barreled election sweep of Congress on Wednesday, taking control of the Senate with a victory in Virginia as they padded their day-old majority in the House.

Jim Webb's victory over Sen. George Allen (news, bio, voting record) in Virginia assured Democrats of 51 seats when the Senate convenes in January. That marked a gain of six in midterm elections in which the war in Iraq and President Bush were major issues.

Earlier, State Sen. Jon Tester triumphed over Republican Sen. Conrad Burns (news, bio, voting record) in a long, late count in Montana.

With a handful of House races too close to call, Democrats had gained 28 seats, enough to regain the majority after 12 years of Republican rule and place Rep. Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) of California in line to become the first female speaker in history.

"It was a thumping," Bush conceded at the White House. "It's clear the Democrat Party had a good night."

Allen's campaign issued a statement noting that state officials are conducting a canvass of the votes cast in Tuesday's balloting.

"At the conclusion of those efforts, Senator George Allen plans to make a statement regarding the outcome," it said.

The Senate had teetered at 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans for most of Wednesday, with Virginia hanging in the balance. The Democratic total includes two independents, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who vote with the party. Webb's victory ended Republican hopes of eking out a 50-50 split, with Vice President Dick Cheney wielding tie-breaking authority.

The Associated Press contacted election officials in all 134 localities where voting occurred, obtaining updated numbers Wednesday. About half the localities said they had completed their postelection canvassing and nearly all had counted outstanding absentees. Most were expected to be finished by Friday.

The new AP count showed Webb with 1,172,538 votes and Allen with 1,165,302, a difference of 7,236. Virginia has had two statewide vote recounts in modern history, but both resulted in vote changes of no more than a few hundred votes.

It had been clear for weeks leading up to the election that Democrats were strongly positioned to challenge Republicans for House control.

But Democrats began the year with fewer seats than at any time since Herbert Hoover occupied the White House. Even the party leader, Sen. Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record) of Nevada, mused aloud at one point that it might take a miracle to capture Senate control.

Webb's win capped a banner election year for Democrats, who benefited from the voters' desire issue a searing rebuke of the status quo.

The president, who spoke of spending his political capital after his successful re-election two years ago, acknowledged, "As the head of the Republican Party, I share a large part of the responsibility."

With power on Capitol Hill tilting, Bush faced the reality of at least half of Congress in the opposition's hands for the final two years of his presidency. He announced that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld would step down as Democrats have demanded.

The war in Iraq, scandals in Congress and declining support for Bush and Republicans on Capitol Hill defined the battle for House and Senate control, with the public embracing the Democrats' call for change to end a decade of one-party rule in Washington.

"This new Democratic majority has heard the voices of the American people," said Pelosi, the California Democrat in line to become the nation's first female House speaker, adding that Americans placed their trust in Democrats. "We will honor that trust. We will not disappoint."

With the GOP booted from power, lame-duck Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., announced he will not run for leader of House Republicans when Democrats take control in January.

"Obviously I wish my party had won," Hastert said in a statement that added he intends to return to the "full-time task" of representing his Illinois constituents.
Craig