|
|
 Rank: King  Joined: 8/6/2009 Posts: 2,077
|
The bottom line: Democrats 8 Republicans 2 Independents 1
|
|
|
 Rank: Queen  Joined: 7/15/2002 Posts: 676
|
Funny how things change....
When bush was at 50% it showed everyone hated him.
When Obama is at 50% it shows he is still popular.
As for Dede she is NOT a typical republican she is a far left republican, a Dem in reps clothing.
She showed that by endorsing the DEM when she dropped out of the race.
Another funny thing, when the dems have the moderates and the far left who are fighting it out even today that is somehow a good thing. When the reps have the moderates and what you folks like to call the far right well heck! that means the reps are falling apart!
I love the double standard you folks show in ALL things.
People thought that hopey changey meant good things, The media didnt investigate Obamas marxism, now it is slowly dawning on people that hopey changey means tearing down all that is good and known about this country and putting in place marxism and turning this into a south american style banana republic.
40% identify themselves as conservative, only 20% identify themselves as liberals, once they all wake up and find out just how far left dear leader is they will run, not walk away from him.
I DO think 2010 is not going to be a good year for the dems, that is if they still allow us the right to vote by then.
|
|
|
Rank: King  Joined: 8/5/2009 Posts: 2,760 Location: lost in state of complete confusion
|
ninagay wrote:...I have NO idea if the federal congressional majority has changed with this election... ninagay, I find your abysmal lack of information to be shocking, and that you would even venture to post on a subject area with this total 'haven't got a clue, don't know and don't care to find out' attitude, simply dumbfounding.
The only good thing about this is, at least you were honest.ninagay wrote:...This is a big LOSS for GOP in that community; and represents the biggest in money and personality from the ultra right; Sarah Palin, Fred Thompson and others put huge support behind [R]Hoffman... Hoffman was not a (R )-Republican and was not on any ballot as a Republican, and according to Wikipedia, has never run for any office as a Republican. In fact, in politics, Hoffamn was a completely unknown entity who had next-to-nothing to spend on his campaign until the last minute.
Hoffmans 'party' was Conservative and he could be labeled as such with (C) or as (i ), small 'i', often used to indicate a member of a small, splinter third party, often a 'party' organized just for one person's candidacy. But considering my earlier quote of yours, it is not surprising that you don't know the difference between a person running on the Republican ticket and a third-party candidate.
This certainly is a ‘Republican Sweep’. In every election considered to be important enough for national news coverage, even by the extremely left-wing MSM, not one single candidate running under the Republican label was defeated, not even in NY 23, and there is no way to know how many more would have been swayed to vote for Hoffman if he would have been on the Republican ticket.
With the Rino pulling out too late to re-print paper ballots and too late to re-program electronic voting machines, I would very much like to know just what happened to the actual ballots in NY 23.
In every vote, in every election, and among every party, there is a percentage of the electorate who will just blindly vote for the party they have voted for all of their lives, and probably the party their parents voted for. These ‘blind allegiance’ voters who have always voted for a Democrat, voted for Owens, no problem… but what about those with ‘blind allegiance’ to the Republican Party?
Did they just skip that contest on their ballot?... Or did they stay home?... Or was it more likely that they still voted Republican and had that contest voided and their ballot was not even counted at all?
I’d sure like to know how many NY-23 ballots were considered ‘spoiled’ and not even counted because they still voted for the rino-woman who was still listed as a Republican, and how the election would have turned out if Hoffman was under the Republican banner and he, thereby, would have received those ‘Republican-blind allegiance’ votes, just as Owens did receive all of the ‘Democrat-blind allegiance votes.
Yes, with having sponsored this Rino, the Republicans in northern NY state, have certainly taken a great fall, from a very high place....
"But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns.
Don't bother, they're here.
Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer,
Losing my timing this late
In my career?
...
But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns.
Don't bother, they're here.
...
Well, maybe next year."
|
|
|
Rank: King  Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
nova wrote:Funny how things change....
When bush was at 50% it showed everyone hated him.
When Obama is at 50% it shows he is still popular.
As for Dede she is NOT a typical republican she is a far left republican, a Dem in reps clothing.
She showed that by endorsing the DEM when she dropped out of the race.
Another funny thing, when the dems have the moderates and the far left who are fighting it out even today that is somehow a good thing. When the reps have the moderates and what you folks like to call the far right well heck! that means the reps are falling apart!
I love the double standard you folks show in ALL things.
People thought that hopey changey meant good things, The media didnt investigate Obamas marxism, now it is slowly dawning on people that hopey changey means tearing down all that is good and known about this country and putting in place marxism and turning this into a south american style banana republic.
40% identify themselves as conservative, only 20% identify themselves as liberals, once they all wake up and find out just how far left dear leader is they will run, not walk away from him.
I DO think 2010 is not going to be a good year for the dems, that is if they still allow us the right to vote by then.
I don't recall "everyone hating BUsh" with a 50% rating. Many of us did, yes. But I think you are fudging with perception. His approval rating didn't stay below 50% until after his second term election, then nosedived permanently. When you have a 50% approval rating, half the people hate you. You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
hartman79 wrote:Quote:Most people have the common sense to know he can't fix the problems in a few months, but he's on the clock. Time will tell.
You say he can't "fix" in a "few months"........ Aggie, it has gotten worse. Never in the history of our country do we have the national debt that we now have.
Never in the history of our country have we had such a government take-over.....banks, car industry, now pushing Obamacare. This country is OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE.........not OF THE GOVERNMENT - BY THE GOVERNMENT. An outside observer would compare us to a dictatorship country. I believe the National Debt was about $1.4 trillion when Bush left office....and it was going to go up whether he had a year left of his term or not. I believe the debt now (last I heard) was at $1.6 Trillion. Considering the stimulus bill, you do the math on "how much was spent". I think it's over-exaggerated on the spending rate. And if you think it's bad now, you would have been crapping in your pants at what the economic situation would have been without any Stimulus. Yes it's bad. It could have been worse. But everything but unemployment is turning around. You are just going to have to have more patience for the results. That's just how it is. The last serious economic downturn in 2001, it took 2 years for jobs to rebound. This downturn was much worse....isn't it reasonable for it to take longer than the 2001 episode????? You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King  Joined: 12/9/2003 Posts: 1,829
|
Good morning Aggie!
Good for you...50% is indeed half of whatever is being counted.
Remember that this election was decided with only a little over half the population voting for our current President.
That still means that nearly half of the population did not vote for him.
An approval rating does not necessarily mean that those who do not approve of you, actually hate you.
There are many reasons why folks may not approve someone.
Hating them is not the only option.
Anyone who wishes to use this material in any way that they see fit, is welcome to do so.
|
|
|
 Rank: Rook  Joined: 6/1/2006 Posts: 325
|
Someone ought to tell Joliet that their escapees work for the GOV,now
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
henriettafw wrote:Good morning Aggie!
Good for you...50% is indeed half of whatever is being counted.
Remember that this election was decided with only a little over half the population voting for our current President.
That still means that nearly half of the population did not vote for him.
An approval rating does not necessarily mean that those who do not approve of you, actually hate you.
There are many reasons why folks may not approve someone.
Hating them is not the only option.
Anyone who wishes to use this material in any way that they see fit, is welcome to do so. I think you'll find those figures to be very much in line with past elections. Excluding Bush's first term, where the majority voted for Gore, but he still lost. You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 12/9/2003 Posts: 1,829
|
BRAVO WChan!
That is a very astute observation.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 8/6/2009 Posts: 2,077
|
MLawson--Wrong-- Democrat John Garamendi (CA-10) easily won election in this right-center California district. First off, the election was held because Rep. Ellen Tauscher, the former district representative, was brought into the Obama Administration to serve as the Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security. Not only in Garamendi a Democrat, he is a LIBERAL.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 12/9/2003 Posts: 1,829
|
As if we don't have enough of those folks here in California already!
Any more of the same and our chances of ever recovering our economy go from slim to none!
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
nova wrote:Funny how things change....
When bush was at 50% it showed everyone hated him.
When Obama is at 50% it shows he is still popular.
As for Dede she is NOT a typical republican she is a far left republican, a Dem in reps clothing.
She showed that by endorsing the DEM when she dropped out of the race.
Another funny thing, when the dems have the moderates and the far left who are fighting it out even today that is somehow a good thing. When the reps have the moderates and what you folks like to call the far right well heck! that means the reps are falling apart!
I love the double standard you folks show in ALL things.
People thought that hopey changey meant good things, The media didnt investigate Obamas marxism, now it is slowly dawning on people that hopey changey means tearing down all that is good and known about this country and putting in place marxism and turning this into a south american style banana republic.
40% identify themselves as conservative, only 20% identify themselves as liberals, once they all wake up and find out just how far left dear leader is they will run, not walk away from him.
I DO think 2010 is not going to be a good year for the dems, that is if they still allow us the right to vote by then.
The thing is, MOST people, BY FAR call themselves "MODERATE". Many of you conveniently leave out that group to beef up your "conservative" label. The "liberal" label is at 20%, and that should be thought of as a good thing, as that is the "extreme" left. Most on the left are not extreme. Looks like twice as many on the right know they are extreme. You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 12/9/2003 Posts: 1,829
|
OK Aggie, please post the results of any poll that shows what percentage of Americans declare themselves to be MODERATE....
When it comes to extremes, a closer examination of the folks who are pushing that health care bill through would reveal a considerable number of folks on that side.
Maybe the conservatives are HONEST about their stand on things, instead of extreme....
Note: anybody who wishes to use this user or profile in any data collection for any project or research is hereby invited to help yourself to whatever you need. Just E-mail me if you need more information.
|
|
|
Rank: King  Joined: 9/30/2009 Posts: 2,940
|
After reading the responses by the lefties in this thread it is a perfect example of how the left redefine "moderate" in order to set the boundries of what moderate means.
On social issues Scazzafava supports gay marriage. To support gay marriage when most states have voted down gay marriage rights at the ballot box and the only states that have legalized it are states that have used their legislative branch or courts to do so, would that be considered the views of a moderate?
Scozzafava on fiscal issues, as a state assemblywoman voted for massive tax increases, Democratic budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package — which every House Republican voted against. Would that be considered the stand of a moderate?
The answer is no! The reason the lefties like to call her a moderate is to make anyone right of her views look extreme and the leftists look more moderate,
Scozzafava is no moderate. Her record proves such.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
vesper wrote:After reading the responses by the lefties in this thread it is a perfect example of how the left redefine "moderate" in order to set the boundries of what moderate means.
On social issues Scazzafava supports gay marriage. To support gay marriage when most states have voted down gay marriage rights at the ballot box and the only states that have legalized it are states that have used their legislative branch or courts to do so, would that be considered the views of a moderate?
Scozzafava on fiscal issues, as a state assemblywoman voted for massive tax increases, Democratic budgets and a $180 million state bank bailout. She also supported the trillion-dollar federal stimulus package — which every House Republican voted against. Would that be considered the stand of a moderate?
The answer is no! The reason the lefties like to call her a moderate is to make anyone right of her views look extreme and the leftists look more moderate,
Scozzafava is no moderate. Her record proves such.
YOu can blame the "lefties" if you like, but your own John Boehner supported her along with other notable Republicans. I wonder if you'll be anxious to vote Boehner OUT of office next election---you know, him being a "moderate" and "lefty" and all. You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 9/30/2009 Posts: 2,940
|
Boehner and Gingrich both came out in support for Scozzafava but have since back peddled on that support.
Like I said earlier a handful of Washington insiders picked this candidate. To them it is about winning, not standing on Republican principles. It is this kind of thinking that have more people identifing themselves as Conservatives and Independents than Republicans.
This past election sent them a message and they got it loud and clear. If Scozzafava is a moderate than why not support Obama, Pelosi and Reid?
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
vesper wrote:Boehner and Gingrich both came out in support for Scozzafava but have since back peddled on that support.
Like I said earlier a handful of Washington insiders picked this candidate. To them it is about winning, not standing on Republican principles. It is this kind of thinking that have more people identifing themselves as Conservatives and Independents than Republicans.
This past election sent them a message and they got it loud and clear. If Scozzafava is a moderate than why not support Obama, Pelosi and Reid?
So what do you do with your incumbants who obviously are not "conservative" enough? I mean, we keep hearing how people say "throw them all out!!" With a low approval rating for Congress and Repub's have the lowest approval/trust of any of them....I'll be anxious to see who's willing to put up or shut up. Or is it "throw YOUR bums out" and we'll keep ours? You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 9/30/2009 Posts: 2,940
|
Republicans will work their differences out.
I think maybe you should be concerned about your own party. Last I looked your beloved Pelosi and her posse have the lowest ratings in Congress and Reid is losing his Senate race.
Look at the group gathered at the Capital today against your party's policies and the Change you are wanting to force upon all of us.
|
|
|
Rank: King Joined: 11/18/2002 Posts: 2,283
|
vesper wrote:Republicans will work their differences out.
I think maybe you should be concerned about your own party. Last I looked your beloved Pelosi and her posse have the lowest ratings in Congress and Reid is losing his Senate race.
Look at the group gathered at the Capital today against your party's policies and the Change you are wanting to force upon all of us. Boy, if that's not a generic copout. Are you saying you "don't know"? Are you just optimistic that "something" will happen? Either way, you don't seem to have a solid answer. Right now, according to Real Clear Politics polls, Democrats still are the favorite in Congress. Polls say people don't trust Republicans to have any answers. LOOK AT THIS POLLDo you see a trend as you page down? I'll point it out to you....every time, Rasmussen has numbers that give positives to Republicans....AND IT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT DOES! Why is Rasmussen consistenly the outlier? And it is consistently the outlier in favor of Republicans....that doesn't raise a red flag to you? What happened to Rasmussen that they've "gone over to the dark side"? You can't consistenly be the outlier and EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG! Something's "askew" in their data. As for my own party, if the economy gets turned around, they don't have a problem. Until then, they are on eggshells. I don't think the Health care bill will make a difference, and it may even help. Everyone knows something needs done, and the right won't participate in the solutions--polls show that voters are not being fooled by the Republican obstructionism. They rally their own base, but that's about it. AARP just endorsed the House's version today. Like it or not, they hold clout. Would I like to see some heads roll? You bet. Unlike you, I won't pussyfoot around. I'd like to see Reid go. I don't think he's as bad as the RIght says, but I don't think he's a leader...he's weak. Nancy...she's just abrasive and unlikeable. But she gets the job done. I would have voted against Durbin if he had a real challenger....but he doesn't. So what can you do. You go ahead and try to keep your dirty laundry under wraps. But we all know it's there. You'll "work your differences out", heh? You're going to have to work them out better than you did up in NY's 23rd....that was a Republican seat for over 100 years. That has National implications, unlike the Gov. races which were local. And BTW, exit polls (from FOX no less) said that a large majority of Virginia's and N.J. voters decisions had nothing to do with Obama. Additionally, these same two states have a history of voting the other party of who's in the White House. Same two states did the same thing in Bush's first term, 2001--except they went from Republican to Democrat. How'd that effect the 2004 election??? You do not have permission to use this user or profile in any data collection for any projects or research. Anyone doing so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
|
|
|
Rank: King  Joined: 8/16/2003 Posts: 1,493
|
dipirro wrote:The banter is very interesting; both sides are spinning this in favor of their viewpoints-no surprise there however the numbers do not lie. This election was a minor indication of the mindset of most Americans...ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. The American spirit is independance and liberty not Government interferance and tyranny. No matter how you cut it or dice it the Governor races are indicitive of the way people are thinking now. THEY ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE CHANGE OBAMMA HAS IMPLIMENTED. Even in New York an Unknown Candidate only in the race for 30 days and outspent 3-1 over that timeframe and to top it off the Republican  candidate endorsed the Democrate (in my mind this lost the election)it shows that the message is clear and conservative values are what will solidify the Republican Party and will be the message come 2010. The big question is will this election have any affect on Health Care and Cape and Trade. Time will tell but my guess is the Blue Dogs and Liberal Republicans are going to think twice before making their vote. It's called the truth, do try to use it sometime. Remember.......Just going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in your garage makes you a car..
The government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law. Due process holds the government subservient to the law of the land, protecting individual persons from the state.
gop creed: Love the fetus hate the child
|
|
|