Discussion » Questions » Politics » Do you think the Democrats have a change of taking the Senate and/ or the House this election?
Marguerite, the Beloved

Do you think the Democrats have a change of taking the Senate and/ or the House this election?

Change should be chance. I couldn't edit. ...

Posted - October 27, 2016
Tag : #Election2016

Responses


  • 2515
    Ok, I tried to edit my question after it was posted. Change should be chance. It doesn't work! This post was edited by Marguerite, the Beloved at October 27, 2016 8:52 AM MDT
      October 27, 2016 8:47 AM MDT
    0

  • 3907
    Hello M:

    I think MY country will REPUDIATE Donald Trump by handing the ENTIRE kit and caboodle over to the Democrats... 

    Trump is a LOSER.

    excon

    PS>  I'm laying 5 to 4 on Hillary.  Paying off in credits..  Want some??
      October 27, 2016 8:56 AM MDT
    0

  • 1615
    You might be surprised but if Hillary wins we all lose .
      October 27, 2016 12:56 PM MDT
    1

  • 2500
    First you say that Putin likes Trump. Now you're saying that he will repudiate Trump. Make up your mind. 
      October 27, 2016 1:49 PM MDT
    0

  • 3934
    The most sophisticated poll analysis (such as by fivethirtyeight.com) indicates HRC has a very strong chance of winning the presidency, and it seems likely the Democrats will take a small majority in the Senate (probably 51-49 or 52-48). Unless there is a HUGE downballot effect from Trump's loss, it seems unlikely the Democrats will take over the House of Representatives. The GOP so effectively gerrymandered Congressional districts after 2010 it would take an overwhelming disparity in turnout for many GOP House candidates to lose.

    For example, in Pennsylvania 52% of the voters selected President Obama in 2012 (suggesting about 52% of voters are Democratic). However, out of PA's 18 Congressional seats, only 5 are held by Democrats (about 28%).

    A look at PA's 7th district gives you a clue why...;-D...


      October 27, 2016 9:51 AM MDT
    2

  • 2500
    What odds did all those "sophisticated" polls give Ronald Reagan against Jimmy Carter? If I remember correctly Carter was leading Reagan in "the polls" by about 6 percentage points right up to election day.
      October 27, 2016 1:45 PM MDT
    0

  • 3934
    @Salty Herbert --- Comparing polling 40 years ago with much less sophisticated mathematical models and mech less polarized electorate to modern poll analysis seems like a foolhardy errand.

    Also, just FYI...

    http://www.snopes.com/carter-reagan-polls/
      October 27, 2016 3:05 PM MDT
    0

  • 2500

    You just can't stop acting like a child with the name calling, can you?

    And what a load of crap about statistical analytical methods improving in the last umpteen years. It's the same math only now it's processed with SSPS or Stata (or similar software) on PC's instead of running on an IBM mainframe. Unless you want to count the way it's now biased to influence the outcome; oh, wait . . . THAT hasn't changed either.

    As to Snopes . . . it's now been discredited so many times it's as much of a joke as the lib-tard diatribe on this site. Try something credible next tiime you try to sell your organic fertilizer.

    This post was edited by Salt and Red Pepper at October 27, 2016 3:40 PM MDT
      October 27, 2016 3:32 PM MDT
    0

  • 3934
    @Salty Herbert -- I'm not sure who displays more motivated cognition: you, or my 85-year-old Alzheimer's-suffering mother.

    She can be somewhat forgiven. A person who literally thinks not having a personal memory of an occurrence means that it DIDN'T happen in reality clearly has lost the power of rational thought.

    What's your excuse?....;-D...
      October 27, 2016 3:37 PM MDT
    0

  • 2500
    Your mother's memory lapses are actually merciful, given the deteriorating mental state of some of her offspring. (Liberalism really is a recognized mental disorder.) Or perhaps her memory lapses are intentional, which again,linking back to the psychopathy of her progeny, would also be understandable.
      October 27, 2016 3:53 PM MDT
    0

  • 2515
    @Old School, thanks for the heads up! 
      October 27, 2016 3:16 PM MDT
    0

  • 1615
    Let's hope not or we will have 4 to 8 years of corruption in Washington.
      October 27, 2016 12:53 PM MDT
    1

  • 46117
    No.  Not even close.  Change takes time.  That doesn't mean that Hillary can do nothing.  It means she has to work very hard at educating the nation on the importance of learning who you are voting for on the entire ballot and not just the President and the higher ups.  The little guys that represent each state and county that we all pick are the ones who wind up gumming the works from the bottom up, making the work much harder to affect change when they have to work against dozens of nay sayer's who have a say in the change.

    Look at the mischief our Republican Sheriff Arpaio has caused.   We cannot get that creep gone to save our souls and he even has a Federal lawsuit against him AGAIN. This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at October 27, 2016 3:14 PM MDT
      October 27, 2016 1:00 PM MDT
    1