Democrats win big on House. Senate... a toss-up

[ByeBye]

Originally posted by Nash

welome back Nash!

Nuke

[Mace2004]

It never seems to register to Dems that polls and the press are not elections.  The amount of positive press for Democrats smells of wishful thinking.  The press has done a lousy job predicting elections and since they're so strongly pro Dem I'd almost discount the large gain simply on the press' track record.  Remember all the down-cast faces on TV during the 2004 election?  The win most of the press predicted would be Kerry's?  Everyone remember the press predicting a landslide Republican victory right before they took over?  No, I don't either.  Again, nothing but stunned looks and "how could that have happened? The polls and our own press coverage said it couldn't happen?"  

Why are the polls unreliable?  This particular article was from 2004 and was discussing primarily the New Hampsire primary but check out the details where they discuss overall pollster reliability, particularly this quote:

"The svengalis at ABC News and some major papers don't like Zogby's tracking," reported The Note, the widely read ABC News online politics briefing . Then they quote an anonymous "ABC guru" who called Zogby's tracking polls "crack for the weak."

Or this:

"Zogby is not a reputable pollster," said Warren Mitofsky, who is co-directing the media exit polls this year for the major television networks and the Associated Press. "He is more a salesman and a self-promoter than a pollster. He has made lots of mistakes on election outcomes -- five in 2002. . . . I have heard of volatile campaigns, but he has volatile polls." (Zogby acknowledged on his Web site last February that "this past election cycle was not my finest hour.")

Or this:

The New Hampshire-based American Research Group's tracking poll ended up buried deepest in the snow bank: They had Bush winning by two the day before the primary, merely 20 points off the mark. On the Democratic side, the losing pollster at least got the winner right: The Quinnipiac poll predicted Gore would win by 17 percentage points, but he actually won by four.

If anyone still wants to jump overboard based on polls here's  another interesting article about Zogby with a lot of info about polls in general:

In a recent New York Times Magazine cover story about animal rights, journalist Michael Pollan reported that 51 percent of Americans believe that "primates are entitled to the same rights as human children." It was a surprising finding, but one that Pollan simply attributed to a "recent Zogby Poll." When Pollan's article came out, you can only imagine the celebration at the Doris Day Animal League, a group dedicated to establishing legal rights for chimpanzees. The league's role in commissioning the survey went entirely unmentioned in the Times story. By hiring the renowned pollster John Zogby, the group had essentially purchased an objective fact, one that entered into the conventional wisdom via the nation's leading Sunday magazine.

I think I'll wait until after the election to see what the voters have to say,

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by 1K3
Projected New Senate:     49 Democrats     49 Republicans     2 ties
Projected New House:     241 Democrats     193 Republicans     1 Tie

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

The idiot liar crime family will be taking over for the pervert crime family, how exciting...

[Eagler]

polls lean left as they are done in the middle of the day when republicans are at work and dems are home watching Ophra or J springer ...
my guess is that they do not gain the majority of the house or the senate and we have recounts through Christmas ...

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by cav58d
"reward the mediocre, and sub par performance, and penalize the average-above average workers",  

Like enron? Or any corporate welfare case? I am more in debt and raises have been microscopic. Any tax cut has been offset by higher costs everywhere else. There is no party for the working class anymore, we are getting sqeezed more and more.

Take the race for governor here in ma. I mean, who wouldn't vote for Healey? She won't raise taxes and she won't give illegals a license or pay for their education. So why is she so far behind Patrick, who will do all these things and has not denied it?

Because she is so out of touch with the working class it isn't funny. She calls union people hacks, that was brilliant, throw the peasants under the bus. She campaigns in well to do suburbs and thinks that's the only people who vote. I got news for her, the majority of voters are from working families who don't have 7.8 million to put into their own election campaign. They are workers(and alot of them union) who want someone who is going to recognize them, not call them hacks. What, you make $20.00 dollars an hour and you're a hack? But if your husband is making millions off your political connections your not?

All she had to do was reach out to the working class and she would have crushed Patrick, but she's a millionaire, why should she care about them?

Oh, and speaking of hacks, she collected more from state employees for her campaign than Patrick did, I guess her hacks need to keep their jobs.

So now we get Patrick, just great, just freaking great

[1K3]

The site posted above is an un-biased source.  Most people here think anything but Faux News (TM) is a biased source.

[1K3]

This 2006 election is

1. anti-Republican
2. anti-incumbent

3. or both


we'll see what happens on Tuesday:aok

[Mace2004]

Originally posted by Sixpence
Like enron? Or any corporate welfare case? I am more in debt and raises have been microscopic. Any tax cut has been offset by higher costs everywhere else. There is no party for the working class anymore, we are getting sqeezed more and more.

Take the race for governor here in ma. I mean, who wouldn't vote for Healey? She won't raise taxes and she won't give illegals a license or pay for their education. So why is she so far behind Patrick, who will do all these things and has not denied it?

Because she is so out of touch with the working class it isn't funny. She calls union people hacks, that was brilliant, throw the peasants under the bus. She campaigns in well to do suburbs and thinks that's the only people who vote. I got news for her, the majority of voters are from working families who don't have 7.8 million to put into their own election campaign. They are workers(and alot of them union) who want someone who is going to recognize them, not call them hacks. What, you make $20.00 dollars an hour and you're a hack? But if your husband is making millions off your political connections your not?

All she had to do was reach out to the working class and she would have crushed Patrick, but she's a millionaire, why should she care about them?

Oh, and speaking of hacks, she collected more from state employees for her campaign than Patrick did, I guess her hacks need to keep their jobs.

So now we get Patrick, just great, just freaking great

What does Enron have to do with Republicans?  Ahhhh, nothing at all. You dont like millionaire politicians?  Then vote Republican because there are far, far more millionaire Dem politicians than Republicans.  

Inflation is small (avg 3.6 for this year) and that's including the price of gas (which BTW is still dropping).  We will always have inflation whether the economy is booming (as it is) or not.  You'd think inflation of 0% would be great, wrong.  That's a sign the economy is a bust.  

You may feel squeezed but then so do lots even during the best economies and the national economy is doing very well despite the left's propaganda.  Regions and various industries will vary in their economic prospects, that's a fact of life, regardless of which party is in power.  I'd suggest that if your raises are miniscule that you find another job.  You a union guy?  Why not complain to them?  Why do you think it's the government's job to do something about your raises?  

Finally, why not knock off this "working class" crap, as if nobody but you actually works.

[storch]

Originally posted by Mace2004
What does Enron have to do with Republicans?  Ahhhh, nothing at all. You dont like millionaire politicians?  Then vote Republican because there are far, far more millionaire Dem politicians than Republicans.  

Inflation is small (avg 3.6 for this year) and that's including the price of gas (which BTW is still dropping).  We will always have inflation whether the economy is booming (as it is) or not.  You'd think inflation of 0% would be great, wrong.  That's a sign the economy is a bust.  

You may feel squeezed but then so do lots even during the best economies and the national economy is doing very well despite the left's propaganda.  Regions and various industries will vary in their economic prospects, that's a fact of life, regardless of which party is in power.  I'd suggest that if your raises are miniscule that you find another job.  You a union guy?  Why not complain to them?  Why do you think it's the government's job to do something about your raises?  

Finally, why not knock off this "working class" crap, as if nobody but you actually works.

very well worded argument Mace.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Mace2004
What does Enron have to do with Republicans?  Ahhhh, nothing at all. You dont like millionaire politicians?  Then vote Republican because there are far, far more millionaire Dem politicians than Republicans.  

Inflation is small (avg 3.6 for this year) and that's including the price of gas (which BTW is still dropping).  We will always have inflation whether the economy is booming (as it is) or not.  You'd think inflation of 0% would be great, wrong.  That's a sign the economy is a bust.  

You may feel squeezed but then so do lots even during the best economies and the national economy is doing very well despite the left's propaganda.  Regions and various industries will vary in their economic prospects, that's a fact of life, regardless of which party is in power.  I'd suggest that if your raises are miniscule that you find another job.  You a union guy?  Why not complain to them?  Why do you think it's the government's job to do something about your raises?  

Finally, why not knock off this "working class" crap, as if nobody but you actually works.

Why attack me? I'm voting for Healey, perhaps you misunderstand, but attack as you will. And yes, of course we all work, but alot more of us work for under 100k than over it, and if you don't reach out to those voters, how can you win? The government's job to give me raises? Wow, nice spin, no, but it isn't the governments job to strip unions of any bargaining power they have either.

btw, our last cola(cost of living adjustment) was thirty nine cents an hour, the largest in about 20 years

[Mace2004]

I apologize Sixpence if I misread your post, I didn't mean any personal insults to you.  I was instead trying to attack the myths that we constantly hear from various interest groups and the press.  You know, those that portray Enron as a Republican conspiricy or that the economy is bad when it's really doing exceptionally well.  Even more to the point, and that the political parties are responsible to specific classes of citizens, i.e., the "working class" or minorities, rather than all of us.  I guess it might have been better to simply point out that it's a mistake to believe the government (feds in particular, but also state) is there to deal with the problems of individuals or specific groups.  It's not designed for that and, quite frankly, it's horribly inefficient and incompetent when it tries to do so. In actuality, the best thing government can do is the least possible.

[Dago]

I sure believe the polls, they are never wrong.  But, ahhh, didnt the polls assure us Kerry was going to win the presidential election in 04?

Nothing is assured in the upcoming election, and from recent experience demos shouldnt count their chickens (seats) before they hatch.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Mace2004
Even more to the point, and that the political parties are responsible to specific classes of citizens, i.e., the "working class" or minorities, rather than all of us.  

Well, if you draft legislation designed for a specific class of people, then you directly effect them. If you tell the corporate world they can spend what they want on lobbying, then tell labor they can't, you effect a class of people.

[lazs2]

six...  How do the republicans do that?    I thought all they wanted to do was allow the union members to act as individuals if they chose?  that these individuals could tell the union to stop wasting the money they gave them on political parties that were not of their choice?

lazs

[DREDIOCK]

Thing that cracks me up here. I dont know about the rest of the country but we have two clowns here running against one another.
The only thing sputtered out of their mouths was how bad the other guy is.

Honestly, havent got a clue what either of them stand for cause neither of them have said.
Other then to say how bad the other guy is.

Now there is something to vote on:rolleyes: