Author Topic: Mid Terms Elections Thread  (Read 5695 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Mid Terms Elections Thread
« on: October 20, 2014, 09:10:25 AM »
Obama Voters Express Regret In New USA Today Poll
inquisitr ^  | 10/19/14

Posted on ‎10‎/‎19‎/‎2014‎ ‎9‎:‎56‎:‎44‎ ‎PM by knak

Obama voters are having a case of buyer’s remorse, according to a new USA Today/Suffolk University poll in six states with key Senate races this November.

The number of likely voters “who can remember voting” for President Obama has turned out to be lower than the actual number that did, USA Today reports. And of those who confessed to helping reelect the president in 2012, one in seven said they now regret their decision.

Of the six states in the polling, only Kansas featured as many likely voters who remembered voting Obama as those who actually did (at 38 percent apiece.)

In the other states, it broke down in the following manner.

Arkansas had 37 percent Obama voters during the 2012 election, but now only 35 percent actually admit to it. Colorado’s percentage point drop was even steeper, from 51 percent in 2012 to 46 percent today. Iowa matched this with a drop of 52 percent to 47 percent.

Michigan fell the most, going from 54 percent to 48 percent, and North Carolina dropped from 48 percent to 43 percent.

USA Today didn’t stop there. Of the individuals who admitted to voting for Obama but now regret it, they shared the following responses.

Lois Rice, 61, Colorado: “I voted for Obama, but quite frankly I’ve been disappointed with his handling of the ISIS (Islamic State) issue and just some general economic issues.”

Kristopher Lane, 21, Iowa: “I’m kind of upset that I did vote for him… I was kind of pushed towards voting for him by someone I know.” Lane also expressed concern that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), President Obama’s signature domestic policy achievement, has turned out worse than promised.

Charles Franklin of Marquette University Law School attempted to explain the results.

“Voters who defect from their party to vote for the winner are more likely to ‘forget’ this over time and to report a vote more consistent with their current party identification. Reports of past vote also correlate with current preferences.”

Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune added that Obama voters may just be tired of seeing the President after six years.

“After six years in office, any president has been seen and heard too many times to satisfy the public’s relentless appetite for something fresh and new,” Page wrote.

What do you think, readers? First of all, if you were one of the Obama voters who ushered him into a second term, have you/do you regret your decision? And are these poll numbers a bad sign for Democrats in the battleground states next month?

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1548696/obama-voters-express-regret-in-new-usa-today-poll/#vt1eeOiW3QWJSsIk.99

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2014, 05:33:09 AM »

Running Against Obama, Republicans Positioned for Midterm Sweep

Most of the battleground Senate races are trending in the GOP's direction, while Democrats are playing defense in the House.




By Josh Kraushaar
Follow on Twitter


 




Future Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell?(Chet Susslin)
 



October 20, 2014 In baseball, not long ago, there was a long-standing feud between scouts and number-crunching sabermetricians. Baseball traditionalists resisted the influx of new thinking into the game, while the data gurus too often adopted a dogmatic position that numbers always trumped personal reporting and observation. It quickly became obvious that the most successful teams are the ones that utilized a hybrid model—the best in scouting and statistics—and the Moneyball war in baseball subsided.

That's not all that different from what's happening in politics, where armchair pundits and number-crunching congressional-race modelers frequently overhype the latest polls, while downplaying the broader environment. They're directly related. The leading fundamentals of an election—presidential approval, right track/wrong track, and the congressional generic ballot, among them—are like "park effects" in baseball. If a hitter is playing in the thin air of Denver's Coors Field, it's much easier to hit a home run. Likewise, in a political landscape where the president is deeply unpopular, it's much easier for the messages of the other party's challengers to resonate, even if they're running weaker campaigns.



In July, I wrote that the odds of a nationalized election were growing because of that worsening environment for Democrats. Back then, there were clear signs that the red-state races were tilting in the GOP's direction, while Republicans were running surprisingly strong campaigns in swing states. Those trends have only solidified since then. The national environment can change over time—few could have predicted a panic over Ebola in the summer, for example—but it was hard to see the issues dragging down the president and his party subsiding by the fall. Now, it's becoming likely that Republicans will win more than the six seats necessary to retake control of the Senate.

Throughout this election cycle, the Democrats have been dogged by the president's health care law. Dissatisfaction over Obamacare, compounded by its disastrous rollout, sent the president's approval ratings tumbling. They haven't recovered. The law's popularity hasn't improved since then, even with the administration delaying unpopular provisions until after the midterm elections. When Democratic senators spent time strategizing on how to inoculate themselves from their past support of the law instead of defending it, it was clear that this would long remain a vulnerability for the party. Indeed, despite conventional wisdom that health care has diminished as a top issue in the midterms, it's still (by far) the dominant theme in Republican congressional campaign ads, according to The Cook Political Report's Elizabeth Wilner. Not only does it mobilize angry Republican voters, but it persuades disaffected independents as well.

In the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, support for the health care law isn't far from its all-time low, with 36 percent supporting and 48 percent opposing (a whopping 43 percent opposing strongly). After the health care website debacle in December 2013, 34 percent supported and 50 percent opposed. Its potency as an issue isn't too far off from 2010, an election where Republicans made historic gains in the House. Before the 2010 midterms, 36 percent of voters listed health care as one of their top two issues. Now, it's at 30 percent, ranking below economic growth, partisan gridlock, and military action against ISIS—but still a potent campaign theme.
 



 
Over the summer, worsening foreign policy was also an issue that looked bound to get worse for Democrats, not better. Presidential speeches and promises can only do so much in combating the reality of terrorists gaining ground in the Middle East and Russian President Vladimir Putin making a land grab in eastern Ukraine. As George W. Bush learned in his presidency, when events turn bad overseas, it's rare that they improve quickly. President Obama is now talking about defeating ISIS in terms of decades, not months or years. The limited airstrikes in Iraq and Syria have only had a limited effect, with the terrorist group creeping closer to Baghdad despite the U.S efforts. As a result, the president's approval ratings on foreign policy and national security—a first-term strength—have dropped to at or near all-time lows, and haven't recovered much with his prime-time address.

All told, the cascading number of controversies and scandals in the president's second term has fed into the perception that this administration is out of its depth in doing its primary job: managing government. And that's not good for Democrats, both the party in power and the party associated with an activist federal government. The dominant theme in the campaign's final month is Democratic Senate candidates struggling to distance themselves from the president, from Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor's awkward assessment of the president's handling of the Ebola crisis to Kentucky Senate candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes's refusal to discuss whom she voted for in the 2012 election.

Republicans now are positioned to net between six and nine Senate seats in the upcoming midterms, with the higher end looking more likely. Most of the battleground Senate contests are now either trending in a Republican direction or remaining stable with a GOP advantage. Trailing in the North Carolina Senate race throughout much of the fall, Republican Thom Tillis has lately put Sen. Kay Hagan on the defensive by connecting her to the president's management of the ISIS threat and the outbreak of Ebola. In Colorado, GOP Rep. Cory Gardner has led in all of the six public polls released in October, with leads ranging from 2 to 6 points. Early voting data out of Iowa is looking favorable for Republican Joni Ernst, consistent with public polls showing her with a small advantage. The Cook Political Report recently moved the New Hampshire race between Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Republican Scott Brown into toss-up status, indicative of polling showing Shaheen still ahead but with a rapidly narrowing lead. Outside of Kansas, political analyst Stuart Rothenberg now has Republicans holding an edge in all the red-state races, reflecting a nationalized environment against the party in power.

Democrats are hoping to upend the rough environment in conservative states like Kansas, Georgia, and South Dakota. All those GOP-held seats feature Republican candidates who have run weak races. Thanks to effective ads targeting David Perdue's history of outsourcing (and his ham-handed responses to the attacks), Democrat Michelle Nunn holds the momentum in the Georgia Senate race, though it's still likely to head into a January runoff. A late Democratic investment in South Dakota is keeping the four-way race competitive, but GOP reinforcements should push former Republican Gov. Mike Rounds over the finish line. Even Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, who has run a dismal campaign, has gotten some late traction against independent candidate Greg Orman, thanks to a flurry of outside GOP involvement. In a neutral environment, Democrats would hold a good shot at an upset or two. But in a nationalized midterm, Republicans should catch breaks in states where the fundamentals favor them.



All the trend lines in the House favor Republicans, as well. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee pulled their advertising in races that were expected to be among their most winnable, including against Rep. Mike Coffman Colorado, Rep. Dan Benishek of Michigan, and Virginia Republican candidate Barbara Comstock—moving the money to protect blue-district incumbents. Outside Republican groups are now spending millions on solidly Democratic turf, including districts in New York, California, and Hawaii where Obama won by comfortable margins. One senior House Democratic official told National Journal that internal polling in Iowa shows Ernst leading Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley in all three of the state's battleground seats, making it challenging for downballot House candidates to put away winnable races—even in Iowa's Democratic-leaning districts.

Put it all together, and it paints the picture of a nationalized election favoring the GOP. Democrats are hyping their superior turnout efforts, a similar argument to what Republicans employed before losing the House and Senate in 2006—and not (yet) backed up by the early voting evidence. While even Republicans are avoiding premature talk of a "wave" election, those type of labels often become apparent after the fact.

With anxiety over Ebola running high, renewed fears of terrorism, and most Americans not feeling secure economically, it doesn't take much imagination to see how voters could decisively punish the governing party. Republicans nominated their strongest slate of Senate candidates in at least a decade, and are benefiting from the fickle public mood. When Democrats are relying on winning races they weren't even planning to contest in South Dakota and Kansas, it speaks volumes about the state of play two weeks before Election Day.

This article appears in the October 21, 2014 edition of NJ Daily.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2014, 06:18:04 AM »

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #3 on: October 22, 2014, 05:10:38 AM »

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #4 on: October 22, 2014, 11:27:26 AM »
AP Poll: GOP Seizes Significant Lead, Obama Disapproval Spikes to 60 Percent
Townhall ^  | October 22, 2014 | Guy Benson

Posted on ‎10‎/‎22‎/‎2014‎ ‎1‎:‎31‎:‎30‎ ‎PM by yoe

With the midterm elections less than two weeks away, a (new national poll) from the Associated Press features a parade of horribles for Democrats. This is not where a party wants to be in the home stretch of an election campaign:



(1) President Obama's approval rating among likely voters is (41/60), marking his worst disapproval number in the series. As the president has reminded voters in recent days, (Hell Yes, My Agenda is On the Ballot This Fall) of his policies are on the ballot in November, and vulnerable Democrats have been (stalwart allies) on behalf of his agenda in Washington. On issues, the president's numbers are egregious. (42/58) on the economy, healthcare and ISIS, (34/65) on immigration, and (38/62) on managing the federal government. The only issue on which Obama is above water is same-sex marriage, at (50/49). Obama's personal favorability is 10 points underwater (44/54) among likely voters.


(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #6 on: October 23, 2014, 08:12:08 AM »
A whopping 9% of likely voters “enthusiastic” about Barack Obama
Hotair ^  | 10/23/2014 | Jazz Shaw

Posted on ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2014‎ ‎10‎:‎52‎:‎16‎ ‎AM by SeekAndFind




You can tell that the press is losing interest in covering the 2014 elections. Not only are the tides of fortune not looking all that promising for the Democrats, people in the media’s target demographic – younger, predominantly Democrat voters – just don’t seem that excited or interested in hearing yet another story about how their candidates are getting kicked around. But just how dismal are they feeling? A new poll conducted by the Associated Press and Gfk put a different spin on the usual questions which voters are asked.

Rather than just asking people whether they “approve” or “disapprove” of the job the President is doing – and how strongly – they decided to mix things up and ask how “enthusiastic” or “angry” they are about Obama. As the WaPo describes it, the results are, if anything, worse than the original numbers.


The AP-GfK poll asked the approve/disapprove question, finding 17 percent of likely voters said they strongly approve of Obama and 44 percent strongly disapprove. But then it asked a separate — and we would argue, more enlightening — question about the Obama administration. It asked how people felt about it, and gave them four options: “enthusiastic,” “satisfied but not enthusiastic,” “dissatisfied but not angry,” and “angry.”

That would seem to be a pretty good analogue for the approve/disapprove question, but the answers are quite a bit different. While 17 percent of likely voters “strongly approve” of Obama, just 9 percent say they are “enthusiastic” about his administration.

On the other side, 34 percent say they are “angry” about Obama’s presidency. Again, that’s less than the 44 percent who “strongly disapprove” of Obama.

While there is little doubt that the level of enthusiasm for Barack Obama across the country – in both parties – is likely cratering, I’m not convinced that the shift in numbers between those two polls is all that indicative of a trend. What it may be, at least in part, is a matter of wording and the way people react to particular phrases, which is a huge factor in the science of polling. If you use a word like “angry” in a question, it’s just never going to ring up the same kind of numbers as other choices such as unenthusiastic or disapproving. That’s because people can’t help protecting their own self-image, even in an anonymous poll. Most people don’t like to think of themselves as angry because that carries an inherent connotation of a loss of control. It’s a parallel to the modesty most individuals feel. In repeated surveys, more people will say that they think they are wise than smart. It’s all about self-image.

But that shouldn’t come as too much consolation to the White House. No matter whether the answer is 9% or 17% those are still some pretty awful numbers.

JOHN MATRIX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • the Media is the Problem
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2014, 08:17:22 AM »
Most important elections in a long, long time...

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #8 on: October 23, 2014, 08:43:23 AM »
Most important elections in a long, long time...

yep, since way way back in 2012


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #9 on: October 23, 2014, 08:45:40 AM »
If Republicans take back the Senate they can continue their strategy of doing absolutely nothing for the next two years

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #10 on: October 23, 2014, 08:46:46 AM »
If Republicans take back the Senate they can continue their strategy of doing absolutely nothing for the next two years

Good - I don't want anything being done since that worthless communist in the WH is useless.  I am voting for Obama to be stopped from doing anything

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #11 on: October 23, 2014, 09:01:48 AM »
Good - I don't want anything being done since that worthless communist in the WH is useless.  I am voting for Obama to be stopped from doing anything

Weren't you supposed to leave after the 2012 elections

Remember the self indulgent threads you started counting down to your departure

Kind of reminded me of an insecure 7th grade girl with all narcissistic phony drama


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #12 on: October 23, 2014, 09:04:44 AM »
Weren't you supposed to leave after the 2012 elections

Remember the self indulgent threads you started counting down to your departure

Kind of reminded me of an insecure 7th grade girl with all narcissistic phony drama



And that has to do with Obama dragging down the dems due to his failed presidency how? 

JOHN MATRIX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • the Media is the Problem
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #13 on: October 23, 2014, 09:05:43 AM »
If Republicans take back the Senate they can continue their strategy of making sure Obama does absolutely nothing destructive for the next two years

Fixed

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #14 on: October 23, 2014, 09:06:11 AM »
And that has to do with Obama dragging down the dems due to his failed presidency how? 

this election reminded me of that election


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2014, 09:08:43 AM »
Fixed

Obama has done a lot of stuff

Remember your side thinks he's a ruthless dictator


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2014, 09:10:50 AM »
Obama has done a lot of stuff

Remember your side thinks he's a ruthless dictator



Harry Reid has nothing to do with this does he?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2014, 09:14:39 AM »
Harry Reid has nothing to do with this does he?


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2014, 09:20:20 AM »


The house has sent hundreds of bills to Harry Reid he wont even bring up for a vote.  Why not blame him too moron?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #19 on: October 23, 2014, 09:32:36 AM »
The house has sent hundreds of bills to Harry Reid he wont even bring up for a vote.  Why not blame him too moron?

that argument works well on simpletons such as yourself

Quote
Are these bills "sitting on Harry Reid’s desk awaiting action"?

Resolving this claim is murkier.

First, a technical problem. It’s an oversimplification to say that these bills are "sitting on Harry Reid’s desk." Many have been assigned to committees, where they would need to be approved before being taken up on the floor. While Reid has influence over what committee chairs do, a chair can -- using their own powers -- decide to either fast-track or stall a bill coming over from the House.

Another complication: In at least some cases, the Senate is working on a bill on the same topic, but without using the House bill as a starting point. "The disposition of a House bill is not particularly relevant to measuring Senate legislative activity," said Steven Smith, political scientist and Senate specialist at Washington University in St. Louis.

We should also note that in the Senate, one member -- either from the majority or the minority -- can stop a bill in its tracks by threatening to filibuster -- a delay that requires 60 votes to break. Reasonable people can disagree about whether Reid or Senate Republicans are the biggest offenders -- we previously addressed some of those issues -- but the experts we checked with said both parties share at least some of the blame.

"There's plenty of blame to go around," said Donald Wolfensberger, a former Republican House aide now studying Congress at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Wolfensberger sees Reid as the bigger offender by blocking bills and amendments "to protect his vulnerable members who are up for re-election in November. You can blame the threat of filibusters and politically sensitive amendments from Republicans, but politics ain't bean bag. Senators were sent there to cast the tough votes, not to be pampered, protected and coddled by their leaders."

Others see Republican threats as the bigger problem.

"It is true that some bills, including some of substance, are being blocked by Reid from action because he wants to avoid Republican amendments of the ‘gotcha’ variety that could work against some of his endangered incumbents up this fall," said Norm Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. "You can make a case that the role of the majority is to suck it up and do votes, even if some are uncomfortable. But on the balance sheet, the bigger reality is that very few of the bills passed by the House were aimed at compromise or agreement with the Senate."

A spokesman for Jenkins, Thomas W. Brandt, told PolitiFact, "Only Sen. Reid can bring these bills up for a vote, and if he did, it would go a long way in ending the legislative gridlock currently plaguing Washington."

Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid, countered by noting that there are 50 bipartisan Senate-passed bills awaiting House action. (Here's the list.)  http://www.politifact.com/senatebills/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/aug/06/lynn-jenkins/rep-lynn-jenkins-blames-harry-reid-do-nothing-sena/

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #20 on: October 23, 2014, 09:34:44 AM »
LOL - yeah the socialists have 2/3 of the govt and somehow its the GOP's Fault   


FNG fool

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31229
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #21 on: October 23, 2014, 10:23:57 AM »
This is really not any news at all.  Two things about midterm elections :

1 - Dems have historically never done really good in the mid terms with any consistency.
2 -  The opposing party of whoever is sitting in the WH generally have the best chance of making any gains from the mid terms.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63956
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #22 on: October 23, 2014, 11:02:37 AM »
This is blockbuster news, because the Republican Party is dead.  I read it right here on getbig.com. 

LurkerNoMore

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31229
  • Dumb people think Trump is smart.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #23 on: October 23, 2014, 12:01:30 PM »
Oh it's dying all right.  Being consumed from within.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39833
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Mid Terms Elections Thread
« Reply #24 on: October 23, 2014, 12:03:54 PM »
Oh it's dying all right.  Being consumed from within.

The GOP is slated to pick up 8 Senate seats alone. 

Senate Democrats wont even admit to voting for Obama let alone supporting his disastrous agenda