2014 Senate election

[lamboguy]

the odds as of 10/19 are the Republicans are - $240 to win $100 that they gain control of the senate. a 50-50 split would be a push for betting purposes even though the democrats would control it due to a democratic VP.

[classhandicapper]

If it's anything less that a total rout given all the blunders by the democrats recently it would be bad sign for the republicans in the medium term. It would mean they have to do a much better job of explaining their positions, especially on business and economics, to all the new immigrants who are very geared towards voting for the left.

I don't see how the "right" doesn't get well above 50% of the Asians eventually. I'd be less optimistic about the Latin Americans. They remind me of the Italian immigrants of my father's generation and older. They were all left leaning initially. Most didn't change for many decades. Among those that are still alive some still are left leaning. It took some success within the system and some experience with how the real world works to start changing them. Then they slowly started moving right.

[BlueShoe]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I don't see how the "right" doesn't get well above 50% of the Asians eventually.

There is a misconception regarding Asian voting patterns. They are not conservatives. In spite of being regarded as hard working and law abiding, this bloc votes left wing Democrat in greater numbers than do Latinos. An example of this is Hawaii, with it's Asian-American majority, one of the bluest of the blue states.

Here in SoCal the older Vietnamese that came here shortly after the fall of Saigon were heavily Republican due to their strong anti-communist views. However, their American born children and grandchildren are voting much more for Democrats.

Over 50% ? Would like to see it, but not confident that it will happen. Perhaps it is the ingrained acceptence of authoritarianism that coaxes them to vote for Big Brother Nanny State Democrats.

[mostpost]

I'm afraid that it is going to be difficult for the Democrats to retain control of the Senate if only because of the logistics. There are 20 Democratic seats up for election compared to 13 Republican. 10 of the Republican seats are considered safe compared to 6 for the Democrats.

Five popular Democratic Senators are retiring. Only one popular Republican Senator is retiring. Only in Michigan does the replacement Democrat seem likely to win. Iowa is a toss up and Montana , South Dakota and West Virginia seem likely to switch to the Republicans.

Still, I have not entirely given up hope as we are doing surprisingly well in Georgia, Kansas and Kentucky.

However this election turns out, I think the Republicans have seen their high water mark and will continue to fall in future elections.

[alydar]

The problem for Republicans is not House or even Senate elections, it is the White House. Demographics are becoming increasingly difficult on a national election level. The Republicans are in real danger of becoming a party that can only count on the deep south and some large, but small in population states in the west as a solid base. You cannot win the White House without carrying some of the swing states. The current cast of possible candidates does not look promising. Not that it looks a whole lot better on the left in terms of good viable national candidates.

[lamboguy]

they aren't losing because they don't have the right candidates, they are losing because they don't know how to get the right people to the polls to vote.

as bad as some people might think Obama is, he had some republicans that did vote for him. in order for the republicans to win a presidential election, they have to find a way to get a lot of democrats to the polls to vote for them, the same way that Reagan did

[BlueShoe]

Originally Posted by mostpost

However this election turns out, I think the Republicans have seen their high water mark and will continue to fall in future elections.

The Republicans take the Senate and keep the House, thus a GOP Congress to check Comrade Obama and the appointed Bolsheviks in his adminstration.

In 2016, the GOP wins the presidency, but may lose back the Senate while keeping the House, which means more gridlock.

Of course these predictions could go awry, voters, like racehorses do not always run to form or what is expected of them.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by alydar

Demographics are becoming increasingly difficult on a national election level.

The current cast of possible candidates does not look promising. Not that it looks a whole lot better on the left in terms of good viable national candidates.

The electorate is also becoming much more pessimistic. The 2008 presidential race was about getting rid of Bush and politics as usual. Obama beat Hillary because he was new and had more sizzle, and came across as more non-Bush, non-Washington than Hillary. In 2012, Obama was coasting on his image and on the fact that the incompetence of his administration wasn't as apparent yet.

As Obama stated, much to the chagrin of the Dem candidates, this election is about his policies. I can't imagine that Obama will even try to work with a Republican Congress, so I'd guess his last two years will resemble the last days of the Third Reich, except Obama will be on the golf course instead of in a bunker.

I can't imagine that the Republicans will be competent enough to take advantage of the situation, so the underlying theme in 2016 will be who do people hate more, Obama or the Republicans. If the Democrats just hunker in the bunker for two years and snipe at Congress, the mood of the people will probably swing back from the current anti-Obama to anti-Republicans. Yet another lesser evil election.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by BlueShoe

There is a misconception regarding Asian voting patterns. They are not conservatives. In spite of being regarded as hard working and law abiding, this bloc votes left wing Democrat in greater numbers than do Latinos. An example of this is Hawaii, with it's Asian-American majority, one of the bluest of the blue states.

The general pattern I have observed is that immigrants start left and vote left for a couple of generations. Then as they get more educated, get good jobs, start businesses, accumulate wealth, pay high taxes, see the implications of taxes and regulations on their ability to grow their own businesses, experience paying high personal taxes and watching others cheat and game the system etc.. they start shifting right.

The Asians appear to be succeeding so rapidly in business and academics, I think the shift is going to start in 10-20 years instead of a couple of generations. IMO they are the wild card of the future of the US. If we are going to open the flood gates of immigration, IMO we can't possibly bring in enough Chinese, Koreans, Thais, Vietnamese etc... This could wind up with a "happy ending".

[Tom]

Originally Posted by alydar

The problem for Republicans is not House or even Senate elections, it is the White House. Demographics are becoming increasingly difficult on a national election level. The Republicans are in real danger of becoming a party that can only count on the deep south and some large, but small in population states in the west as a solid base. You cannot win the White House without carrying some of the swing states. The current cast of possible candidates does not look promising. Not that it looks a whole lot better on the left in terms of good viable national candidates.

The power of the 47% and other assorted anchors - hard to vote for responsibility and integrity when you have none yourself.
As time goes by, you will see more and more wealth and jobs leave here because the USA ain't worth staying for. Why invest here and be a target for the Bamazombies? Plenty of other countries out there.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by mostpost

I'm afraid that it is going to be difficult for the Democrats to retain control of the Senate if only because of the logistics. There are 20 Democratic seats up for election compared to 13 Republican. 10 of the Republican seats are considered safe compared to 6 for the Democrats.

Five popular Democratic Senators are retiring. Only one popular Republican Senator is retiring. Only in Michigan does the replacement Democrat seem likely to win. Iowa is a toss up and Montana , South Dakota and West Virginia seem likely to switch to the Republicans.

Still, I have not entirely given up hope as we are doing surprisingly well in Georgia, Kansas and Kentucky.

However this election turns out, I think the Republicans have seen their high water mark and will continue to fall in future elections.

You omitted North Carolina. I guess you think Kay Hagan is a lock??

[davew]

So all those House bills that Harry Reid has been sitting on because he is busy might make it to the Senate floor?

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

You omitted North Carolina. I guess you think Kay Hagan is a lock??

She is not, but North Carolina is not germane to my discussion.
I mentioned five states in which Incumbent Democratic Senators were retiring.
Those states were Iowa, Michigan, West Virginia, Montana and South Dakota.
North Carolina was not one of those states.

My second category was states in which Democrats were polling surprisingly strong. States which were expected to remain Republican but may switch.
I said nothing about states which have Democratic Senators who are facing a tough reelection campaign, states like NC, AR, Co, AL.

[Robert Goren]

It is tough to find a scenario where the GOP doesn't at least get a tie in the senate. GOP control of senate would not change things much. The democrats can still filibuster anything they don't like much the GOP has done. And of course nothing gets through the house except a few bills to placate the tea party and have no chance passing the senate and/or being signed by the president. There are damn few things that can pass the house and still get enough democratic support to reach 60 votes. And if Obama vetoed it, they would need 67 senate votes. Highly unlikely. It looks like the Tea Party agenda will have to wait at least a couple of more years.

[Clocker]

More bad news for the Democrat candidates. After recently announcing that the election is all about his policies, Obama doubles down and says that all of those Dems that are pretending they don't know him are actually his strong allies and totally supportive of all of his policies.

The guy just can't let it go. Everything is always all about him and propping up his ego.

US President Barack Obama offered a new talking point to Senate Republicans on Monday — just two weeks away from Election Day.

Speaking on the Rev. Al Sharpton's radio show, Obama said the Democratic candidates who had been avoiding him were actually "strong allies who have supported my agenda." Many of these candidates are in conservative-leaning states where Obama's agenda is decisively unpopular.

"And so some of the candidates there — it is difficult for them to have me in the state because the Republicans will use that to try to fan Republican turnout," Obama said, according to The Hill. "The bottom line is, though, these are all folks who vote with me, they have supported my agenda in Congress, they are on the right side of minimum wage, they are on the right side of fair pay, they are on the right side of rebuilding our infrastructure, they're on the right side of early childhood education."

Yahoo News