News US Midterm Elections - Predictions and Post-mortems

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gokul43201
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Midterm
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on predictions and analyses surrounding the US Midterm Elections. Participants share their forecasts for Senate and House outcomes, with some expecting a Republican gain in the House while Democrats might retain the Senate. There is a notable focus on voter turnout, with many expressing concern over low engagement and the influence of organized groups like the Tea Party. Candidates such as Bob Inglis and Rick Snyder are highlighted as preferred choices among some voters. Overall, the sentiment reflects a mix of anticipation and disappointment regarding the election results and their implications for future political dynamics.
  • #31
Gokul43201 said:
The real bloodbath is not in the Senate or the House, but in the Statehouses.

Eh, local stuff.

Wyden won in Oregon [yay!] Also, Brown won in California [Moonbeam is back!]. It was expected that the get-out-the-pot vote would benefit the Dems. Brown and Boxer won, but I haven't heard about their pot amendment yet.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I know that I'm the minority here, but I feel that it's good to be in a country that's not so "blue." HAHA
 
  • #33
Remember 1994, when Clinton had been in office for two years, health care reform ("Hillarycare") had also been a big issue, and the Republicans made big gains in the midterm elections?

Clinton got re-elected in 1996 anyway and handed Bush II a nice budget surplus in 2000.
 
  • #34
jtbell said:
Remember 1994, when Clinton had been in office for two years, health care reform ("Hillarycare") had also been a big issue, and the Republicans made big gains in the midterm elections?

Clinton got re-elected in 1996 anyway and handed Bush II a nice budget surplus in 2000.

This election pattern was also seen with Reagan.
 
  • #35
Wow! Murkowski appears to be winning handily in Alaska.

I don't recall a write-in candidate ever winning a Senate seat before. Is this a first [assuming she wins]?
 
  • #36
Still a little early in the day for AK, but it's probably also a first time that the ballot was allowed to list the names of write-in candidates.
 
  • #37
Gokul43201 said:
It's probably also a first time that the ballot was allowed to list the names of write-in candidates.

I don't understand. Her name isn't on the ballot, and write-ins have always been allowed.

Or are you saying they provide some list?
 
  • #39
Ivan Seeking said:
Or are you saying they provide some list?
Yup they provide a list of all the write-ins' names. First time it's been allowed in AK. Was some wrangling in the courts about it in the last couple weeks.

Edit: From the wiki:
Early voting began in mid-October. On October 20th, a voter in Homer noticed that a list of write-in candidates was posted inside the voting booth. The voter took a picture of the notice and reported the incident to both the City of Homer and the Alaska Democratic Party. While city workers maintained that posting the list in the booth was a misunderstanding, there was soon more attention on the broader issue of whether the state should be providing such a list at all, and a lawsuit was filed alleging that the Alaska Division of Elections was violating the law, specifically AAC, 25.070,which reads in part: "Information regarding a write-in candidate may not be discussed, exhibited or provided at the polling place, or within 200 feet of any entrance to the polling place, on election day." Both Republican and Democratic spokespersons decried the lists as electioneering on behalf of Murkowski, while representatives of the Division of Elections maintained that the lists were intended merely to assist voters. On Wednesday October 27 a judge issued a restraining order barring the lists, noting in his decision "If it were important 'assistance' for the Division to provide voters with lists of write-in candidates, then the Division has been asleep at the switch for the past 50 years, the Division first developed the need for a write-in candidate list 12 days ago." Later on the same day the Alaska Supreme Court issued a new ruling that the lists could be distributed to those who asked for them, but that any ballots cast by voters based on information on the lists be "segregated." The Division of Elections responded that they had neither the manpower nor the time to implement such a system by Election Day. By close of business on Thursday, October 28, over 60 new write in candidates had submitted their names for the race, encouraged by an Anchorage talk radio host.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Alaska,_2010#Candidates_3
 
Last edited:
  • #40
Gokul43201 said:
25% of precincts reporting, and pot is losing by double digits.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/ballot.measures/#

Yes, I saw that. It was about 14% I think...? [Ah 11% so far] Interestingly but not surprisingly, one of the groups that was coming out against the law were... the growers!

I guess it suddenly dawned on them that this may not be too good for their bank accounts. :smile:

It should pass in several States in 2012 [a younger electorate and a bigger turnout], but is too bad for now. Chalk up another one for the Mexican cartels.
 
Last edited:
  • #41
Post to subscribe to thread on PF mobile.
 
  • #42
Interesting to look at ballot measures in AZ. Strong rejection of affirmative action and support for secret ballots for union membership, but medical marijuana is split right down the middle with 80% of precincts counted.
 
  • #43
stinkbomb12 said:
I know that I'm the minority here, but I feel that it's good to be in a country that's not so "blue." HAHA

Were it not for the extremism of the tea party and their influence on the Republican party, and the extremism of the party itself, I would normally agree. But most of the big tea names went down - O'Donnell, Fiorina, Miller, Angle. In addition to Paul, those were the biggest on my list.

At least Paul is an accomplished person. It is the know-nothings like O'Donnell an Palin that really scare me.

Edit1: Fiorina is contesting the call for Boxer saying it's a dead heat. Presumably she ignores district considerations.

Edit2: Holy crap, she is indeed trailing by five points! A good example of why I can't stand her! She is a snake.
 
Last edited:
  • #44
Ivan Seeking said:
Wow! Murkowski appears to be winning handily in Alaska.

I don't recall a write-in candidate ever winning a Senate seat before. Is this a first [assuming she wins]?

Last I saw, it was all write-in candidates, which there are quite a few running this year in alaska.
 
  • #45
Gokul43201 said:
Interesting to look at ballot measures in AZ. Strong rejection of affirmative action and support for secret ballots for union membership, but medical marijuana is split right down the middle with 80% of precincts counted.

Always amusing to look at the "think of the children" results. My property taxes just went up, and a horribly ineffective bureacracy created by voters a few years back was retained, both by overwhelming margins.

I'm pretty confident your average person will vote for anything that says "kids" or "schools" somewhere in its description.

Other than that, I couldn't be happier with the results of the AZ elections tonight. I did vote for the medical marijuana prop myself, which is far more conservatively crafted than that passed in CA and OR. Assuming passage, it won't turn into the rubber stamp between pot heads and pot observed elsewhere. But, yeah, clearly the average voter in AZ is still pretty conservative, even as the state dances on the edge of west coast libertarianism.
 
  • #46
Ivan Seeking said:
Wow! Murkowski appears to be winning handily in Alaska.

I don't recall a write-in candidate ever winning a Senate seat before. Is this a first [assuming she wins]?

The last time it happened, Strom Thurmond was still a Democrat!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write-in_candidate
 
  • #47
So far this morning:

Senate: 51 D, 46 R, 3 undecided
House: 183 D, 240 R, 12 undecided

Next two years will be interesting.

Boehner now has the toughest job in Washington
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101103/el_yblog_upshot/boehner-now-has-the-toughest-job-in-washington

Reid (D-NV) was re-elected to the Senate. So much for ousting incumbents. DeMint (R-SC) and Schumer (D-NY) were both re-elected to the Senate. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #48
Ivan Seeking said:
That's about all I cared about tonight. The bloodbath of red was obviously expected, but I am still very sad for the country.

On the up side, the just-say-no party won't be able to get away with that anymore, so this does help to secure Obama's victory in 2012.

In 2012, Obama will most likely (still be running against Bush and) cite gridlock. However, this time around, he will also be faced with nearly 6 years of his own words - the accumulated sound bites and broken promises that define Obama.
 
  • #49
talk2glenn said:
Always amusing to look at the "think of the children" results. My property taxes just went up, and a horribly ineffective bureacracy created by voters a few years back was retained, both by overwhelming margins.

I'm pretty confident your average person will vote for anything that says "kids" or "schools" somewhere in its description.
Aha! I hadn't read the actual text of the measures (just the summary provided by CNN), so didn't notice the tactical wording. Add to that list: "patriot" and "security".

I've only been following a handful of Governors' races and they all went roughly the way I was hoping. Rick Snyder (R-MI) won handily by 20 points or so. Patrick (D-MA) held off Charlie Baker a little more easily than expected, with Tim Cahill(I) sadly dropping into single digits. If Scott Brown's election was to be read as a rejection of by the MA electorate of Obama's policies (as has been suggested by the punditocracy, and some posters here), I wonder how we should interpret the re-election of Obama's closest friend and virtual political doppelganger. And in RI, Lincoln Chafee (I) won, and will likely be the only Independent in a statehouse.
 
  • #50
Another interesting tidbit about a specific group of ballot measures:
CNN said:
Voters in several states defeated major anti-tax measures on Tuesday, acknowledging that their financially-strapped governments need revenue to provide services.

A trio of controversial tax initiatives in Colorado failed, as did an effort to slash sales taxes in Massachusetts, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. This comes amid a wave of anti-incumbent fervor that swept Republicans to victory in the U.S. House of Representatives.

"Voters are not willing to go so far as to start to disassemble state government," said Jennie Bowser, an elections analyst for the conference. "They recognized there are programs and services they benefit from and they want them to continue."

At the same time, voters were not eager to raise taxes. A high-profile bid to tax millionaires in Washington state failed.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/02/news/economy/ballot_measures/index.htm
 
  • #51
Gokul43201 said:
The real bloodbath is not in the Senate or the House, but in the Statehouses.

In states like Ohio (where Obama/Clinton campaigned very hard) the issue for 2012 and beyond is re-districting.
 
  • #52
My neighborhood sits right on the border of two congressional districts, so we get blasted by two sets of campaigns. Both districts were held by democrats, one was one term, and the other in a second term. Both democrats lost to new republicans. Independents swung away from democrats. Economy and taxes are the big drivers in voter sentiment. Health care is an issue for many, and social security and health care are issues for the elderly and retired.

I want to see where Congress will cut expenditures.

Nobody wants their social security or medicare/medicaid cut, or the unemployment check eliminated - but that's pretty much what has to be done to reduce government expenditures.

http://www.federalbudget.com/

Cutting SSI payments, HHS and DOD by 30% would quickly reduce the deficit.

Otherwise - http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/05/past-deficits-vs-obamas-deficits-in-pictures/

The states have to rein in healthcare and pension costs. An issue in this state is the health care, pension and other benefits enjoyed by State lawmakers (assembly and senate), who actually work part time.
 
  • #53
I listened to msnbc and CNN last evening and this morning. The (rather smug) question being posed isNow what? What will you cut? Who will you target?

It seems to me that if the Republicans "put the car in the ditch" - Obama and company pushed it into the field took it for a joy ride. Now everyone wonders how the Republicans will get the car back on the road? (again IMO)

Therefore, I think the strategy for the new Republican House should be to identify about 1,000 insane/obvious wastes of money and target them with very narrow legislation (Bills that everyone can and will read) - force Reid and Obama to defend their spending. Will this fix the problem - of course not - but it will set the stage for 2012.

On the flip side, the new Republican House also needs to introduce very narrow and specific programs that will help small business and create jobs.

The bottom line is a common sense approach to the problem will be recognized as responsible behavior. The surgical extraction of obvious waste, coupled with job growth (increased tax revenue) will steer us back in the right direction.
 
  • #54
WhoWee said:
On the flip side, the new Republican House also needs to introduce very narrow and specific programs that will help small business and create jobs.
Something like the Small Business Jobs Bill that passed a few weeks ago after Republicans had been blocking it for months? Hopefully, now that they are forced to actively lead, there will be less of a gridlock with reasonable legislation.
 
  • #55
NYTimes Quote of the Day said:
"I'd like to get to the bottom of what's really right for this country, and that's kind of hard while they're all calling each other names."
TONY PERELLI, 75, voting in Chicago.

Independents Fueled G.O.P Gains (no surprise there)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/03exit.html

Many Voters Find Little Comfort on Ballot
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03mood.html

I believe Reid will step down as majority leader. Too bad it wasn't sooner.

As for bigger or smaller government, one of the problems is that under the republican administrations, the trend was to increase spending, partly because the government starting outsourcing work to expensive contractors (which began under Reagan). So it is quite disengenous for republicans to be claiming they are for less government, when in actuality the function of government is simply passed to private hands. Add to that the failure to appropriately regulate and the failure to enforce regulation (e.g., mine safety, hazardous waste, financial markets, . . . ) which have in part lead to the near economic collapse in the US. Of course, the democrats have been more or less equally irresponsible.

It is certainly fair to ask the republicans what they will cut. Cutting $100 billion in the next fiscal year still leaves more than a $1 trillion deficit. Try cutting $1 trillion is federal expenditures.

The federal deficit is about 10% of the GDP, and the GDP only grew at an annual rate of 2%.

Federal budget deficit to exceed $1.4 trillion in 2010 and 2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/23/AR2010072304101.html

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/ (also has numbers on GDP)
http://www.cbo.gov/
 
Last edited:
  • #56
Gokul43201 said:
Something like the Small Business Jobs Bill that passed a few weeks ago after Republicans had been blocking it for months? Hopefully, now that they are forced to actively lead, there will be less of a gridlock with reasonable legislation.

I think it depends. We may see a full-on gridlock for the next few years if Obama tries to continue with his agenda because Republicans disagree with it.

Everyone talks about "bipartisanship," I really don't see how that can work except in a very few limited circumstances. On almost eveyr major issue, Democrats and Republicans are sharply divided on how to go about solving the issue.
 
  • #57
CAC1001 said:
I think it depends. We may see a full-on gridlock for the next few years if Obama tries to continue with his agenda because Republicans disagree with it.
How specifically do you suggest Obama will try to "continue with his agenda" (whatever that means)? Obama doesn't write legislation, he can only at best veto it. The Republicans have the House, and it's time for them to start writing some legislation.

Everyone talks about "bipartisanship," I really don't see how that can work except in a very few limited circumstances.
However, even in those limited circumstances, artificial differences are created purely for political reasons. Example: Republicans propose a commission to study the budget and deficit issues; later Obama supports this idea and promotes it publicly; immediately, Republican leadership stonewalls the move.
 
  • #58
Gokul43201 said:
Something like the Small Business Jobs Bill that passed a few weeks ago after Republicans had been blocking it for months? Hopefully, now that they are forced to actively lead, there will be less of a gridlock with reasonable legislation.

I said "narrow and specific".
 
  • #59
Advice from republicans to the republicans
Veteran Republicans' Advice To Winners: Don't Blow It
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131033092

Ken Duberstein's comment hits the spot. The election was a referendum on Obama and the democrats, not an indication that the voters are in love with the republican agenda. :smile:
 
  • #60
Astronuc said:
The election was a referendum on Obama and the democrats, not an indication that the voters are in love with the republican agenda.

Indeed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • · Replies 232 ·
8
Replies
232
Views
25K
Replies
61
Views
10K
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K