Republicans Outpolling Democratic Senators, Governors

[kyredneck]

Remember the midterm elections of 1994? Think maybe change could be in the wind?

http://news.newsmax.com/?ZKCRaYeV9i13fjP5zX1OxvW1z3lkxfU1Z

Democratic senators and governors are trailing their Republican challengers in a number of states in prospective match-ups for the 2010 elections, Rasmussen Reports polls reveal.

Even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is facing a tough re-election battle — he trails Sue Lowden, chairwoman of the Nevada Republican Party and the preferred candidate of the GOP, by 10 percentage points in a recent poll, 50 percent to 40 percent.

Another GOP hopeful, former University of Nevada-Las Vegas basketball star Danny Tarkanian, also leads Reid, 50 percent to 43 percent.

Other election battles that are shaping up as difficult for Democratic incumbents:

In Connecticut, Republican challenger Rob Simmons, a former congressman, leads Sen. Christopher Dodd, 49 percent to 39 percent, while 5 percent say they'd prefer another candidate and 6 percent are not sure, Rasmussen found. Dodd is essentially even with three other possible Republican candidates.

Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado trails former Republican Lieut. Gov. Jane Norton, an announced candidate, by a margin of 45 percent to 36 percent.

Republican challenger Chris Christie, a former prosecutor, leads New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, 48 percent to 41 percent, in a recent Rasmussen survey, while independent candidate Chris Daggett gets 6 percent of the vote.

In Iowa, Democratic Gov. Chet Culver trails Des Moines University President Terry Branstad, a former GOP governor of the state who is considering a run, by a huge margin of 54 percent to 34 percent.

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland narrowly trails Republican challenger John Kasich, a former congressman, 46 percent to 45 percent.

In California, three-term Sen. Barbara Boxer leads former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, 49 percent to 39 percent, and state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore by a margin of 46 percent to 37 percent, but Rasmussen notes that "any incumbent who polls less than 50 percent is considered vulnerable."

 

[Nonsequitur]

Remember the midterm elections of 1994? Think maybe change could be in the wind?

http://news.newsmax.com/?ZKCRaYeV9i13fjP5zX1OxvW1z3lkxfU1Z

Democratic senators and governors are trailing their Republican challengers in a number of states in prospective match-ups for the 2010 elections, Rasmussen Reports polls reveal.

Even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is facing a tough re-election battle — he trails Sue Lowden, chairwoman of the Nevada Republican Party and the preferred candidate of the GOP, by 10 percentage points in a recent poll, 50 percent to 40 percent.

Another GOP hopeful, former University of Nevada-Las Vegas basketball star Danny Tarkanian, also leads Reid, 50 percent to 43 percent.

Other election battles that are shaping up as difficult for Democratic incumbents:

In Connecticut, Republican challenger Rob Simmons, a former congressman, leads Sen. Christopher Dodd, 49 percent to 39 percent, while 5 percent say they'd prefer another candidate and 6 percent are not sure, Rasmussen found. Dodd is essentially even with three other possible Republican candidates.

Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado trails former Republican Lieut. Gov. Jane Norton, an announced candidate, by a margin of 45 percent to 36 percent.

Republican challenger Chris Christie, a former prosecutor, leads New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, 48 percent to 41 percent, in a recent Rasmussen survey, while independent candidate Chris Daggett gets 6 percent of the vote.

In Iowa, Democratic Gov. Chet Culver trails Des Moines University President Terry Branstad, a former GOP governor of the state who is considering a run, by a huge margin of 54 percent to 34 percent.

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland narrowly trails Republican challenger John Kasich, a former congressman, 46 percent to 45 percent.

In California, three-term Sen. Barbara Boxer leads former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, 49 percent to 39 percent, and state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore by a margin of 46 percent to 37 percent, but Rasmussen notes that "any incumbent who polls less than 50 percent is considered vulnerable."

I just can't believe that.
People want Republicans?
What happened to the public mandate of wanting the Democratic planks of killing babies, stopping people from owning arms to protect themselves, forcing people to pay for others who won't take care of themselves or their families and expect all the 'rich' people to do it?

 

[KenH]

Unfortunately, recent history shows that the Republican Party will not stop the growth of the federal government when it has power. They failed after the 1994 election because they allowed President Clinton to face them down during the federal government shutdown faceoff.

 

[Nonsequitur]

Unfortunately, recent history shows that the Republican Party will not stop the growth of the federal government when it has power. They failed after the 1994 election because they allowed President Clinton to face them down during the federal government shutdown faceoff.

I agree, but that doesn't mean we should just take whatever they give us.
'WE THE PEOPLE'
I know, it's sorta old and no one cares anymore.
But that does not mean we should give up.

 

[Spear]

I have the feeling there's no more moderation sor some here in terms of politics than there are in my own country : the " other political wing " is absolutly good for nothing, has no idea, and everything they've done, might or will ever do will be wrong.

Do democrats NEVER do anything good ? Do republicans ALWAYS do better ? I'm not american, but i can't believe one is perfect, and the other does always worse in everything.

 

[kyredneck]

.......personally, I like gridlock......

 

[Johnv]

Partisan majorities are somewhat predictable. The Democratic Party has enjoyed a majority which peaked in 2008. I predicted then that you will see the pendulum start to swing in the opposite direction. 2012 will see a significant increase in Republican seats, even if the current POTUS is reelected. I suspect a Republican majority (which will include a Republican POTUS) will max out in 2016, afterwhich the pendulum will begin swinging in the opposite direction once again.

 

[Nonsequitur]

I have the feeling there's no more moderation sor (SIC)some here in terms of politics than there are in my own country(Try to remeber, the only war that the French has won is the french Revolution.)
no idea, and everything they've done, might or will ever do will be wrong.

Do democrats NEVER do anything good ? (NO)Do republicans ALWAYS do better ? (NO)I'm not american, (No kidding?)but i can't believe one is perfect, and the other does always worse in everything.

You are right. You are not an American.
Your opinion means the same as droppings from the south end of a mule walking north.

 

[Nonsequitur]

Unfortunately, recent history shows that the Republican Party will not stop the growth of the federal government when it has power.

Are you trying to tell me that the Democratic party will?
If not, then what is your point?
Libertarian?
You mean "Democratic Lite?" , They still go for abortion and gay rights.
Still not biblical. Still not Christian. Still not anything that stands for what is right. Only a secular 'Happy Medium' between the current parties. Thanks for playing. (Re-Set?, Re-Start, Quit?)

 

[Spear]

Try to remeber, the only war that the French has won is the french Revolution

I didn't understand why you were reminding that to me ? Was i parading or mentioning about war, was i ? But, as you don't seem to know, France has been at war many, many times, even after the Revolution (yes !). We even had an emperor, who conquered many countries (type " Napoleon " in wikipedia, if you don't know who i'm talking about), by war (no, i'm not proud of that, am just completing the information about the " France & war " thing you were trying to talk about). We lost many wars too, before and after the Revolution.

But let's come back to contemporary history : about War in the gulf I, about War in Yougoslavia, and a few other conflicts, do you mean these were " american only " victories ? I'd like to know, tell me now.

 

[Trotter]

Ignore the troll, Spear.

In US politics, the Republicans and the Democrats are usually on polar opposites. Democrats are usually extremely liberal in their views and their politics, while Republicans are very conservative. In the old days the Dems were for the common man and the Reps were for the rich... but these are not the old days.

From my own point of view, the Reps make a LOT more sense than do the Dems. Abortion is just one issue that makes sure I will never stadn with the Dems, but it is much more than that. You can't keep trying to make those who earn a living support those who won't. I realize some can't, but they are a very small minority.

Neither party is a religious party, but the core values of the Reps is a whole closer to my own values than the other.

 

[Spear]

Ignore the troll, Spear.

In US politics, the Republicans and the Democrats are usually on polar opposites. Democrats are usually extremely liberal in their views and their politics, while Republicans are very conservative. In the old days the Dems were for the common man and the Reps were for the rich... but these are not the old days.

From my own point of view, the Reps make a LOT more sense than do the Dems. Abortion is just one issue that makes sure I will never stadn with the Dems, but it is much more than that. You can't keep trying to make those who earn a living support those who won't. I realize some can't, but they are a very small minority.

Neither party is a religious party, but the core values of the Reps is a whole closer to my own values than the other.

Thanks for giving your point of view, which is clear Trotter and very understandable !

 

[Nonsequitur]

Ignore the troll, Spear. (Moi?)

In US politics, the Republicans and the Democrats are usually on polar opposites. Democrats are usually extremely liberal in their views and their politics, while Republicans are very conservative. (The Trots got that right Spear.)In the old days the Dems were for the common man and the Reps were for the rich... but these are not the old days. (That, needs to be looked up in U.S history, which Trots seems to be woefuilly ignorant of. He is probably a product of our new liberal school system, given this 'world-view'.)

From my own point of view, the Reps make a LOT more sense than do the Dems. Abortion is just one issue that makes sure I will never stadn with the Dems, but it is much more than that. You can't keep trying to make those who earn a living support those who won't. I realize some can't, but they are a very small minority.(Again, Trots and I agree.)

Neither party is a religious party, but the core values of the Reps is a whole closer to my own values than the other.

As for 'bringing up' war as far as the French are concerned; yes, I know who Napoleon was. He was another two-bit dictactor who thought he could take over the world. He was wrong.
As far as the French government, (i.e. doesn't mean you) goes, we can start another thread concerning Iraq.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Remember the midterm elections of 1994? Think maybe change could be in the wind?

http://news.newsmax.com/?ZKCRaYeV9i13fjP5zX1OxvW1z3lkxfU1Z

Democratic senators and governors are trailing their Republican challengers in a number of states in prospective match-ups for the 2010 elections, Rasmussen Reports polls reveal.

Even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is facing a tough re-election battle — he trails Sue Lowden, chairwoman of the Nevada Republican Party and the preferred candidate of the GOP, by 10 percentage points in a recent poll, 50 percent to 40 percent.

Another GOP hopeful, former University of Nevada-Las Vegas basketball star Danny Tarkanian, also leads Reid, 50 percent to 43 percent.

Other election battles that are shaping up as difficult for Democratic incumbents:

In Connecticut, Republican challenger Rob Simmons, a former congressman, leads Sen. Christopher Dodd, 49 percent to 39 percent, while 5 percent say they'd prefer another candidate and 6 percent are not sure, Rasmussen found. Dodd is essentially even with three other possible Republican candidates.

Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado trails former Republican Lieut. Gov. Jane Norton, an announced candidate, by a margin of 45 percent to 36 percent.

Republican challenger Chris Christie, a former prosecutor, leads New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, 48 percent to 41 percent, in a recent Rasmussen survey, while independent candidate Chris Daggett gets 6 percent of the vote.

In Iowa, Democratic Gov. Chet Culver trails Des Moines University President Terry Branstad, a former GOP governor of the state who is considering a run, by a huge margin of 54 percent to 34 percent.

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland narrowly trails Republican challenger John Kasich, a former congressman, 46 percent to 45 percent.

In California, three-term Sen. Barbara Boxer leads former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, 49 percent to 39 percent, and state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore by a margin of 46 percent to 37 percent, but Rasmussen notes that "any incumbent who polls less than 50 percent is considered vulnerable."

On the one hand, it makes sense. Even Democrats are saying "wait a second! This isn't what I signed on for".

But on the other, why Republicans, when Republicans have proven themselves to be just as bad as Democrats?

 

[kyredneck]

....... why Republicans, when Republicans have proven themselves to be just as bad as Democrats?

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1463500#post1463500 [my post #6 this thread]



.....i like it when there isn't anything getting done; imo, gridlock is a good thing....