Posted on 10/27/2010 7:05:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
Edited on 10/27/2010 7:24:24 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
What it does is misdirect limited news resources to their personal needs ~ kind of like the gay guys want to renovate the entirity of society just for the sake of a few ounces of their own flesh.
No matter what happens here we won't be hearing about "Castle may change parties".
When the Democrats (and Republicans) finally called Jeffords bluff he ended up jumping parties for a milk support deal for something close 10 dairy farms in Vermont and a Canadian cheesemaker. Castle would be infinitely cheaper.
Seems to me that the cards fall more desirably if one has prepared the deck beforehand.
The problem with the Tea Party candidates this year is that they're an ad hoc bunch, onto whom Tea Party folks have latched only after they showed up in the race.
Where the Senate is concerned, a lot of those folks are really not very good candidates, and they're floundering.
Next time, perhaps the Tea Party would do well to be more organized and intentional about who they support -- and they should begin with recruitment.
Then you could "do the right thing" without having to hope that your guy doesn't turn out to be a chump.
And we certainly won’t have to worry about Sen. Coons jumping to the R column, will we?
I think even Senator Webb would shoot him down in mid-leap for that. Some switcheroos are intolerable to everyone!
I’m getting a sense lately that the talking heads and other elitists are using past models and thought processes. The models that were used in the past to predict or gauge what is or will happen was perhaps working but I sense that this year is way different. There is something going on (a deep, deep, awaking that wasn’t even present in 1994?) in the country that makes those models useless. They are unaware of how deep the feelings and motivations this year are and will not understand what happened come Nov 3.
100 seats is overconfidence and raising the bar of high expectations. I'm thinking 80 tops, with a minimum of 60.
Well then stack your own damned deck, rather than whining about the one somebody else used on you!
I don't understand this idea some of you folks have, that politics will just sorta flow your way without effort and preparation.
Politics is like war. And on that subject, it pays to recall the old saying, "Amateurs talk about strategy, dilettantes talk about tactics, and professionals talk about logistics."
The name of the game in winning for the long term, is to deal with the logistics of politics. Democrats have been winning with that approach for decades. Republicans have never been good at it. And in its stout refusal to organize, Tea Party movement positively rejects the premise.
If O'Donnell is irrelevant and can't win Delaware, then why are the Democrats so heavily focused on that state? The answer is simple; The Democrats internal polling shows the race either tied or O'Donnell leading outside the margin of error.
50 is a safe bet. What are you gonna do if it's not 100?
I’m not counting on 100, but why go with the lowest number and look defeated with a pathetically depressed face while saying so?
I think the pundits don’t want egg on their faces. I don’t think one can use previous models because we’re in a different age where the voting public is more informed and more engaged in the process.
I never said...I didn't want organization or viable candidates. I think all I said..was I prefer to do what is right.
I understand war. To the victor goes the spoils...War is hell...War, is strategy..etc.
Let's just see what we see come Nov. 3rd.
Lastly...were you happy with Dole and McCain? I suspect not....considering your response.
I'm on your side....
You said you're aiming for 100.
...but why go with the lowest number and look defeated with a pathetically depressed face while saying so?
I'm not depressed and I'm certainly not trying to be overconfident. Realistically lot of these races are tight or tightening, and anything can happen.
I'd love to see the Democrats get their asses kicked on Tuesday night/Wednesday morning, like the next Freeper wishes, but we need to be realistic here of the possibility of voter fraud nationwide.
And also the possibility that hopes have exceeded possibilities in some of these races.
Putting those huge numbers out there is just asking trouble. The worst result on Tuesday is that the expected swing to the R's is much lower than expected, which would be spun as a rejection of the Tea Party movement, and fear of what the Republicans would do.
I expect that the R's will win the House, though not by a large margin. I expect that the Democrats will keep at least 50 seats in the Senate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.