Posted on 11/07/2006 5:04:31 PM PST by Dog
Please Mods can we have one central Live thread ...its tough jumping from thread to thread to get results.
ABQ Journal reports Wilson (R) up another 147 votes in NM-1. Lead is now 1,318 votes with six precincts left to report. Looks like she pulled off another squeaker.
Tonight is a lot more like 1986 then 1994. D's won a big victory in House/Senate after getting their clock cleaned in 1984 because of Reagan's stumbles.
But we won in 1988, and that was important for the same reason it'll be just as important in 2008, and that is basic American survival in a dangerous world. Bush Sr. needed to preside over the fall of the Soviet Union, make sure it happened, just like we need to win in 2008 to make sure we win the WOT.
'86 was a serious setback, but we were going to win as long as we kept the Presidency. Same for this time.
If ever an election wasn't about the base, this is it. With GOTV and the rest the base got out. This comes down to the middle. We need to focus on the big tent as well as our core issues.
That's right; no Yellowstone votes are included in these numbers.
If Burns wins, we still are stuck with some type of power-sharing crap at 50-50 though, correct (assuming Allen loses the recount)?
>>Conrad Burns can save the GOP from losing the Senate. Wow. Can it really happen?
It looks very possible!
Roskam won.
Duckworth lost.
One of the few bright spots tonight.
Republicans need to regroup immediately and vociferously demand that the rats STAND AND DELIVER!
Concur. The analogy tonight is 1986 - in reverse.
Huh? Is was on CNN everyday. Even made the big three nightly news many times.
Much like what happened in OHIO tonight.
Hell in 94 the run up to the election I can remember on CNN the talking heads asking about how the Check Kiting would factor in on the election. Then whamo and the Dems got hammered and we herd quotes like "the voters threw a temper tantrum tonight."
And that is exactly what happened in Ohio. Twas well orchestrated too, do you think it was any coincidence at all that the trial on the Coin dealer whole stole the money was in session these last few days? All day long WTVN was giving updates on the story telling how Noe set out from day one to steal money, and then they would mention Taft, and then they would go straight into reporting the latest election polls and then they would have a local voter comment on how Blackwell just did not do enough.
The Dems learned well and took advantage of voter anger, as the Republicans did in 94. They offered an alternative with the contract. However that contract would not have stood out as well without the contrast of the Demos writing bad checks.
94 was almost a perfect storm. Right now we don't even have the makings of mild rain.
In fact if the Repubs and President Bush don't hold the line on Iraq, I fear we will get hammered even harder in 08.
I hope I am very wrong but I just do not see any gungho leaders in there right now like we had in Newt!
sorry, not in reverse.
Hey, it wasn't my idea. When you depress your base it makes a very broad sword and it takes all the most vulnerable members. Those that were in highly contested races last election were the ones that took the hit - no matter how they stood on the issues.
Those that were in very safe districts had enough of a buffer to withstand the depressed base.
I don't think so. Cheney breaks any tie. Besides, even a power sharing arrangement beats being the minority party.
In '94 there were probably a few rats left with some ethics - people like your mom.
But look at the kind of people they vote for - Alcee hastings, over and over. William Jefferson, over and over, Menendez, and so on.
Please. This is Rahm Emaual's win tonight; try to remember WHO he works for.
CNN just called the Pombo (CA-11) race as a loss. :(
I just checked and saw that Steele lost the Senate race in Maryland and Murtha beat Irey for his House seat. It's official: I'll try to go back to sleep and hope all of this is just a nightmare.
The base voted almost straight GOP.
Well, I don't know the procedural details of how the Senate comes up with an agreement, but it strikes me that McConnell is tougher and a better tactician than was Trent Lott, so he might do alright by us.
It effectively is. Haven't we learned yet that voting third-party gives the race to the Democrats? Just look at Montana - the Republicans would still have the Senate if it weren't for the third-party votes?
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.