November is not that far away so might as well get this going. So far most polls show Republicans taking back the Senate but not by much. There are also some interesting Governor's races in Florida and Georgia that are neck and neck. I think Georgia has the potential to be the biggest upset because it so conservative and the challenger is Jimmy Carter's grandson. In my state of Florida there is no US Senate race so all eyes are on the Republican Rick Scott trying to hold off a challenge from the previous Governor and ex-Republican, ex-Independent Charlie Crist. There is also the issue of Amendment 2 which is the controversial medical marijuana bill. Feel free to post any interesting developments in your home state.
I have high hopes that the GOP will sweep Arkansas. Getting rid of daddy's boy Pryor and that soon to be unemployed bastard Mike Ross. Screw Ross. I hope he never gets another job after the way his staff blew me off when I needed help.
We have various state offices, and a Senate election. as far as I know, the only thing actively contested is Governor, with everything else having perhaps a sacrificial lamb Republican, but in most cases not even that. The Governor's race sets Martha Coakley (D), currently state AG, against Charlie Baker (R), formerly an HMO CEO. Baker was the Republican nominee four years ago, and I think he could win this, since there is no incumbent, and he was generally well regarded in 2010, even by those of us who didn't vote for him. Coakley is best known for her role in killing DOMA, but she is also known for losing Ted Kennedy's Senate seat to Scott Brown. She comes off very much as a professional politician who is disdainful of politicking. A bit of an elitist, I think she will need to really clean Baker's clock in the debates. There is also an interesting Congressional race, in which the incumbent lost to a primary challenger. The incumbent was weak (obviously), so Republicans are running a good candidate. Not much info yet on how the new Dem matches up against him. Lastly, there are two ballot measures to watch. One would repeal the state's casino law, the other would reduce the gas tax. I expect neither to pass, though originally thought the Casino proposal would succeed. The organizers of that effort have mounted a pretty lackluster campaign so far, and there is big money from the Mohegan's and Steve Wynn, both of which are approaching approval to build the first casinos in the state.
The only race of note is the Governor's race here in Oklahoma. Incumbent Mary Fallin (R) leads challenger Joe Dorman (D) by 20 points or so, which is interesting because the race is largely invisible, and he shows gain on her as the date nears. And most Republicans go near untested in this state. Fallin is essentially a robot created in an oil company lab, put in power by the good old boys to put a faux folksy spin on state government. Dorman seems likeable enough and I'll vote for him as a vote against the status quo, and any Oklahoma democrat is more conservative than most national brand republicans, so there's nothing to truly be worried about.
Michigan here, with two notable state races. The gubernatorial race is Rick Snyder, a moderate Republican, against Mark Schauer, a former congressman (my former congressman, in fact) who hasn't offered much beyond "I'll go back to the Granholm-era status quo of giving the unions everything they want." My biggest beef with Snyder is that, while I generally like HIS positions, he's been too reluctant to veto the abominably stupid shit his fellow Republicans in the Legislature dream up. Still, I'll be voting for him, since I think a return to "government of the unions, by the unions and for the unions" would be disaster. The Senate race is Terri Lynn Land, a Republican former secretary of state, against Gary Peters, a Democratic congressman. It's an open seat because Carl Levin, who has been in the Senate since approximately the signing of the Magna Carta, is retiring. Land was popular as secretary of state because she did a lot make the office (which in this state serves the functions of the DMV) more consumer-friendly. But she's been ducking debates and basically being the Invisible Candidate, so Peters will probably beat her. I'll be voting for Peters because I don't want the batshit insane national-level GOP to take the Senate.
Even if Republican win both the House and the Senate, they still won't have the balls to repeal Obamacare or do anything else productive.
It will be interesting to see how the registered independents vote in Arizona. There are actually more people registered as independents than there are registered Democratic voters in this state.
I am getting a little bored of every republican candidate running against Obama. I know the only way the republicans are able to beat him is to run against him in elections he is not even in, but the mass number of people who actually think the republicans are actually a better alternative is alarmingly high. Yes, I probably would not let Obama clean up after a short game of risk, but at least he is in the room. The republitards are still out in the lawn naming their toes and pissing on themselves. But perhaps a last dying wound from the republican party is what this country really needs right now. I do not want to pull a switch to vote for any of these nutbar banker puppets, I want my voting switch to send a dronestrike to whoever I vote for. Then I will vote for everyone. The republican party is the party of professional victims, and the democrats are the professional losers. My prediction for the midterms is the people get fucked.
In 2006 the democrats all ran against Bush and captured control of congress. Running for congress while mentioning the President has been standard practice for years
I'm always suspicious of any candidate who doesn't debate. I remember when Arnold refused to debate any of his opponents when he ran for Governor of California and for that reason alone I was hoping he'd lose. It just struck me as arrogant and disrespectful to the voters. Here in Florida's democratic primary Charlie Crist refused to debate Nan Rich. Nan Rich was an accomplished state senator and had filed her papers for Governor long before Charlie Crist joined the democratic party and flip flopped on all his previous positions. No way in hell would I ever vote for him. Keep it up guys this is interesting stuff
Without digging deeper in to the model, I'm a bit suspicious. They seem to be factoring movement in what are arguably still not close races. We should expect such races to tighten, but we should not expect the ultimate result to change much.
I actually hope the Dems hold the Senate. And I hope they win the House even though that is a long shot. I plan on helping them by not voting for anyone running for either body in the next election. (I am voting for Governor though) Let's give Obama's last two years unfettered control just like his first two years. Let's see the chaos that happens......
Historically, almost no 2nd term president's party has had control of Congress after the midterm elections. The Gipper won back some seats - but had lost so dramatically the election before that the Democrats still held both houses. If Obama's Democratic party DOES hold serve on the Senate, that would be a historical oddity. More here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/us/politics/obama-midterm-election.html
It is all a bit stupid if you ask me. People used to gather around and sacrifice people to the gods all the time. Should we keep doing it because it was standard practice for years?
Until the voters stop falling for it the practice will continue regardless of what you or I think about it.
As a realist I agree. Politicians are certainly not going to win the game by playing one that simply does not inspire the large block of idiot voters who run on name recognition and media popularity over actions and ability. It is sort of like how in high school elections you have to eliminate write ins or else beavis and butthead would win class president. Only here beavis and buthead are replaced by sarah palin and ted cruz. There are just simply too many idiots who are allowed to vote. Despite my fairness sensors going bezerk overe it I really have come to the conclusion that you simply cannot allow the village idiots to vote and democracy is doomed because of the amount of idiots we have in society. It is sort of like how communism might work on paper, but when applied to humans it is a miserable failure. Still, despite the futility of it all I do enjoy mentioning what should be merely for the shame and anger it creates in those who have some form of recognition about what their dumbassery does to the world. It is sort of like the meme that says this is why we cannot have nice things. It does not change anyone's actions, but it does rile up the self aware idiocy that roams around ruining things for everyone.
