Dem primary if/when Hillary's campaign flames out?

[GannonFan]

When job approval equals election results then your graph will be relevant. Holding your breath would not be wise, however.

Oh, and they have strangleholds on most state governments (legislatures and executives) as well. So yeah, just those few things.

I think Republicans have control of the state governments that reflect their core tenets
I don't see things nearly as lopsided as is being reflected on either side of this debate

I guess if Republicans gained control of Washington State and Oregon and Vermont
Then I'd have to start shifting my perspective to match one of these debates here

In the past few elections the GOP now has control in the following places you wouldn't think they would, or at least to the extent that they do have control:

- Florida - governor and both houses of legislature
- Illinois - governor
- Maine - governor and state senate
- Maryland - governor
- Massachusetts - governor
- Michigan - governor and both houses of legislature
- Minnesota - state house
- Nevada - governor and both houses of legislature
- New Hampshire - both houses of legislature
- New Mexico - governor and both houses of legislature
- New York - state senate
- Ohio - governor and both houses of legislature
- North Carolina - governor and both houses of legislature
- Pennsylvania - both houses of legislature
- Washington - state senate
- Wisconsin - governor and both houses of legislature

That's a lot of places where the GOP hasn't had any control in decades, or places where they haven't had such total control in the same amount of time. And all at a time when the GOP is supposedly dissolving and ceasing as a political party, as per dawg.

[Chizzang]

lost Obama care, lost womens vote, lost latino vote. Fact.

lost the popular vote in five of the last six elections. Fact.

Where is this majority that all these governors and congressholes represent? Note at the voting booth evidently.

Where do you think governors and state legislatures and the federal Congress come from? Elections. How are the GOP winning, and at such wide margins (again 31 out of 50 governors, 33 out of 50 state senates, 34 out of 50 state houses of reps, 245 out of 435 in the House, 54 out of 100 in the Senate) and how are they taking control away from Dems (as was done in Congress) if they are failing at the election polls? The answer is, the Dems are winning the Presidential elections (and just the election of the President in those), and nothing else. The problem for the Dems, is, that the nothing else represents the lionshare of the government in the US these days.

This ^ points out some interesting things...
What states have governors that are Republicans but the state is primarily Liberal..?
as well as Senators - what "liberal" states have Republican Governors..?

I'm curious about that

* Edit: Oops I see your post above now *

[GannonFan]

Where do you think governors and state legislatures and the federal Congress come from? Elections. How are the GOP winning, and at such wide margins (again 31 out of 50 governors, 33 out of 50 state senates, 34 out of 50 state houses of reps, 245 out of 435 in the House, 54 out of 100 in the Senate) and how are they taking control away from Dems (as was done in Congress) if they are failing at the election polls? The answer is, the Dems are winning the Presidential elections (and just the election of the President in those), and nothing else. The problem for the Dems, is, that the nothing else represents the lionshare of the government in the US these days.

This ^ points out some interesting things...
What states have governors that are Republicans but the state is primarily Liberal..?
as well as Senators - what "liberal" states have Republican Governors..?

I'm curious about that

* Edit: Oops I see your post above now *

Kentucky, Montana, and West Virginia (although WVa has been purple for decades now) would be typically GOP states that have Democratic governors, and really just those first two are deeply Republican.

[houndawg]

I think Republicans have control of the state governments that reflect their core tenets
I don't see things nearly as lopsided as is being reflected on either side of this debate

I guess if Republicans gained control of Washington State and Oregon and Vermont
Then I'd have to start shifting my perspective to match one of these debates here

In the past few elections the GOP now has control in the following places you wouldn't think they would, or at least to the extent that they do have control:

- Florida - governor and both houses of legislature
- Illinois - governor
- Maine - governor and state senate
- Maryland - governor
- Massachusetts - governor
- Michigan - governor and both houses of legislature
- Minnesota - state house
- Nevada - governor and both houses of legislature
- New Hampshire - both houses of legislature
- New Mexico - governor and both houses of legislature
- New York - state senate
- Ohio - governor and both houses of legislature
- North Carolina - governor and both houses of legislature
- Pennsylvania - both houses of legislature
- Washington - state senate
- Wisconsin - governor and both houses of legislature

That's a lot of places where the GOP hasn't had any control in decades, or places where they haven't had such total control in the same amount of time. And all at a time when the GOP is supposedly dissolving and ceasing as a political party, as per dawg.

So how come with all this control they can't elect a conk?

[GannonFan]

In the past few elections the GOP now has control in the following places you wouldn't think they would, or at least to the extent that they do have control:

- Florida - governor and both houses of legislature
- Illinois - governor
- Maine - governor and state senate
- Maryland - governor
- Massachusetts - governor
- Michigan - governor and both houses of legislature
- Minnesota - state house
- Nevada - governor and both houses of legislature
- New Hampshire - both houses of legislature
- New Mexico - governor and both houses of legislature
- New York - state senate
- Ohio - governor and both houses of legislature
- North Carolina - governor and both houses of legislature
- Pennsylvania - both houses of legislature
- Washington - state senate
- Wisconsin - governor and both houses of legislature

That's a lot of places where the GOP hasn't had any control in decades, or places where they haven't had such total control in the same amount of time. And all at a time when the GOP is supposedly dissolving and ceasing as a political party, as per dawg.

So how come with all this control they can't elect a conk?

The Presidential election is ultimately not about party, it's about the two people running. Ultimate popularity contest. The GOP, going back to the 1992 contest, has only had the more likeable candidate in 2 of the 6 Presidential contests since then. But that's only for one office (granted, the most powerful office, but just one office). The GOP has simply had the better of the Democrats in almost every other election at other levels outside of the campaign for President, and it's been a trend for several years now (about 8 years). The GOP, going back a century, has rarely held both houses of Congress, and has likely never held both houses of Congress while also holding such a substantial number of state offices as well. For all the GOP has done wrong at the very tippy top of the ticket, they're doing it right below it. And the counter is true, the Dems have done great at the tippy top of the ticket, but have really messed it up almost everywhere else. Of course, those Dems are like you and seem to be under the illusion that, despite the GOP rolling to victory in election after election, that the GOP is no longer a party to bother with. Maybe the Dems should get rid of the donkey as their symbol and simply go with the ostrich?

[travelinman67]

So how come with all this control they can't elect a conk?

The Presidential election is ultimately not about party, it's about the two people running. Ultimate popularity contest. The GOP, going back to the 1992 contest, has only had the more likeable candidate in 2 of the 6 Presidential contests since then. But that's only for one office (granted, the most powerful office, but just one office). The GOP has simply had the better of the Democrats in almost every other election at other levels outside of the campaign for President, and it's been a trend for several years now (about 8 years). The GOP, going back a century, has rarely held both houses of Congress, and has likely never held both houses of Congress while also holding such a substantial number of state offices as well. For all the GOP has done wrong at the very tippy top of the ticket, they're doing it right below it. And the counter is true, the Dems have done great at the tippy top of the ticket, but have really messed it up almost everywhere else. Of course, those Dems are like you and seem to be under the illusion that, despite the GOP rolling to victory in election after election, that the GOP is no longer a party to bother with. Maybe the Dems should get rid of the donkey as their symbol and simply go with the ostrich?

Hey, GF made a joke!!!

[Baldy]

You know as good as I that jon would blow Barack (or Michelle) if given the chance. So why not The Hildabeast?

Is English your first language?

Touched a nerve?

[Baldy]

You're reinforcing my point about conk irrelevancy, Ballsack: nobody likes Hillary but she will wipe her political ass with whichever feeble excuse for a candidate the conks manage to excrete during the primary..Chiz is exactly right - if Hillary were a conk, every pair of republican trousers in the nation would be permanently stained by semen.

The only point you have is on the top of your head, Earl.

Except for the single female lesbian feminazi, she will not draw out the vote, period. She is played out, done, over, irrelevant, her window of opportunity closed 8 years ago, time has passed her by. Hell, even John McCain would beat her now.

[Chizzang]

You're reinforcing my point about conk irrelevancy, Ballsack: nobody likes Hillary but she will wipe her political ass with whichever feeble excuse for a candidate the conks manage to excrete during the primary..Chiz is exactly right - if Hillary were a conk, every pair of republican trousers in the nation would be permanently stained by semen.

The only point you have is on the top of your head, Earl.

Except for the single female lesbian feminazi, she will not draw out the vote, period. She is played out, done, over, irrelevant, her window of opportunity closed 8 years ago, time has passed her by. Hell, even John McCain would beat her now.

would you care to make a wager on that sir..?
"Romney in a landslide"
was the last Republican prognosticator to speak so loudly

[kalm]

So how come with all this control they can't elect a conk?

The Presidential election is ultimately not about party, it's about the two people running. Ultimate popularity contest. The GOP, going back to the 1992 contest, has only had the more likeable candidate in 2 of the 6 Presidential contests since then. But that's only for one office (granted, the most powerful office, but just one office). The GOP has simply had the better of the Democrats in almost every other election at other levels outside of the campaign for President, and it's been a trend for several years now (about 8 years). The GOP, going back a century, has rarely held both houses of Congress, and has likely never held both houses of Congress while also holding such a substantial number of state offices as well. For all the GOP has done wrong at the very tippy top of the ticket, they're doing it right below it. And the counter is true, the Dems have done great at the tippy top of the ticket, but have really messed it up almost everywhere else. Of course, those Dems are like you and seem to be under the illusion that, despite the GOP rolling to victory in election after election, that the GOP is no longer a party to bother with. Maybe the Dems should get rid of the donkey as their symbol and simply go with the ostrich?

Coincided with Democrats moving to the right and courting power establishment wealth.

Have the two parties been ideologically closer with how they govern?

[UNI88]

The only point you have is on the top of your head, Earl.

Except for the single female lesbian feminazi, she will not draw out the vote, period. She is played out, done, over, irrelevant, her window of opportunity closed 8 years ago, time has passed her by. Hell, even John McCain would beat her now.

would you care to make a wager on that sir..?
"Romney in a landslide"
was the last Republican prognosticator to speak so loudly

What did you have in mind?

I'm not as tried and true conservative as Baldy but I believe that over a protracted campaign Hillary's arrogance will wear on people and that if nominated there is a better than 50% chance that she will not be elected POTUS.

[Baldy]

would you care to make a wager on that sir..?
"Romney in a landslide"
was the last Republican prognosticator to speak so loudly

What did you have in mind?

I'm not as tried and true conservative as Baldy but I believe that over a protracted campaign Hillary's arrogance will wear on people and that if nominated there is a better than 50% chance that she will not be elected POTUS.

I am certainly no conservative since social issues are of no concern to me whatsoever. Constitutional amendments for "traditional" marriage (even at the state level) or the overturning of Roe v. Wade make my skin crawl. You may label me a free market libertarian (small "L") if you must.

[AZGrizFan]

It's not just the Right, Clitzorus.

Hillary Clinton has never been more unpopular



As I said, nobody likes her. If they don't like you, they ain't gonna waste their time and vote for you.

Please include me among those who do not like her...
But my "feelings" are rarely seen as an important element in the outcome of pretty much anything



I got two words for you guys: Jill Stein

Except in this case your "feelings" are representative of a big chunk of normally solid Donk voters...

[Chizzang]

would you care to make a wager on that sir..?
"Romney in a landslide"
was the last Republican prognosticator to speak so loudly

What did you have in mind?

I'm not as tried and true conservative as Baldy but I believe that over a protracted campaign Hillary's arrogance will wear on people and that if nominated there is a better than 50% chance that she will not be elected POTUS.

Well everybody does Pay-Pal
lets bet $50.00 on the election
Keep in mind I'm betting on somebody that I'm not even voting for
However it is a foregone conclusion she will win Washington State so my vote is meaningless

But $50 bucks

I'll place wagers with both you and Baldy

[houndawg]

You're reinforcing my point about conk irrelevancy, Ballsack: nobody likes Hillary but she will wipe her political ass with whichever feeble excuse for a candidate the conks manage to excrete during the primary..Chiz is exactly right - if Hillary were a conk, every pair of republican trousers in the nation would be permanently stained by semen.

The only point you have is on the top of your head, Earl.

Except for the single female lesbian feminazi, she will not draw out the vote, period. She is played out, done, over, irrelevant, her window of opportunity closed 8 years ago, time has passed her by. Hell, even John McCain would beat her now.

She'll still kick the shit out of whichever political dwarf the conks put up, Balsack. It will be like playing pinata with no blindfold.

[andy7171]

My little brother, the militant vegan, proud PETA supporter and crunchy Green Party member is wearing Bernie t shirts. He doesn't like it when I mention he'd be 87.

[Baldy]

The only point you have is on the top of your head, Earl.

Except for the single female lesbian feminazi, she will not draw out the vote, period. She is played out, done, over, irrelevant, her window of opportunity closed 8 years ago, time has passed her by. Hell, even John McCain would beat her now.

She'll still kick the shit out of whichever political dwarf the conks put up, Balsack. It will be like playing pinata with no blindfold.

You're also the idiot who thinks Obama could win a 3rd term.

[Ivytalk]

My little brother, the militant vegan, proud PETA supporter and crunchy Green Party member is wearing Bernie t shirts. He doesn't like it when I mention he'd be 87.

Is your little brother also a lesbian?

[andy7171]

My little brother, the militant vegan, proud PETA supporter and crunchy Green Party member is wearing Bernie t shirts. He doesn't like it when I mention he'd be 87.

Is your little brother also a lesbian?

Maybe.

[houndawg]

So how come with all this control they can't elect a conk?

The Presidential election is ultimately not about party, it's about the two people running. Ultimate popularity contest. The GOP, going back to the 1992 contest, has only had the more likeable candidate in 2 of the 6 Presidential contests since then. But that's only for one office (granted, the most powerful office, but just one office). The GOP has simply had the better of the Democrats in almost every other election at other levels outside of the campaign for President, and it's been a trend for several years now (about 8 years). The GOP, going back a century, has rarely held both houses of Congress, and has likely never held both houses of Congress while also holding such a substantial number of state offices as well. For all the GOP has done wrong at the very tippy top of the ticket, they're doing it right below it. And the counter is true, the Dems have done great at the tippy top of the ticket, but have really messed it up almost everywhere else. Of course, those Dems are like you and seem to be under the illusion that, despite the GOP rolling to victory in election after election, that the GOP is no longer a party to bother with. Maybe the Dems should get rid of the donkey as their symbol and simply go with the ostrich?

Only one actually. More voters found Gore likable than Bush in 2000.

So how did Obamacare get passed in the face of such an overwhelming majority?

[houndawg]

Where do you think governors and state legislatures and the federal Congress come from? Elections. How are the GOP winning, and at such wide margins (again 31 out of 50 governors, 33 out of 50 state senates, 34 out of 50 state houses of reps, 245 out of 435 in the House, 54 out of 100 in the Senate) and how are they taking control away from Dems (as was done in Congress) if they are failing at the election polls? The answer is, the Dems are winning the Presidential elections (and just the election of the President in those), and nothing else. The problem for the Dems, is, that the nothing else represents the lionshare of the government in the US these days.

This ^ points out some interesting things...
What states have governors that are Republicans but the state is primarily Liberal..?
as well as Senators - what "liberal" states have Republican Governors..?

I'm curious about that

* Edit: Oops I see your post above now *

Illinois for one.

[houndawg]

She'll still kick the **** out of whichever political dwarf the conks put up, Balsack. It will be like playing pinata with no blindfold.

You're also the idiot who thinks Obama could win a 3rd term.

He'd win easily but he's too busy plotting invading Texas and taking all their guns.

[Baldy]

You're also the idiot who thinks Obama could win a 3rd term.

He'd win easily but he's too busy plotting invading Texas and taking all their guns.

Obama Says He Could Win Again - True or False?

In a recent speech criticizing African political leaders who stay too long in office, President Obama said he could win a third term if he ran for president again but acknowledged that U.S. law does not allow it. Could Obama win again?

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 30% of Likely U.S. Voters say they would vote for the president if he ran for a third term. Sixty-three percent (63%) would not. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Most Democrats (57%) would vote to give Obama a third term. Ninety-three percent (93%) of Republicans, 68% of voters not affiliated with either major party - and 32% of Democrats - would not.

[BDKJMU]

The Presidential election is ultimately not about party, it's about the two people running. Ultimate popularity contest. The GOP, going back to the 1992 contest, has only had the more likeable candidate in 2 of the 6 Presidential contests since then. But that's only for one office (granted, the most powerful office, but just one office). The GOP has simply had the better of the Democrats in almost every other election at other levels outside of the campaign for President, and it's been a trend for several years now (about 8 years). The GOP, going back a century, has rarely held both houses of Congress, and has likely never held both houses of Congress while also holding such a substantial number of state offices as well. For all the GOP has done wrong at the very tippy top of the ticket, they're doing it right below it. And the counter is true, the Dems have done great at the tippy top of the ticket, but have really messed it up almost everywhere else. Of course, those Dems are like you and seem to be under the illusion that, despite the GOP rolling to victory in election after election, that the GOP is no longer a party to bother with. Maybe the Dems should get rid of the donkey as their symbol and simply go with the ostrich?

Only one actually. More voters found Gore likable than Bush in 2000.

So how did Obamacare get passed in the face of such an overwhelming majority?

The donks had a near supermajority for 2 year when they passed Obamacare. And shortly after they passed Obamacare in 2010 they lost BADLY in Congress in 2010, gained sleightly in 2012 (BHO's coattails) and even more ground in 2014. How come the conks gained a whopping 6 Senate and 63 House seats in 2010 Densedawg? How come most donks in 2010 were afraid to even mention Obamacare in their 2010 campaigns? How come after losing only 2 Senate and 8 House Seats back in 2012 the conks gained a WHOPPING 9 Senate seats and 14 House seats in 2014? Why were the donk voters who voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 not voting donk in 2010 and 2014 O Densedawg? How come nationally the only area where donks are winning is at POTUS? Are they too lazy or too stupid to vote more than once every 4 years?

[Skjellyfetti]

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 30% of Likely U.S. Voters say they would vote for the president if he ran for a third term. Sixty-three percent (63%) would not. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Most Democrats (57%) would vote to give Obama a third term. Ninety-three percent (93%) of Republicans, 68% of voters not affiliated with either major party - and 32% of Democrats - would not.

Rasmussen, .

One of the worst pollsters. His polling led all those Conk talking heads to predict a Romney landslide.




Truth is - incumbents with around 50% approval rating win reelection almost every time. Obama is pretty close to 50%. No guarantee he'd be reelected. But, it's just stupid to suggest he'd have no change.