Re: 2018 Election Predictions
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:13 pm
Reminds me of "Burn this bitch down!"Col Hogan wrote: I now know John’s real identity...he’s Ezra Klein from Vox
https://mobile.twitter.com/ezraklein/st ... cepalms%2F
FCS Football | Message Board | News
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=49655
Reminds me of "Burn this bitch down!"Col Hogan wrote: I now know John’s real identity...he’s Ezra Klein from Vox
https://mobile.twitter.com/ezraklein/st ... cepalms%2F
JohnStOnge wrote:No. I stick to the rules. And we are in a situation where there is not sufficient evidence to make any call except that the Democrats will get more votes total in the Senate races.93henfan wrote:[
Save your bloviating, buddy, have some balls, and make a call instead of establishing backtracking points like you always do.
Actually you ought to appreciate that since said on election Eve of 2016 that the idea of Clinton winning was not a done deal at all.
If there's not sufficient evidence to make a call, you don't make a call.
Believe me, I'm HOPING the Democrats will win at least one House of Congress as that would be best for this country. And I think there is reason for hope. But there is not sufficient evidence to say that they will. I'd love to be able to say otherwise.
That is amazing, even I had the Donks getting 25 in the house.mainejeff wrote:Senate + 4 Conks
House + 2 Conks
Governors + 2 Democrats
I see you got your talking points for the day.JohnStOnge wrote:Everything is too close to call except for saying that the Democrats will get more total votes in the Senate races. I was expecting to say that the Democrats would win more votes in the House races but the crappy Rasmussen poll is an outlier that increases variation and prevents me from saying that. I'm not going to discount it as an outlier because I decided ahead of time not to say that.
There is not sufficient confidence to either say that the Democrats will take the majority in the House or that the Republicans will will maintain control of the Senate.
However, I will say that the greatest hope for our Country is that the Democrats will take the House so that we can have some check on and investigation of the sleaze ball that occupies the Oval Office right now.
There is a substantial risk that we'll wake up Wednesday to a situation in which the Democrat won more votes in the last Presidential election, the Democrats won more votes in the last House election, and the Democrats won more votes in the last TWO Senate elections yet the Republicans control the Presidency, the House, and the Senate.
Minority rule.
I was going to say the same thing - who even talks about the total votes (nationwide) for the Senate? You have to be stretching an agenda to roll out that data point as your main point. I wasn't even aware that people even tabulated that number.css75 wrote:JohnStOnge wrote:
No. I stick to the rules. And we are in a situation where there is not sufficient evidence to make any call except that the Democrats will get more votes total in the Senate races.
Actually you ought to appreciate that since said on election Eve of 2016 that the idea of Clinton winning was not a done deal at all.
If there's not sufficient evidence to make a call, you don't make a call.
Believe me, I'm HOPING the Democrats will win at least one House of Congress as that would be best for this country. And I think there is reason for hope. But there is not sufficient evidence to say that they will. I'd love to be able to say otherwise.
News flash. The popular vote does not count in the mid terms. Who gives a rats rear end if Hinges on heels Harris wins Cali by 10 million votes and gives Dims an edge on total?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
They don’t.GannonFan wrote:I was going to say the same thing - who even talks about the total votes (nationwide) for the Senate? You have to be stretching an agenda to roll out that data point as your main point. I wasn't even aware that people even tabulated that number.css75 wrote:
News flash. The popular vote does not count in the mid terms. Who gives a rats rear end if Hinges on heels Harris wins Cali by 10 million votes and gives Dims an edge on total?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Only in the Senate, which is a victory in a first term mid-cycle.mainejeff wrote:Happy Election Day everyone! It's going to be a special day for Republicans!
93henfan wrote:I got a sticker!
The east coast is definitely getting weather today, but I don't think it's going to stop many people.ASUG8 wrote:
Not much will change in SC. Gowdy's seat is open but I think it will remain R. McMaster as governor may sound like a buffoon and wear his belt way up around his nips but he hasn't screwed anything up since Nikki Haley left office so I think he'll remain in office.
I got to the polls at 6:55 and was out by 7:20. I probably had 40-50 people in front of me which seems like a light turnout vs. past elections at our polling church. The sky just opened up so the poor bastards in line right now are getting soaked.
Shouldn't there be more Republican Senators anyway..?Ibanez wrote:Mitt Romney is the newest Senator
Republicans take a Senate seat from the Dems
So far it looks like the blue wave hit a red wall
AZGrizFan wrote:Dana **** Perino. I would eat a bucket of her **** just to see where it came from.
Actual:93henfan wrote:I'll go:
Senate +2R
House +33D
Governors +6D
An atta boy/girl/it.93henfan wrote:Actual:93henfan wrote:I'll go:
Senate +2R
House +33D
Governors +6D
Senate +3R
House +34D
Governors +6D
What do I win?
AZGrizFan wrote:Dana Fucking Perino. I would eat a bucket of her shit just to see where it came from.