WHO WILL WIN IN NOVEMBER?

mysteryman wrote:

About that bet...

Does "majority of the seats in congress" mean both the house AND senate,or just the house OR senate?

Mysteryman, it depends who said it and when they said it.

I bet $100 that this specific prediction of mine is true: The Republicans will add at least 3 seats in the House and add at least 1 seat in the Senate, because the voters will by election day realize that the psychotic Democrats are a far greater threat to our security than the neurotic Republicans.

If my prediction is proven correct, those who bet otherwise shall donate the amount of their bet to their favorite charity, and post a copy of their receipt showing that in this forum.

If my prediction is proven incorrect, I shall donate the amount of my bet to the Salvation Army, and post a copy of my receipt showing that in this forum.

0 Replies

Well, Icann, good on you that you did take the bet. Not so pathetic after all.

And jeez, this must have been the most-discussed bet in board history..

0 Replies

This will be useful for on election night:

Quote:

Election-Night Bellwethers

Barring major glitches in Election Day vote counting, there should be an indication whether the Democrats' momentum will overwhelm the Republicans' barrier or whether the GOP barricade, though leaky, will be left standing.

The early poll closings, at 6 p.m. Eastern time, are in Indiana and Kentucky, states with high concentrations of Democratic House takeover bids.

In Indiana, Democrats' oft-thwarted efforts to oust staunchly conservative Republican John Hostettler from his seat in the state's southwestern corner may be coming to fruition at the hands of Democrat Brad Ellsworth, the sheriff in the district's most populous county. If Hostettler hangs on, it will send a strong signal that Republican damage will be limited. If the Democrats win a pair of rematches ?- in the state's southeastern corner, where Baron P. Hill is looking to get back the seat he lost two years ago, and in the district around South Bend, where lawyer Joe Donnelly is taking a second shot at Republican Chris Chocola ?- it could herald a big night for the challengers.

Reynolds, the NRCC chairman, and other Republicans have argued long and loud that all politics is local and that this midterm campaign, despite the Democrats' efforts to make it so, is not a referendum on Bush or Republican rule in Congress.

That proposition will get an early election-night test in the House seat based in Louisville, in which Republican Anne M. Northup has stayed popular with a slightly Democratic constituency with the federal funds she has sent home as an Appropriations Committee member. Her challenger this time, alternative-newspaper publisher John Yarmuth, is running a textbook 2006 Democratic campaign of castigating Bush and seeking to tie the incumbent to his ankles.

Farther east, a traditional Republican bastion that includes suburbs of Cincinnati, freshman Republican Geoff Davis faces his predecessor, Ken Lucas, thought by some to be the only Democrat conservative enough to compete for this seat. A Lucas win there, coupled with an upset of Republican Ron Lewis in a district south of Louisville by state Rep. Mike Weaver, might spur an early champagne run by Democrats.

Poll closings an hour later will bring the first major indicators from the other side of the ledger: whether the Republicans can balance the scales by knocking off some Democratic incumbents. The focal point is in southern Georgia, where Democrats in adjoining districts, Jim Marshall and John Barrow, are among the Republicans' few top-tier targets in a year when the party is mostly playing defense. Former House members are the challengers in both cases.

The 7-o'clock hour will also bring potentially the most important result from the Senate races: the Virginia contest between Republican incumbent George Allen and Democrat Jim Webb, an author and former Navy secretary who is a veteran of the Vietnam War. If Webb overcomes the state's slight GOP tilt and ousts Allen, who has been buffeted since the summer by gaffes and controversies, it will mark an upset that could signal how the other Senate tossups will fall.

Special Report: The Battering Ram and the Bulwark

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Well, Icann, good on you that you did take the bet. Not so pathetic after all.

He didn't bet ungots.

People frequently donate money to the Salvation Army, especially around Christmastime. For all we know, Ican was going to donate that money anyway.

A bet means you are willing do something you are NOT normally willing to do. For instance, I am not normally inclined to give Ican money, nor is he inclined to give me money. So if we agree on a condition-say that after this election, in 2007 the Speaker of the House of Representatives will be a Democrat, then that would be a bet. Not a mere donation to charity that he most likely was going to do anyway.

As it stands right now, Ican hasn't made any bets at all.

0 Replies

You're being ungracious..

0 Replies

Not at all.

What Ican is doing is like Jerry Lewis making a bet where if he loses, he agrees to do a Labor Day telethon for Muscular Dystrophy research.

0 Replies

Lost in all of this Blatham-Ican shuffle is the fact that I took up Ican on his bet as well, right after Blatham did.

I will reiterate and even extend it. I will take up Ican's prediction above re: at least three seats in Congress and at least one seat in Senate to Republicans, with my $100 bet.

If Ican loses, he would hate to send the money to me, so that is what he must do. I will do with it what I chose.

If I lose, I will send the money to him, receipt or copy of check/money order posted here. He can do with it as he choses.

I would be more than willing to send it to a third party, and timber is fine with me.

0 Replies

If we had a dependable escrow system, I would take that bet in a second. I would even feel a bit guilty about it.

0 Replies

For what it is worth, I heard yesterday that gamblers were more accurate in predicting election results than polls. I would wager that is particularly apt if you look at gamblers outside the US.

Also noteworthy, in a similar vein of follow the money:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/28/us/politics/28hedge.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

"An analysis by The New York Times of contributions from Oct. 1 to 18, the latest data available, shows that donations to Republicans from corporate political action committees dropped by 11 percentage points in favor of Democratic candidates, compared with corporate giving from January through September.

Republicans still received 57 percent of contributions, compared with 43 percent for Democrats, but it was the first double-digit October switch since 1994. "A lot will hold their powder for now," said Brian Wolff, deputy executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "But after the election, we will have a lot of new friends." "

AND

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102801003_3.html?referrer=email

which examines the two responsible for spending money on ads and operatives in the remaining days of the race for congressional seats.

0 Replies

About getting out the vote...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/us/politics/29vote.html?th&emc=th

"Democrats Push to Counter G.O.P. in Turnout Race
By ADAM NAGOURNEY

VINITA PARK, Mo., Oct. 28 ?- Democrats are pushing into high gear this weekend a sharply expanded campaign to get their voters to the polls, even as some party leaders expressed anxiety that Republicans would again out-organize them in the approximately 20 House and 3 Senate races that both sides agree will determine the outcome of the midterm elections.

After two national elections in which Republicans' sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation helped them triumph over their opponents, Democrats have invested heavily in catching up.

The success of that effort could be crucial to their hopes on Nov. 7. Notwithstanding polls that show broad Democratic strength, control of Congress appears to rest on a relatively few races in which the candidates are separated by razor-thin margins. Those are precisely the kinds of races where turnout efforts can make a difference, and the Republicans' track record on getting their supporters to the polls in districts they focus on is a primary reason that the White House continues to express confidence that it can at least limit Democratic gains this year."

BUT

"But Democratic Party leaders acknowledged structural shortcomings that could continue to give Republicans the advantage. Republicans have spent the past three years building a detailed national database of voters, including their voting history and consumer data that the party has used to predict their political leanings and identify the issues that most motivate them. The Democrats' voter list is not as expansive or comprehensive, though Mr. Dean said he hoped that would be repaired by the next presidential election

And while Republicans have centralized their turnout operation under the Republican National Committee, Democrats have been forced to maneuver within a fractured system involving a series of different committees and private groups, sometimes working at cross purposes, from district to district across the country."

0 Replies

Quote:

After two national elections in which Republicans' sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation helped them triumph over their opponents, Democrats have invested heavily in catching up.

Slow learners? The GOP has never made its GOTV strategies secret (something that's always bothered me a bit), but I really thought that by 2006 the Dems would have figured it out. They haven't and seem to still rely on a hodge podge of GOTV efforts without any centralized organization and control (just look at CA-50 if you are skeptical).

What it all means is that the second week of November will be wonderful (if you're a Republican) but the Dems will still be facing another set of coulda, shoulda, woulda, but didn't conversations.

0 Replies

If all of you feel like you can trust me,I will volunteer to hold a check from each person involved in the bet.
I will forward all of those checks to whoever wins the bet.

0 Replies

If anyone is interested in following an interesting race, watch Maryland.

Steele, the Lieutenant Governor in a Republican administration, and a keynote speaker at the Republican National Convention, as well as ex-head of the Maryland Republican Party, is distancing himself from his own party, let alone Bush. Nowhere on his web does the word Republican appear.

And Tim Russert pulled out a bumper sticker of his that read:
STEELE Democrat.

He was recruited to run by everyone in the Repg party, including a phone call from Cheney.

I smell Rove.

0 Replies

sumac wrote:

Lost in all of this Blatham-Ican shuffle is the fact that I took up Ican on his bet as well, right after Blatham did.

I will reiterate and even extend it. I will take up Ican's prediction above re: at least three seats in Congress and at least one seat in Senate to Republicans, with my $100 bet.

If Ican loses, he would hate to send the money to me, so that is what he must do. I will do with it what I chose.

I must do what I have promised to do. Nothing more and nothing less.

If I lose, I will send the money to him, receipt or copy of check/money order posted here. He can do with it as he choses.

Do what you will, but I will not accept your $100 and will return it to sender for sender to donate it to sender's favorite charity.

I would be more than willing to send it to a third party, and timber is fine with me.

I am not willing to do that!

0 Replies

Vote on or before:

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2006

Be there do that! We're counting on you!

It's your boat too!

0 Replies

Sorry for the cross-post, but I'm gambling that it's interesting enough (with so much speculation going around about who is expecting what in terms of these elections' results):

-----------

What do the experts think?

There are a number of websites that continually assess the current state of the Senate and House races. Each day or week, they update their ratings to reflect what the current state of play is.

(Note: this does not equate with predictions for what the outcome of the race will be in a week's time; it is all about how things look right now.)

So how do these sites rate the balance of seats at the current moment? I made one of those colorful little tables (of course).. might be well useful for you all - for one because it isn't as easy as it should be to retrieve these numbers from the differently formatted ratings pages; and secondly, not unimportantly, to temper some expectations on both sides of A2K ;-).

Note: re the Senate, not one of these eight "asssessors" dares to give a majority to either party. The race for the majority is at the moment a true toss-up. That said, 5 out of 8 give the Republicans a slight edge, while only 1 gives the Democrats an edge.

Note: re the House, even here only one of the eight "assessors" gives the Democrats an actual majority; to all the others, the balance of power is still in the toss-up category. But here, all of them give either a slight or a clear edge to the Democrats.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/8879/assessing2006uscongriict9.gif

You can also go and look up the sites yourself:

- Congressional Quarterly Election Forecast Map
- Rasmussen Reports - Senate balance of power
- Rothenberg Political Report
- Real Clear Politics
- The Cook Political Report
- The Fix (WaPo)
- New York Times 2006 Election Guide
- Pollster.com

The real enthusiasts can compare this table with the one I made a month ago - and see just how much the Democrats have gained since then.

0 Replies

Great work, nimh.

0 Replies

Thanks Sumac..

0 Replies

sumac wrote:

Great work, nimh.

ditto!

The one I personally check is The Cook Political Report as they are considered truly non-partisan and very conservative on how they categorize, leaving most incumbents in the toss-up category.

0 Replies

I'm glad as well that The Cook Political Report is now online since some years.

0 Replies

WHO WILL WIN IN NOVEMBER?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know