The GOP will win the Senate and Keep the House

[Conserative Morality]

Oh come now, you must know that the 1930s~60s/70s and the New Deal era was a fluke in American history, surely?
America changed to the left then, and then Reagan pulled it back to its true "center" and probably some more too.

Let's see...

1790s-1830s Essentially Aristocratic
1830s-1850s Tumultuous
1860s-1870s Proper American Values
1880s-1900 Gilded Age
1900-1920s Reasonable American Values
1920s Second Gilded Age
1930s-1960s Proper American Values
1970s Er, uh, er... look, we don't really know either.
1980s+ Reaganism and Fundamentalism. Woohoo.

It looks fairly evenly split.

~40 years which are so far removed from the modern day that it's really hard to look at them through the lens of the modern day
~60 years I'd say were reasonably American values
~30 years in which the country wasn't clear either
~50 years of Captain Capitalism and the Free Marketeers

EDIT: Scratch that, I'll fuckin' give the 90s to American values. Change that to 40 years of Captain Capitalism and 70 of American values

[The Black Forrest]

Well the RNC does dream.

Have you looked at any polls? Democratic net gains are next to impossible this fall.

Nah. I tend to ignore Republican polls.

I spend too much time snickering at their "outreach" efforts.

[Olerand]

By Liberal what do you mean? Here in the US left wing and liberal are nearly synonyms.

We have liberals in Europe too. Centrists mostly, more center-right than center-left, but centrist. Obama would fall in somewhere with them.

Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Group

[Arlenton]

90% chance Republicans make gains in both houses this year
95% chance Republicans hold the house this year
50% chance Republicans take control of the Senate this year

On what grounds? Answer me the following questions:
1. What is your basis for the information?
2. Did your information target a specific group/audience or did it diversify its findings?
3. With the Republican Party declining in popularity, how do you expect such an outcome which would be practically and statistically impossible?

The 3 races where Democrats are the incumbents in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virgina basically make it so that even if Democrats win ever single tossup state and a few leaning Republican states the GOP will still have a net gain, Its pretty simple with this: http://www.270towin.com/2014-senate-ele ... /index.php

Worst case scenario for the GOP is a net gain of 0 by both parties.

And about the house, a Democratic takeover is about as likely as a Palin administration.

[Lalaki]

Many people pride themselves on not voting. I respect that. But remember, if you are a Democrat who refuses to vote in the midterm, do not be surprised or upset when the Republican wins. Same goes for Republicans not wanting to vote.

[Republic of Coldwater]

I would be happy with Libertarian leaning Conservative Tea Party Republicans like David Brat winning the Senate and keeping the house, as that will finally result in a repeal of the failed and atrocious PPACA and perhaps a repeal of the PATRIOT Act.

[Williamson]

First im pretty their is nothing in the bible about birth control anyway. secound its not make it so you have to use birth control its just make it so others have the opprunity to get birth control.

Well, considering the Bible has information on how women can get abortions, if there was mention of birth control it might not be to his liking.

wait are you saying that fundmeantalist doesnt pay attention to the bible and uses it for justicifiction to oppress people?

[Dragomerian Islands]

On what grounds? Answer me the following questions:
1. What is your basis for the information?
2. Did your information target a specific group/audience or did it diversify its findings?
3. With the Republican Party declining in popularity, how do you expect such an outcome which would be practically and statistically impossible?

The 3 races where Democrats are the incumbents in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virgina basically make it so that even if Democrats win ever single tossup state and a few leaning Republican states the GOP will still have a net gain Its pretty simple with this: http://www.270towin.com/2014-senate-ele ... /index.php

Worst case scenario for the GOP is a net gain of 0 by both parties.

And about the house, a Democratic takeover is about as likely as a Palin administration.

Wrong, by that exact site, it shows 20 Democrat States 12 Republican States. Democrat Win.

[Republic of Coldwater]

1860s-1870s Proper American Values

Whot.

How is the centralization of power and the burning of the southland ever an American Value? How is a war that killed anywhere from 600,000 to 1 Million people ever an American Value? The 1860s and 1870s were terrible decades that saw the destruction of states rights and the American South (thanks Sherman).

[Conserative Morality]

Whot.

How is the centralization of power and the burning of the southland ever an American Value? How is a war that killed anywhere from 600,000 to 1 Million people ever an American Value? The 1860s and 1870s were terrible decades that saw the destruction of states rights and the American South (thanks Sherman).

The only reason that that age of Americanism didn't last longer is because Sherman was merciful, and because of that, the Southerners up and waged a campaign of terror that resulted in a cowardly handover of power that damned our country for nearly a century.

We didn't break the chains of aristocracy, so they wrapped themselves back around our wrists.

[Othelos]

I would be happy with Libertarian leaning Conservative Tea Party Republicans like David Brat winning the Senate and keeping the house, as that will finally result in a repeal of the failed and atrocious PPACA and perhaps a repeal of the PATRIOT Act.

I would be happy with an actual libertarian candidate (with one caveat: they should be in favor of universal healthcare). Not a libertarian party member, or a "libertarian" conservative, but a real libertarian.

[Olerand]

Oh come now, you must know that the 1930s~60s/70s and the New Deal era was a fluke in American history, surely?
America changed to the left then, and then Reagan pulled it back to its true "center" and probably some more too.

Let's see...

1790s-1830s Essentially Aristocratic
1830s-1850s Tumultuous
1860s-1870s Proper American Values
1880s-1900 Gilded Age
1900-1920s Reasonable American Values
1920s Second Gilded Age
1930s-1960s Proper American Values
1970s Er, uh, er... look, we don't really know either.
1980s+ Reaganism and Fundamentalism. Woohoo.

It looks fairly evenly split.

~40 years which are so far removed from the modern day that it's really hard to look at them through the lens of the modern day
~60 years I'd say were reasonably American values
~30 years in which the country wasn't clear either
~50 years of Captain Capitalism and the Free Marketeers

EDIT: Scratch that, I'll fuckin' give the 90s to American values. Change that to 40 years of Captain Capitalism and 70 of American values

Uhm...From a European perspective, here are what I see:
-Note, I absolutely in no way consider the Clinton Administration, the forerunner of Tony Blair and the embodiment of the pathetic acceptance of the new status quo as "American values".

1790s-1850s: Bad("right"). As we all were.
1860s-1870s: Center. Social-liberalism is centrist, not left-wing. France had started its social reform by this time under Napoleon III.
1880s-1900s: Bad("right"). We were less so, but still right-leaning.
1900s-1920s: Center. Progressive politics are hardly left-wing, more along the lines of social-liberalism. We were so as well.
1920s: Bad("right"). Much more than us.
1930s-1960s: Good("left"). As we all were.
1970s: Center. Our president tried to pull us there too, but due to the different environment didn't get as far.
1980-present: Bad("right"). We are slowly progressing there too, after rebuffing the onslaught in the 1980s and 90s, and beginning to succumb with the "new EU and the Euro" in 2000s.

So:
-125 years of "bad".
-40 years of "centrist".
-30 years of "good".

So, to me, the record is much less even.

[Arlenton]

The 3 races where Democrats are the incumbents in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virgina basically make it so that even if Democrats win ever single tossup state and a few leaning Republican states the GOP will still have a net gain Its pretty simple with this: http://www.270towin.com/2014-senate-ele ... /index.php

Worst case scenario for the GOP is a net gain of 0 by both parties.

And about the house, a Democratic takeover is about as likely as a Palin administration.

Wrong, by that exact site, it shows 20 Democrat States 12 Republican States. Democrat Win.

You dont get it? It is showing the current senate composition. many currently democratic states are leaning, 3 of them almost certainly, going GOP next fall, therefore GOP gains, even if all toss up stats go democrat, and even if all the lean GOP states go democrat, the GOP will still gain seats. I cant think of any other way to explain it?

This shows the CURRENT composition, you see montana, south dakota, arkansa, iowa, and west virignia? when you scroll over them they say with leaning, likley or safe GOP, they are blue on the map because democrats CURRENTLY control them.

[Olerand]

Many people pride themselves on not voting. I respect that. But remember, if you are a Democrat who refuses to vote in the midterm, do not be surprised or upset when the Republican wins. Same goes for Republicans not wanting to vote.

I don't blame them.
I'm considering abstention too, and our political choices are much more numerous and vibrant than those offered to an average American voter.

[United Marxist Nations]

Well, I hate then both, so...

[Conserative Morality]

Uhm...From a European perspective, here are what I see:
-Note, I absolutely in no way consider the Clinton Administration, the forerunner of Tony Blair and the embodiment of the pathetic acceptance of the new status quo as "American values".

1790s-1850s: Bad("right"). As we all were.
1860s-1870s: Center. Social-liberalism is centrist, not left-wing. France had started its social reform by this time under Napoleon III.
1880s-1900s: Bad("right"). We were less so, but still right-leaning.
1900s-1920s: Center. Progressive politics are hardly left-wing, more along the lines of social-liberalism. We were so as well.
1920s: Bad("right"). Much more than us.
1930s-1960s: Good("left"). As we all were.
1970s: Center. Our president tried to pull us there too, but due to the different environment didn't get as far.
1980-present: Bad("right"). We are slowly progressing there too, after rebuffing the onslaught in the 1980s and 90s, and beginning to succumb with the "new EU and the Euro" in 2000s.

So:
-125 years of "bad".
-40 years of "centrist".
-30 years of "good".

So, to me, the record is much less even.

Your scale is heavily influenced by the sixty (!!!) years after our founding that were characterized by internal power struggles and a nearly complete lack of mass politics. Absent that, you're looking 65/40/30 by your estimates.

[Arlenton]

The 3 races where Democrats are the incumbents in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virgina basically make it so that even if Democrats win ever single tossup state and a few leaning Republican states the GOP will still have a net gain Its pretty simple with this: http://www.270towin.com/2014-senate-ele ... /index.php

Worst case scenario for the GOP is a net gain of 0 by both parties.

And about the house, a Democratic takeover is about as likely as a Palin administration.

Wrong, by that exact site, it shows 20 Democrat States 12 Republican States. Democrat Win.

Ok, this one shows the projected winner of each state. Now compare it to the current senate composition. See how many currently blue states are going red this fall? You can even give each pinkish state to the democrats and teh GOP will still gain 1 seat. http://www.270towin.com/2014-senate-election/

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I'm voting this midterm for the people who are the best choices for the government and if what they support aligns with my interests.

People all too often forget that it is not about the party, but about the goals and whether those goals are in our own self-interest or the interest of the nation to follow through.

In whether the GOP will win the Senate and Keep the House? I don't think so.

[Lalaki]

Many people pride themselves on not voting. I respect that. But remember, if you are a Democrat who refuses to vote in the midterm, do not be surprised or upset when the Republican wins. Same goes for Republicans not wanting to vote.

I don't blame them.
I'm considering abstention too, and our political choices are much more numerous and vibrant than those offered to an average American voter.

I respect that, as I do with all decisions to participate or not to participate in politics.

However, do note that the people you disagree with (or ever the greater of two evils so to speak) have a greater chance of winning due to a lack of participation. I know, you may disagree and lack faith in all of the above. But imagine if Democrats took both houses in the United States (as may very well happen in the next decade, but certainly not in 2014-16). Imagine if Republicans took the Senate next election. That would make a difference, big or small.

[Dragomerian Islands]

Wrong, by that exact site, it shows 20 Democrat States 12 Republican States. Democrat Win.

You dont get it? It is showing the current senate composition. many currently democratic states are leaning, 3 of them almost certainly, going GOP next fall, therefore GOP gains, even if all toss up stats go democrat, and even if all the lean GOP states go democrat, the GOP will still gain seats. I cant think of any other way to explain it?

This shows the CURRENT composition, you see montana, south dakota, arkansa, iowa, and west virignia? when you scroll over them they say with leaning, likley or safe GOP, they are blue on the map because democrats CURRENTLY control them.

That part is unreliable. I actually checked the site out and the statistics can get very irregular and skewed. Also, the event of a Republican takeover in the current political climate would be impossible and would require nothing greater than an act of God and the Apocalypse.

[Argentarino]

I don't think the GOP will win the Senate. Yes, there is a rise in pro-GOP sentiment, but there's a more prominent rise in frustration with inaction by Congress. I'm from Kansas, one of the reddest of the red states, and our senior Senator - Pat Roberts - nearly lost his primary to a Tea Party candidate and now very well may lose to an Independent - Greg Orman, who I'm certainly gonna vote for. Not to mention that it looks like Sam Brownback is about to lose his gubernatorial election, I'd have to say that, for Kansas at least, we're kind of tired of the following:
1. Inaction and bickering in Congress
2. Failed policies enacted by politicians who know nothing and go too far to either spectrum

[Arlenton]

I'm voting this midterm for the people who are the best choices for the government and if what they support aligns with my interests.

People all too often forget that it is not about the party, but about the goals and whether those goals are in our own self-interest or the interest of the nation to follow through.

In whether the GOP will win the Senate and Keep the House? I don't think so.

They will keep the house, no doubt about that and the worst case scenario for the GOP in the Senate is a net gain of 0 seats.

[Arlenton]

You dont get it? It is showing the current senate composition. many currently democratic states are leaning, 3 of them almost certainly, going GOP next fall, therefore GOP gains, even if all toss up stats go democrat, and even if all the lean GOP states go democrat, the GOP will still gain seats. I cant think of any other way to explain it?

This shows the CURRENT composition, you see montana, south dakota, arkansa, iowa, and west virignia? when you scroll over them they say with leaning, likley or safe GOP, they are blue on the map because democrats CURRENTLY control them.

That part is unreliable. I actually checked the site out and the statistics can get very irregular and skewed. Also, the event of a Republican takeover in the current political climate would be impossible and would require nothing greater than an act of God and the Apocalypse.

What political climate is preventing the GOP from winning senate seats in places such as Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, and West Virginia?

[Lalaki]

I feel like the Democrats are being pushed into a corner without being given fair analysis by the American public.

What do I mean by that? Republicans in the House of Representatives have blocked much of what President Obama wanted to negotiate. This creates the picture that our chief executive isn't doing a good job, and thus his party suffers.

I do not make this claim on a partisan basis. I would be opposed to a Democratic House refusing to negotiate with a GOP Executive based on politics.

[Olerand]

Your scale is heavily influenced by the sixty (!!!) years after our founding that were characterized by internal power struggles and a nearly complete lack of mass politics. Absent that, you're looking 65/40/30 by your estimates.

Love, we were either in the middle of a revolution, ruled by an emperor, or a king for fifty of those sixty years.

Your power struggles and lack of mass politics are a step up from what we were in.