Ye Olde US Midterm Elections Thread (With Extra Vitimins)

[Holy Paradise]

I see Obama winning in 2012 as well, although I believe it will be closer than it was in 2008.

[Holy Paradise]

Current projections by the Washington Post.

Senate:

47 Dems
40 GOP
13 Undecided

House:
128 GOP
75 Dems
232 Undecided

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

FOX News has both Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin, the only two women to be featured as major party VP nominees at the same table.

[Burtonea]

With large GOP gains expected, how do you think the left will explain the midterm results?

I've already seen MSNBC blame it on money, forgetting races where the Dems spent more. I was not surprised to see many on NSG blame it on Americans' alleged idiocy. So what do you think the overall response will be? I'm guessing option #1, with a strong showing by 3 and 6.

[Hydesland]

I've yet to see a good argument as to why printing more money during a recession is a good thing.

By the way we don't like the term printing money. We prefer the term quantiative eaaaasssiiiiinn', baby yeaaah.

[Panzerjaeger]

FOX News has both Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin, the only two women to be featured as major party VP nominees at the same table.

I would rather sit in the depths of hell then sit beside Sarah "Illiterate" Palin.

[New Kereptica]

"alleged"?

[Belschaft]

1. Even if some roads are repaired earlier than strictly necessary, it seems reasonable to assume that at least some are in need of it, and they prioritize those that do

But again, there may be no roads that have deteriorated to the point where the benefits of the repairs outweigh the costs.

Let's say we have two roads: one with a pothole that's six inches across, and one with a pothole that's two feet across. Both are the same depth. The six-inch pothole probably isn't going to cause a lot of blown tires, so let's say that the long-term benefit of repairing it is worth $200. The two-foot pothole, on the other hand, almost certainly will, so let's say the long-term benefit of repairing it is $5000.

Furthermore, let's assume that the potholes are the same distance from the highway garage, so it costs the same amount to pay for fuel for the truck and to pay the crew for the time they spend otherwise idle in transit. The only variable here is the cost of the asphalt used (I realize that you may decide only to carry just as much asphalt as you need for the job, and so the weight difference will affect fuel economy, but the difference is going to be so miniscule compared to the weight of the truck itself plus crew that it's negligible). So the cost of repairing the pothole is equal to the cost of transportation out and back (which is the price of fuel plus wear and tear on the truck plus the crew's wages for the time they spend in the truck) plus the cost of the asphalt used plus the labor cost of filling the pothole.

Ignoring how the asphalt settles, the amount of asphalt used in the big pothole will be sixteen times as much as that used in the small pothole. If we assume the crew fills the big pothole at the same rate as the small pothole, the labor costs for actually filling the big pothole will also be sixteen times that of the small pothole. So let's say the asphalt for the small pothole cost $50 and for the big pothole $800, and labor costs were $100 and $1600, respectively.

Looking at this alone, yes, it is beneficial to fill both the small pothole and the big pothole (the degree of benefit relative to expense is still greater for the big pothole, but we'll ignore that for the moment). It costs $2400 to fill the big pothole for $5000 of benefit, and it costs $150 to fill the small pothole for $200 of benefit.

But we have yet to account for the costs of transporting supplies and crew out to the potholes. Since both potholes are the same distance from the garage (we'll assume the terrain is the same too), then that cost will be the same for both potholes. Let's say that it's $100. Now, that extra $100 isn't enough to matter for the big pothole--even after accounting for it, you get $2500 worth of benefit. But for the small pothole, your costs have suddenly gone up to $250 even though you're only getting $200 worth of benefit. Clearly, it's not worth the expense.

Now, whether or not this particular cost structure bears any relation to the actual costs of highway repair, I have no idea. But you get my point: there is a threshold below which it simply does not make sense to do repairs, because the costs outweigh the benefits.

2. It drives down unemployment figures, which is always a good thing

And I think this is the problem. Decreased unemployment that is not backed up by actual increases in production (by which I mean the value of what is produced is greater than the value of what went in to producing it, ignoring for now opportunity cost effects) is not actually a good thing. In the long run, it helps nothing.

1. I agree with you analysis here pretty much entirely. However I'd argue that it produces benefits beyond the simple repairs to the road - every extra pound/dollar each worker earned is a pound/dollar they can spend elsewhere, benefiting the economy. And yes, you can get the same effect by just paying them benefits - but this way we also get a repaired road. There's also various other jobs supported by the road repairs - the company that makes tarmac for example. All in all a net gain to the economy in my opinion.

2. While it is true that in the long run this can lead to problems, in the short term it supports the economy when it needs the help. In the long run it can be dealt with - the short term increase in consumer and business confidence is more important.

[Panzerjaeger]

"alleged"?

I was about to say...

[Farnhamia]

FOX News has both Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin, the only two women to be featured as major party VP nominees at the same table.

I would rather sit in the depths of hell then sit beside Sarah "Illiterate" Palin.

YOU LIE!
I don't know, 'Jaeger, Dante says the lower depths are pretty damned cold and I find I just don't care for the cold that much anymore.

[Panzerjaeger]

I would rather sit in the depths of hell then sit beside Sarah "Illiterate" Palin.

YOU LIE!
I don't know, 'Jaeger, Dante says the lower depths are pretty damned cold and I find I just don't care for the cold that much anymore.

BABY KILLER!

I don't know my friend the company has to at least be better then...that thing.

[North Wiedna]

I won't "blame" anything. Blame is something put on someone or a group of people for something they have done.

What caused the GOP to gain so many seats? The same reason that any political party gains more favor: people were unhappy with what the government was doing and picked the alternative. Whether this alternative will help or not remains to be seen.

[Political Pilgrims]

I say we wait and see what happens. If the economy soars, it'll be a result of the GOP's victory. If the economy tanks, there will be huge Democratic wins. We can't tell what's going to happen. The people simply don't see things getting any better, and they're reacting. If things continue to go badly, they'll react again. Calm down and stop creating bogeymen or else you're no better than the teabaggers you attack.

[Northwest Slobovia]

I believe the line is "It's the economy, stupid!".

[Panzerjaeger]

I say we wait and see what happens. If the economy soars, it'll be a result of the GOP's victory. If the economy tanks, there will be huge Democratic wins. We can't tell what's going to happen. The people simply don't see things getting any better, and they're reacting. If things continue to go badly, they'll react again. Calm down and stop creating bogeymen or else you're no better than the teabaggers you attack.

That there is already a talk of a double dip I wouldn't bet on the economy soaring.

[Lizardiar]

I won't "blame" anything. Blame is something put on someone or a group of people for something they have done.

What caused the GOP to gain so many seats? The same reason that any political party gains more favor: people were unhappy with what the government was doing and picked the alternative. Whether this alternative will help or not remains to be seen.

^This

[Farnhamia]

YOU LIE!
I don't know, 'Jaeger, Dante says the lower depths are pretty damned cold and I find I just don't care for the cold that much anymore.

BABY KILLER!

I don't know my friend the company has to at least be better then...that thing.

I suppose. More literate, anyway. Brutus, Cassius, Judas Iscariot. Lots of questions for that him.

[Mindhar]

Really, I think this is the election no one really wants to win.

Whoever takes power now is going to have to do a poor job in a shitty situation in a climate of partisan bickering and economic uncertainty. And come 2012, the electorate-goldfish will be screaming that they didn't do enough and vote for the opposition. If anything, this election's almost doing a favour to the losers.

/uninformed nonamerican opinion

[Luciratus]

"alleged"?

I was about to say...

Yet another vast generalization. Americans are by no means idiots. A political party losing or winning does not change the intelligence of an entire country. Americans are of equal intelligence to any other nationality, though they specialize in different manners of learning and different fields. The principle reason the Democrats lost was due to their own incompetence and policies, the terrible state of the economy, and better Republican campaigning.

[Holy Paradise]

I say we wait and see what happens. If the economy soars, it'll be a result of the GOP's victory. If the economy tanks, there will be huge Democratic wins. We can't tell what's going to happen. The people simply don't see things getting any better, and they're reacting. If things continue to go badly, they'll react again. Calm down and stop creating bogeymen or else you're no better than the teabaggers you attack.

That there is already a talk of a double dip I wouldn't bet on the economy soaring.

There wasn't going to be a double dip before, I don't see one happening now.

[Greed and Death]

The mandate. With a reform more along the lines of that proposed by Clinton(bill) the democrats would be on their way to 62 senate seats this evening.

[Wilgrove]

I don't think the Teabaggers are terrible people, I think that they are just misinformed, and your Republican friends have taken advantage of that. The Republicans are obviously in the back pockets of Corporate America, and wow, y'all just handed them the House. It's very easy to manipulate, deceive and mislead a group of angry people. Mainly because they're too emotional, not thinking clearly. They're angry and they want someone to blame. The Pubs saw this and directed their anger.

However, this is a short term tactic. Sooner or later people will realize that the Pubs have screwed them over for their own interest and the interest of Corporate America, and vote them back out. What's truly sad is that we're a country with ADD, so we'll keep going back and forth until we're in ruins.

I posted this on another forum, but I think it'll fit here as well.

[Aubelland]

Option #4. Alot of folks out here in the boonies, especially in the more ill-educated areas, are blaming their problems on Obama without a second thought. While that may or may not be affecting the election, I like to think it has something to do with that.

At any rate. I'm prepared for a lame-duck session in Congress this year.

[New Genoa]

Biased poll, but more than 1 of those options are true. Typically, the democrats were bad salesmen and there's an anti-incumbent mood. oh, and all the rabble-rousing by the tea partiers being blown out of proportion by the media.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

11 senate seats still up for grabs

Victories:
Dems: 7
Reps: 19

Current balance of power:
Dems: 47
Reps: 42

The Democrats are going to need to hold onto both California and Nevada if they want to stop the Republican typhoon.

The tide has shifted in the governor's races:

Up for grabs: 19

Victories:
Dems: 6
Reps: 12

The Reps are now winning twice as many governorships as the Democrats.

Balance of Power:
Dems: 13
Republicans: 18

Republicans are sweeping the governorships but the balance of power is still too close because of the number of governorships still up for grabs.
Jan Brewer is projected to have won reelection in Arizona.