History making results from the Mid Terms

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
28,120
15,628
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#21
I'll be so damned happy when nonsense like this is no longer applicable to choosing a good candidate.

WTF is next, first half man / half dog elected?

this kind of identity politics is most of what is wrong with our current election process, the rest of what is wrong, is the goofs that keep bringing it up.
you are making a very big assumption they were voted in for the reasons and not because they were better than the candidate they ran against.
 
May 22, 2005
2,854
2,481
1,743
Behind Enemy Lines
#22
This is 2010 for the Democrats, as it was for the Republicans then but, with this difference: we stand a very real possibility of gaining more seats in 2020 in the senate and regaining the House
They are largely impotent and can pass nothing through the Senate.
There are too many house democrats who couldn’t possibly survive 2020 while being complete obstructionist and will have to concede on domestic issues
We will have one more SCOTUS in the next 18 months and 1/2 of the Federal judiciary realigned.
Game over
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
28,120
15,628
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#24
Sounds to me like you're the one making the big assumption. Indeed, it was so important that you posted it.
It will be part of history books as the first time these things happened in the USA...that is why I posted it and specifically why I left their party affiliation out of it, as those things are trivial to history since party politics fluctuates so much throughout history.
 
May 22, 2005
2,854
2,481
1,743
Behind Enemy Lines
#26
A Much, Much Better GOP Night Than Had Been Forecast

Republicans knew the House was going to flip. It is common to argue over polling predictions days or weeks in advance, when survey numbers are within a reasonable margin, especially when only one race is in question. But with 435 House races, and so many lining up for Democrat flips, the settled question had become whether a “blue wave” would overturn Washington in a tsunami, even flowing up-ticket for Democrat gubernatorial and U.S. Senate candidates, and whether the President’s agenda would be stymied or even stifled.
Ultimately, that “blue wave” proved modest, enough to flip the House as expected but not more. Indeed, if he could have had one dream from his father, Obama could only have wished that the 2010 and 2014 midterms had been this modest. In 2010, the Republicans gained 63 House seats — the biggest House pick-up since 1948 and the biggest midterm pick-up since 1938 — and six U.S. Senate seats. The GOP even ended up controlling 26 state legislatures and 29 governorships. In the 2014 Obama midterms, the Republicans somehow found thirteen more House seats to net, and they gained nine more Senate seats, retaking the Senate and scoring the largest midterm Senate pick-up in 56 years. They also grew to 31 governorships while controlling 68 state legislative chambers. Similarly, the 1994 Clinton midterms saw Republicans gain 54 House seats, eight Senate seats, and ten governorships. You want to talk “waves”? Them’s waves. Them’s tsunamis. By contrast, this one did not even see the oceans stop rising. So, perspective.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
 
Mar 11, 2006
1,635
1,350
1,743
#27
Why are “historical firsts” just about race, sexual orientation, or gender?
you are making a very big assumption they were voted in for the reasons and not because they were better than the candidate they ran against.
then it shouldn’t be relevant.

I will admit I did a major eye roll when I read your post. Why only have “first” lists for race, sexual orientation, or gender? Is that all that matters?

Was Stitt the first OK Gov elected that had never run for any office prior?
Was Hawley the first Senate candidate to beat a two-term female Senator?
Was Hern the first multiple McDonald’s franchiser to win US Rep on his first try?
Was Blackburn the first person in history to go from 7 points down in the polls just 6 weeks ago (when Taylor Swift critized her and endorsed her opponent) to winning by 11 point?
Was Beto O’Rourke the first person to lose despite having incredible fundraising, free publicity on Saturday Night Live who did two positive skits on him, celebrity endorsements from LeBron James and Beyonce, campaigning from the previous President, an incredibly fawning media coverage .. in short the most tailwinds in history, but still getting absolutely BUPKIS. ?
 

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
18,516
8,360
1,743
Earth
#28
why in a world in a time when the country is trying to erase trait biases are we actively pointing them out and celebrating peoples identity based on those very traits, behaviors, and beliefs? Seems somehow counterproductive.
 

Pokey

Sheriff
Sep 13, 2013
4,773
1,163
743
Left field
#29
why in a world in a time when the country is trying to erase trait biases are we actively pointing them out and celebrating peoples identity based on those very traits, behaviors, and beliefs? Seems somehow counterproductive.
My best guess is that the Congress is starting to look more like it's constituents.
 

John C

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
1,061
1,796
743
63
#30
The first African American female Mormon (forgot what they are now calling themselves) U.S. Congresswoman is probably going down to defeat as she is trailing by 5000 votes in Utah.
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
15,894
2,105
743
Where else but Stillwater
#38
This is 2010 for the Democrats, as it was for the Republicans then but, with this difference: we stand a very real possibility of gaining more seats in 2020 in the senate and regaining the House
They are largely impotent and can pass nothing through the Senate.
There are too many house democrats who couldn’t possibly survive 2020 while being complete obstructionist and will have to concede on domestic issues
We will have one more SCOTUS in the next 18 months and 1/2 of the Federal judiciary realigned.
Game over
So, the Supreme Court decisions will mainly be about advancing corporate and religious rights and considerably less about promoting freedom and individulal liberty.