From the Republican Weekly Standard comes this breakdown of predictions all looking very grim for the GOP.  Let's test their accuracy afterward and compare it with Jordan's.  Myself, I don't have a clue but I'll take their word until the final count is in.

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

Danwhy, for a second I got excited thinking you were in Detroit.  I'll be there next Saturday for a week visiting my mom.  But alas, you're still up there in Canada, heh?

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

Sorry to say there is very little to recommend Detroit.  A sad sad city which is suffering more than ever these days. They happen to have a world class art museum in Detroit but it's hardly ever open since most museum goers fled to the suburbs over the years.  Diego Rivera's murals wrap around the entire first floor plaza. 

But I will be some distance away in lovely Farmington Hills where there are trees (probably leafless now), parks, my old 'hood, my mom, and a nice variety of bookstores and antique stores. Oh, and the big draw -- the quaint little town of Franklin with its Cider Mill. 

Greenfield Village and the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn are fun too but I prefer that on a snowy day when they offer horse-drawn sleigh rides.

Returning to LA the following Saturday, I'll make my usual airport visit to the Motown store and pick up a few t-shirts and sweat-shirts while listening to the continual loop of Smokey and Marvelous Marvin Gaye and the Supremes.  Worth the trip for that alone. 

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Abotu 24 hours and the official numbers start coming in. Any final guesses?

I see Rasmussen has moved TN and Montana back to Toss-Up (TN was GOP and Montana was Democrat).

So according ot Rasmussen, in teh Senate, it's gonna come down to Missouri, Virginia, Montana and Tennessee.

I still think that Talent will win in MO. Have no idea with VA. Montana will go to the Democrat, and I think Corker (Republican) will take Tenessee.

As long as they are no upsets elsewhere, these states will determine the Senate control. Esp watch MO, VA and MT. Democrats probably need to win all 3 to take control. Might be tough but very possible.

One interesting race to watch that you may not be aware of is the Maryland Senate Race. Black republican Steele is running against White Democrat Cardin. MD is generally left and has a huge number of African-Americans. Steel has had a tough time through the years - once having Oreos thrown at him by a black audience. A few pundits are thinking that Steele may actually win - I have my doubts, but it's gonna be an interesting race. Rasmussen has the Democrat up by 7 and leaning Democrat. But he also hasn't polled since Oct 30 and the latest polls show Steele down by 2 or 3 points.

Jordan .

Novak offers his guesses.

He says 19 seats will go Blue in the House, and 2 will go Red in the Senate.

Jordan .

I'll tell you, the guesses are all over the place, aren't they?!  i hope some of you (wink wink) aren't too busy tomorrow night to pay attention to election returns.

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

We only get simplistic media coverage of the mid-term elections over here.

It sounds like it's a simple proposition focused around Iraq.

Democrat voters don't like how things are going in Iraq, so want to withdraw.  They argue things will only get worse if the troops stay.

Republican voters don't like how things are going in Iraq, but want to stay.  They argure that the Democrats offer no alternatives for Iraq - they're trying instead to attract a protest vote.

Is it really becoming a 1-issue deal for the swinging voters?

Election???  What election?  

Oh, okay.  I'll guess Rudy Giuliani versus What's His/Her Name for 2008.

Politics.   

 Susan
 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

i guess for me, bringing a new life into the world puts things into perspective. And now that I get a child credit, the Democrats better not take my $1000 tax credit away!!!!!!!! :-)

Well, I was way off but it looks like B was pretty much on target if memory serves me right from page 1.

A couple of quick notes (esp for those of you who don't follow US politics closely) - many of the Democratic victories were by candidates who are either moderate or conservative and were running against a conservative or moderate Republican. I can't think of a single election in which a liberal Democrat beat a conservative/moderate Republican. There might be a couple but for the most part it's just not the case. That is one reason VA and MT are so frickin' close.

I am very disappointed with MO but was dead on target in my guess (except for Talent winning). I said that if Amendment 2 wins, McCaskill wins and vice-versa. Talent lost and Amendment 2 won. I'm pretty much astounded that Amendment 2 won though. There has been a lot of debate about it, but Amendment 2 now puts on the MO Constitution the right for MO to allow embryonic stem cell research through CLONING. So in other words, an embroy will be created, cloned again and again and again repeatedly simply to experiment on. They don't call it cloning - instaead they use the scientific word for what they did with Dolly the Sheep - which in layman's words is cloning. I really don't think voters understood the amendment because there's been so much hidden agendas at work here. I think in a year or so, MO voters will realize how bad of a move this was and I wouldn't be surprised if there's a challenge to remove the Amendment from the MO Constitution.

And finally, one more piece of perspective - "Since WWII, the party of the incumbent President has typically lost more than 30 seats in the House of Representatives and six seats in the Senate during the second midterm. In addition, in the five wartime congressional elections since 1860, the President’s party has lost an average of 32 House seats and five Senate seats." "

I'll have more to say when I see more exit polling. And here's a preface - this is the BEST thing to happen to the GOP and the worst thing to happen for the Democrats, and this opens the door for the GOP to win the presideny in 2008 whereas I think the GOP would've lost if the GOP had kept both chambers. The GOP do best when they are have competition and they just didn't have it the last 4+ years.

Jordan .

Jordan, you shouldn't be posting, go be with your wife and new son!!!

I will say this about Bush, he was gracious in his press conference and in that aspect he impressed me (watch Tom Delay's comments on FN.com to see the opposite of gracious).

Rummy is now gone, that didn't take long.

On this being good for the Dem's I agree with Jordan and with Starfor that it would likely be better for the Dem's in 08 if they don't win the senate.

One final thought, didn't Clinton pick up seats in his 6th year?

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

Jordan .

i guess for me, bringing a new life into the world puts things into perspective. And now that I get a child credit, the Democrats better not take my $1000 tax credit away!!!!!!!! :-)

I don't think you will have to worry about that being taken away from you, Jordan.  It's a tax credit that is a great benefit to many people. :) Now I can be sure that I will still get my student loan tax credit!  Trust me, I really really need it!

I must say, I am thrilled that Sherrod Brown beat out Mike DeWine in Ohio. I just love Sherrod.  My friend and I were talking about how we just want to hug and squeeze him everytime we see him.  Connie probably wouldn't approve but that's okay. 

Also Strickland beating Blackwell, that's awesome!  Blackwell is a frightening man.  He scared me on so many levels and not because he is a Republican, but because of how he has utter disregard for people.  Doesn't care if you were raped or molested or would die from a pregnancy, he wanted to make abortion outright illegal.  I don't want to get on the abortion debate, but that is something that is cause for concern, he doesn't care what the circumstances are, he wanted to take the right away and through a husband/significant other in prison (it would be a felony) if they took a woman over statelines.  He was also involved in the Tom Noe scandal ("Coingaite" as we affectionately call it here...Tom Noe stole a lot of money from the Workers' Comp fund and gave it as contributions to campaigns or bought a house or invested it in "rare" coins...found out that some were not rare at all) as well as some other issues that arose which are not issues that you want to have hanging over your head. 

I do have to give him credit for not taking the chance to rig the election as many thought he would, being that he is Secretary of State and has total control over the election process and didn't relinquish his duties to oversee even though he was running for governor.  I also give him credit for conceding and being civil.  Although I question why he did it so early...that just seems odd to me....

I may be biased since I pretty much worked my a** off in NW Ohio to get these guys elected but I am thrilled with the results.  And I am thrilled that there were no major problems around the country with long lines or people be turned away or things like that. 

smeds - if the Dems allow Bush's tax cuts to expire that will include child credit AND college credit too (and I now get both since I'm still paying off college loans). Now they can pass another economic bill that may only expire certain cuts but if they just let it expire and return to the taxes of the 90s, then we'll lose those added amounts.

anybody - I'v ebeen thinking about this most of the day. Since Democrats won the House, and looks like might take control of Senate, does that mean that BushCo didn't steal elections this year with their close ties to Diebold, or if they tried to rig the election, did they just not do a good enough job? I'm just wondering because if BushCo has been stealing elections since 2000, then it sure would seem "logical" that they would've done the same this year....so when/if the GOP wins the White House in 2008, does that mean the GOP once again rigged the elections or was it a fair election then? All these fraud conspiracies regarding elections just really confuse me now that Democrats won so big. Or is it possible that Dems took a page from the BushCo admin and stole the 06 election? (okay, I realize that's blasphemy in some corners of the universe.)

I've been reading some blogs and listened to a little big of evil right-wing radio today, and it really is interesting to hear Conservatives digest this election. They don't scream fraud. They don't scream elections are stolen. They don't scream at 3rd party groups (except maybe for the media to a certain extent). Instead they are all turning inward and analyzing why the GOP lost. I encourage anyone on the left side or moderate side to just take some time to read some right-wing blogs, analsys articles and anything else and hear the difference between a group of people determining what they did wrong. If you're honest with yourself, you'll see a huge difference between the GOP self-analysis versus the non-self-analysis of the Democrats for the past 6 years that blamed their losses on everyone BUT themselves. here's one to get you started.

Jordan .

This has nothing to do with the "brains behind Chimpy." Rove has absolutely nothing to do with the response you will hear and see from Republicans about why Bush lost. If just 5% of GOP voters had turned up in VA or MT, the Senate would still be REpublican. The same can be said with a number of close seats in the House. Once a full analysis of the election is done, you'll find I think that GOP voters stayed home.

Actually, I'm not frustrated. Far from. I'm looking forward to the next two years as we watch the Democrats go down the road that will lose them the White House in 2008. They will open up investigation after investigation. They will allow Bush's economic policies to disappear. No longer can they blame Bush. No longer can left bloggers complain about illelgal elections, etc. The Dems have the ball and they better do something with it. American voters don't like either party right now based upon all polls. Americans put in Democrats in hopes that something might change - that's all. The funny thing is - nothing will change for the positive. Iraq may get better - but that was going to happen no matter what I think (unless of course, Dems decide to pull all funding from the war). We're about to watch a party who won not on ideas, but on a frustrated electorate. It won't be pretty, esp as moderate and Conservative Democrats who were elected two days ago have to go against their values simply for the party.

Jordan .

I was hoping Fudge Pachyderm was true to his/her name!

Like Jordan, I'm generally not upset by the outcome with a few minor disappointments. I wrote somewhere (maybe here?) recently that I liked Virginia's Jim Webb and if he's a sign of the New Democrat along with the Old Democrat, Joe Lieberman, well, then all I can say is bring it on! Once I learned Allen was reluctant to admit his Jewish roots, it gave me the creeps about him, though I wasn't on his bandwagon in the first place. Sorry to see Santorum go because I do think he was a class act. I strongly believe he will not be gone for long though.

Here in Cal-EE-forn-EE-ah, Arnold won big time. Drat that Austrian birth, or he'd be a major up and comer for the presidency. Most of the citizen-sponsored propositions I cared about went down to defeat and that is good. I voted for Diane Feinstein in my lone Democratic vote because I find her a thoughtful Democrat unlike her hysterical counterpart, Barbara Boxer. Plus, I knew she'd win. I don't think her opponent ran a single ad at least not in Southern California.

I'm hoping that the new split will force Dems to rise to the occasion and show some stuff rather than demonizing and attacking the opposition. Also, with the Dems suddenly finding themselves with power, perhaps their entertainment contingency who represents the left will hold their feet to the fire this time around. In other words, the Dems with power are now faced with a far greater challenge -- actually doing something instead of simply criticizing. This is always more difficult. Over the next two years the country will have the opportunity to make judgments based on their actions rather than their very loud words.

My greatest dream would be the two parties moving away from the distant edges and closer to one another -- as my now defunct fave Dem presidential candidate Mark Warner described it --- SENSIBLE CENTRISTS. I think it would be a very good thing for the country (and the world) to have two wise, thoughtful, sensible, far-sighted, ARTICULATE candidates running against each other for the presidency in 2008. I would also hope we can move beyond salacious homosexual email, non-stop name calling, over-the-top rhetoric, hoarding thousands of dollars in the frigidaires, and other forms of scandal and divisiveness.

As opposed to those who characterize the American people as 'stoopid,' I give them credit for having a collective good common sense evidenced by a two-plus centuries worth of success. Like our jury system, that once in a while lets an obviously guilty murdering football player go free after cutting off his ex-wife's head and slashing her friend to death, we as a people may take a mistep now and then, but we usually get it right. The job of the presidency, as George Washington realized, is a job no human being is fully capable of executing flawlessly. But oh how I crave that whoever is our next president, he will have the good will of the bulk of the country even if they didn't vote for him. That they will honor the office and show a modicum of respect even while acknowledging their political differences.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

Susan

PS Just caught Jordan's comment about voters in itty bitty Montana. Did you know that after the state's recent Democrat shift, a law was immediately enacted that allowed for same day voter registration and voting? It will be interesting to see when the final breakdown is in, how many same-day registrant-voters went Democratic, Republican or other. Regardless of party affiliation, I find that concept problematic. http://www.fairvote.org/?page=200&articlemode=showspecific&showarticle=844

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Smeds - what kind of requirement do you need to register that day in your st ate? any sort of identification? Susan - do you know if an identification is necessary in Montana?

Same day identification is perfect for voter fraud unless your system is networked and there are lots of checks and balances.

Jordan .

quote  - 'Sorry to see Santorum go because I do think he was a class act. I strongly believe he will not be gone for long though. '

Don't know anything about this guy but the one clip I saw of him showed his grace in defeat. He was congratulating and commending the guy that beat him, and also urging the audience to applaud him (which they seemed reluctant to do)

"Lots of voters" this year was on average about 40% nation-wide so about right for an off-year election.

As long as a state has some good checks/balances regarding same-day registration, I don't see many problems. But I would hope that a state that doesn't require good identification doesn't allow for same-day registration.

Next door in MO, we've had a number of cases of fraud frm previous elections. One group called ACORN had I think 24 workers charged with fraud.  

Jordan .

Smeds, are you saying you can use a utility bill as a sole form of ID to register to vote? Geez you can't even put your kid in a public school with that alone. (Some years ago -- maybe now too -- many people were cheating with public schools trying to get their kids into schools with better reputations in LA.)

((Just noticed you said and a SS #.}}

I found this interesting re/ID too. John Fund, Wall Street Journal who wrote a book on election fraud, sloppiness, etc.

Here in California you can pick up a voters registration form at many venues but I see them at each post office. There are very few spaces to fill in but you do have to check that you are a "US Citizen." Many legal immigrants with valid green cards consider themselves something apart from their illegal (non-legit green card or NO green card) brethren and have believed themselves "citizens" or at least eligible to vote in US elections. Once that little form is filled in and mailed in, there's no one checking your actual status and bingo -- you're a registered California voter. You never need to show any proof of citizenship. It's the honor system alright!

His point about the mobile society is a good one too when you recall from the 2000 election (maybe every election before and since) people with homes in two states (i.e. New York homes with Florida summer homes) were not cross-referenced to see if they were voting in two states. This is a bigger issue in the presidential election years but an issue all the same.

Then there's absentee ballots which are not cross-referenced with death certificates. For years after the death of my mother-in-law and later my brother-in-law, and father-in-law, they still received blank absentee ballots that only needed to be marked and mailed. Were I the unscrupulous sort, I could have cast a few extra ballots.

Well, there are lots of problems that are unfixable probably but we should keep on our toes about elections.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin