Who will have control on Congress after the 2006 elections?

[MCsommerreid]

I do think we may see a swing towards a more democratic senate, if anything. Seems like people are getting kinda fed up with the way republicans are heading lately.

[CoventryCat86]

I do think we may see a swing towards a more democratic senate, if anything. Seems like people are getting kinda fed up with the way republicans are heading lately.

Possibly but almost all the time, that is a minor consideration with respect to individual Congressmen and/or Senators. Most of the voters like to pride themselves as "looking at the individual" rather then tossing them out because of what their party as a whole is perceived as doing wrong.

The Democrats may pick up a few House and Senate seats but it won't be enough for them to have a majority in either chamber.

[MCsommerreid]

Most of the voters like to pride themselves as "looking at the individual" rather then tossing them out because of what their party as a whole is perceived as doing wrong.

In the bay area we get a butt load of partisanship. Or perhaps it's more a case of the more partisan and politically extreme the louder one is.

[mauied1101]

CC - do you still think the Republicans will keep control with the Foley fallout? Time's running short, and most of the news coming out is from the majority - Foley, Allen (yeah, Senate), and it ain't peachy. I'm hearing apologies on XM radio from a congressman from upstate NY apologizing for Foley, and Allen bought a 2 min spot on primetime TV.

[bigpoppapuff]

tom reynolds is down to non-politician jack davis by almost 18pts...this would be a huge loss for the repugs....how many other races are changing due to foley fallout???

[mauied1101]

tom reynolds is down to non-politician jack davis by almost 18pts...this would be a huge loss for the repugs....how many other races are changing due to foley fallout???

that's the guy! I heard that he was the guy that convinced Foley to run for re-election. His chief of staff is Foley's ex-chief and that he was fully informed. Now he's taking credit for "forcing" Foley to resign. Try again - ABC and the media outlets forced Foley to resign.

[CoventryCat86]

CC - do you still think the Republicans will keep control with the Foley fallout? Time's running short, and most of the news coming out is from the majority - Foley, Allen (yeah, Senate), and it ain't peachy. I'm hearing apologies on XM radio from a congressman from upstate NY apologizing for Foley, and Allen bought a 2 min spot on primetime TV.

What "Foley Fallout?" The only "fallout" I see is that the Republicans will probably not hold Foley's seat in Florida and even that is still a toss up.

As I mentioned earlier, in Connecticut, there was a Democratic State Representative who actually broke the law. In the Foley situation so far, has not been charged with a crime. In the Connecticut case, the Democratic State Representative was arrested in June of 2003 for molesting his eight year old foster child. He refused to resign. This BS went on for over a year, the Democrats SUPPORTED this guy, no one called for his resignation nor did anyone here hold his actions against the other Democratic members of the General Assembly. In the summer of 2004 when he had to decide whether or not to run for reelection, he finally gave some lame excuse abut being burnt out or some such nonsense with NO REFERENCE to his pending court case on multiple felony arrests. The Democrats even told him it was okay if he wanted to seek reelection! In August of 2004, a full fourteen months after his arrest, he plead guilty to one felony count and was given a ten year prison sentence and had to register as a sex offender.

So how many seats do you think the Democrats lost in the State House in Connecticut in 2004? Scroll down for the answer.....











































NONE, the Democrats had a net GAIN of FOUR SEATS!!! However, the Republicans did win the seat that was previously held by the convicted felon Democrat.

So much for "fallout".....

We'll let the Democrats keep fantasizing and spouting their bullshit about "Foley." It'll give them a reason to live for the next four weeks or so. Then when reality sets in after the election when they don't control Congress, they can start whining again.

[CoventryCat86]

I noticed that no one wants to take my bet including the blowhard liberals.

They sure do talk a great line of bullshit but refuse to put their money where their mouths are.

[nhcigarfan]

[quote=CoventryCat86;63055}

They sure do talk a great line of bullshit but refuse to put their money where their mouths are.[/quote]


That’s because they need to save it to pay the taxes the next President will have to raise to pay off Bush's debt.


or because it's being used for social services (read donated to the communist party)

or so Hillary can get a cankle lift.

(for those who don't know a "cankle" is a term to describe when a calf merges undefined into the ankle, also known as drop-calf)


As a staunch independent who will most likely be voting for a democrat, assuming a decent one runs for president, I'm going to have to go with #3.

[CoventryCat86]

Yeah. I don't bet. Even on a sure thing.
That being said... I stand by my prediction that you're only going to win three of those elections.
I think it's going to be close. No great "win" for either party.

Have you checked your blood pressure lately?

ONLY three? Here's what you said originally:

CC,
Only two of the republicans will win. It will be a very slim majority WHOEVER wins. Personally, I'm hoping everyone now in office gets voted out and all new people get sent to Washington.
But that's just me.

So I'm confused, have you changed your mind and now agree with me that all three Republicans from Connecticut will win or are you going to stick with your original thought that one of them will lose? If you think one will lose, can you tell me which one?

My blood pressure is fine. Why don't you ask Barry how his is?