Didn't everone vote democrat last time for same reason voting republican this time

[ttwarrior1]

lost

4 years from now we vote democrat again, cycle just goes on

[pavyracer]

No.

50.1% votes for one party and 49.9% votes for the other party. It has been like that for a long time. There is a slight shift to either side ever 4-8 years.

[tblues2005]

I agree there is a slight change every 4 years. It is a normal cycle.

[MB]

I voted both, depended on the races

[ttwarrior1]

no its been like 65 to 35 tonight in some races

[pavyracer]

no its been like 65 to 35 tonight in some races

No.

You have to calculate all the votes from all states. A state with 100,000 registered voters going 65/35 is not the same as a state with 3,000,000 registered voters going 55/45.

[andywend]

When was the last time in the U.S. where there was such a dramatic shift in voting preference within 2 consecutive elections?

In 2008, the voters overwhelmingly supported the democrats and now in 2010, they have completely changed course and want nothing to do with them.

I admit that the huge republican party support has nothing to do with anything the GOP has done because they have been completely powerless over the last 2 years.

If Liberal democrats want to masturbate with themselves into believing their party did nothing to cause this huge voter shift, then it gives the republicans at least some hope for the future.

The Obama administration has been a complete and total disaster and that is the only reason to explain the voters huge shift tonight as opposed to 2 years ago.

[jjgold]

I voted for any Rep because of Obama that's all.

[mtneer1212]

Health Care and Economy -- businesses got bailed out, people did not -- everyone is angry. They are sick of government, and everything Obama wants is more government. Thus, this result.

[maersksealand]

Guys, guys, NOTHING will change...don't get excited over nothing.

[muldoon]

In 2008, the voters overwhelmingly supported the democrats and now in 2010, they have completely changed course and want nothing to do with them.

Why didn't the Repubs overwhelmingly take the Senate if the course was completely changed?

If you look at raw votes from 2010, it looked like an overwhelming change, but the actual numbers are still in low single digits for %.

[agharah1]

I think its funny that Obama scheduled a 2 week trip to the Far East during the election season. This election was about a couple of things. First, when Clinton was President seniors were on his side because they grew up voting for Johnson and Carter. Today, seniors are the people who grew up voting for Nixon and Reagan. The election was a referendum on Obama...for the Republicans. Its also about the economy. The Democrats had no message. Nobody was out there with the CBO report showing the stimulus saved 3 million jobs. Nobody was talking about how many people would be able to afford health insurance for the first time. It doesn't matter who people blame, it matters whose got the solutions.

There's nothing special going on right now. Wait until the actual votes and legislating starts happening. All we have now are punditry (Like I care what a bunch of out of touch losers think) and campaign stuff. But for now, America: let's hug it out, bitch.

Now that CA was called for Boxer, the Democrats will have their 51st Senate vote when they call Hawaii.

Anyway, who do I see about my SBR Points for the CT Senate race?

[andywend]

Why didn't the Repubs overwhelmingly take the Senate if the course was completely changed?

Muldoon, the republicans actually did better on percentage terms in the senate than they did in the house.

Senate: 37 races contested with the republicans gaining approximately 8 seats
House: Estimates are between a 60-65 seat house gain
Governorships: 30 out of the 50 governorships are republicans

Muldoon, I know you lean strongly to the left and if you're happy with the democratic party performance tonight then you are an easy man to please.

For me, it was a great night with the sole big exception being the slimeball Harry Reid winning re-election.

I'll be relieved when January 20th rolls around because who knows what Obama is going to try and get away with from now until then.

[jgilmartin]

lost
4 years from now we vote democrat again, cycle just goes on

Yes, basically. It's the whole 'grass is always greener' mentality. It switches from one group of vile mercenaries to the other.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Yes, basically. It's the whole 'grass is always greener' mentality. It switches from one group of vile mercenaries to the other.

Exactly. Do you wanna get fukked in the mouth or in the anus?

[andywend]

With Obama in the White House, we need something to stop him from bankrupting the country and I am confident the republicans in the house aren't going to give him the blank check his fellow democrats did.

For this reason, everyone but the most vile liberal democrat should be happy about the results of this mid-term election.

[King Mayan]

Repubs put us in this depression and all these brainwashed retards put them back in there...

[muldoon]

Muldoon, I know you lean strongly to the left and if you're happy with the democratic party performance tonight then you are an easy man to please.

Pro guns, pro capital punishment, pro drug decriminalization, morally opposed to abortion but respect the fact that it's law.

You go out and try to sell the virtues of the HCR or the Stimulus when there are paid protesters jumping up and down screaming at town hall meetings.

You think you know me? To quote Rodney Dangerfield "You might think you know, but the truth is, you don't know fu-ck about fu-ck"

[muldoon]

With Obama in the White House, we need something to stop him from bankrupting the country and I am confident the republicans in the house aren't going to give him the blank check his fellow democrats did.

For this reason, everyone but the most vile liberal democrat should be happy about the results of this mid-term election.

Safe to assume you were outraged over 2 unfunded wars and an unfunded 700 billion dollar prescription drug benefit under Bush?

I'm sure you must have posted about how that concerned you.

[MonkeyF0cker]

[ttwarrior1]

rand paul of ky will be a vice presidential candidate at least and i think he's a lying fraud, but his
opponent is worse

[muldoon]

Plenty of blame to go around on both sides there. Easy for people to say that low income people shouldn't have bought homes, but that's like blaming the drug problems of society solely on the shoulders of the addicts.

People got disgustingly rich setting up these mortgages, then repackaging and reselling them.

[l7ustin]

go rand paul, ron paul for president with rand paul as vp

[MonkeyF0cker]

Plenty of blame to go around on both sides there. Easy for people to say that low income people shouldn't have bought homes, but that's like blaming the drug problems of society solely on the shoulders of the addicts.

People got disgustingly rich setting up these mortgages, then repackaging and reselling them.

Yep. Both sides were certainly at fault. Some don't seem to think so however. Both sides also agreed to bailout the people who got rich off of it. It's sickening. It's a shame that people can't open their eyes and see how they are getting exploited by the very people they want in office no matter what side of the aisle they support.

[l7ustin]

both sides agreed to go to war too but now its the republican war and the democrat bailout

[MonkeyF0cker]

Bin Laden was laughed at when he said he would bankrupt America. It sure doesn't seem that funny now.

[rkelly110]

Congratulations Rep backers. Come Jan. it's time to get off their lazy asses and go to work.

To quote MonkeyFOcker: "do we want it in the mouth or the anus?" We ALL are gonna get it,
ASS to Mouth with a side of E-coli.

[unusialsusp5]

no one that lives in kentucky should be allowed to vote.

[d2bets]

no one that lives in kentucky should be allowed to vote.

I'd rather disallow them from reproducing (amongst themselves).

[philswin]

Yep. Both sides were certainly at fault. Some don't seem to think so however. Both sides also agreed to bailout the people who got rich off of it. It's sickening. It's a shame that people can't open their eyes and see how they are getting exploited by the very people they want in office no matter what side of the aisle they support.

Subprime Lending was created by the Government in the 70's and went unchecked for 30 plus years. The Govt forced Freddie/Fannie to promote irresponsible Lending as well as Lending Institutions. Community organizations also pushed borrowers into homes by working with the Govt programs and falsifying documentation if necassary. The height of the problem really started in 1994 when Franklin Raines CEO at Fannie Mae announced their trillion dollar commitment to help put underserved borrowers into homes. This was followed by 2 trillion more dollars. Wall Street ate up Subprime lending because of the better spreads on Mortgage Backed security that were backed by Subprime loans (due to higher interest rates on subprime mortgages). All polliticians Democrat Republicans lauded the increase in Home Ownership as Americans realizing the great American dream.

[Willie Bee]

When was the last time in the U.S. where there was such a dramatic shift in voting preference within 2 consecutive elections?

I'll throw 1992-94 into the ring. Country was in a huff not to re-elect Papa Bush in '92 and sent Slick Willie to DC. Two years later, the same public put the GOP in charge of the house. Sheep are funny that way.

[pavyracer]

It always happens like this. Since most households can afford cable news or car radios it is very easy to shift the voters to either side. The way they spin the news on cable news is amazing. Not even when Stalin was ruling the Soviet Union you could see such massive propaganda going on in the news.