A little perspective on 2014 Senate

[Papageorgio]

The bottom line is less people than in any election voted for the Democrat.

The Senate, no matter how much crying is going on, is in the hand of the Republicans, not the Democrats.

Obama campaigned for a governor in his home state and the governor lost. Obama failed to motivate anyone to vote for his candidate.

The Clinton's campaigned in several states and all the people they campaigned for lost.

Biden campaigned for several candidates, they lost.

Blame whatever you want, the bottom line is the Democrats couldn't get even a very low number to vote for them. Less than most Republicans, a big gain in the Governor, Senate and House, why?

Record low numbers voted for Democrats, despite the party big wigs that came out to campaign.

 

[JoeB131]

Therefore, Senate control switched parties, even though 12.5 million fewer Americans voted for Democrats, with roughly half the total votes Bush received two years prior.

Why does that matter?

It doesn't. It is totally irrelevant.

Like the OP.

Well, actually, it does kind of matter, not that you'd get this.

Unlike the republicans, who pretty much did everything they could to hide what their candidates stood for this time, the 2006 Democrats actually ran on a national theme. Bush totally fucked up getting us into Iraq, and we needed to get out of Iraq and the way to do that change control of BOTH houses of Congress. Voter turnout was a record 40.4%.

Even 2010 had a record voter turnout.

This turnout was the lowest since 1942.

 

[Antares]

Therefore, Senate control switched parties, even though 12.5 million fewer Americans voted for Democrats, with roughly half the total votes Bush received two years prior.

Why does that matter?

It doesn't. It is totally irrelevant.

Like the OP.

Well, actually, it does kind of matter, not that you'd get this.

Unlike the republicans, who pretty much did everything they could to hide what their candidates stood for this time, the 2006 Democrats actually ran on a national theme. Bush totally fucked up getting us into Iraq, and we needed to get out of Iraq and the way to do that change control of BOTH houses of Congress. Voter turnout was a record 40.4%.

Even 2010 had a record voter turnout.

This turnout was the lowest since 1942.

You lost.

 

[Vigilante]

Therefore, Senate control switched parties, even though 12.5 million fewer Americans voted for Democrats, with roughly half the total votes Bush received two years prior.

Why does that matter?

It doesn't. It is totally irrelevant.

Like the OP.

Well, actually, it does kind of matter, not that you'd get this.

Unlike the republicans, who pretty much did everything they could to hide what their candidates stood for this time, the 2006 Democrats actually ran on a national theme. Bush totally fucked up getting us into Iraq, and we needed to get out of Iraq and the way to do that change control of BOTH houses of Congress. Voter turnout was a record 40.4%.

Even 2010 had a record voter turnout.

This turnout was the lowest since 1942.

And those voters almost unanimously.......

 

[JoeB131]

You lost.

Nothing of importance.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Antares]

You lost.

Nothing of importance.

We'll see lil joey.

 

[JoeB131]

We'll see lil joey.

Yes, we'll see Obama vetoing all the crazy shit that comes out of the Senate. We'll see you guys trying to yank food out of the mouths of hungry children to give tax cuts to rich people. And well see all those folks who didn't show up in 2014 making damned sure they show up in 2016.

 

[Toro]

Therefore, Senate control switched parties, even though 12.5 million fewer Americans voted for Democrats, with roughly half the total votes Bush received two years prior.

Why does that matter?

It doesn't. It is totally irrelevant.

Like the OP.

Well, actually, it does kind of matter, not that you'd get this.

Unlike the republicans, who pretty much did everything they could to hide what their candidates stood for this time, the 2006 Democrats actually ran on a national theme. Bush totally fucked up getting us into Iraq, and we needed to get out of Iraq and the way to do that change control of BOTH houses of Congress. Voter turnout was a record 40.4%.

Even 2010 had a record voter turnout.

This turnout was the lowest since 1942.

Keep rationalizing, Joe.

Nobody cares.

The perspective of this election is that "You lost."

 

[Antares]

We'll see lil joey.

Yes, we'll see Obama vetoing all the crazy shit that comes out of the Senate. We'll see you guys trying to yank food out of the mouths of hungry children to give tax cuts to rich people. And well see all those folks who didn't show up in 2014 making damned sure they show up in 2016.

Sure you will.

You are going to witness Obama being painted into a corner he can't get out of.

You will see your side in there with him.

 

[JoeB131]

Keep rationalizing, Joe.

Nobody cares.

The perspective of this election is that "You lost."

No, the perspective is- Midterms don't really matter.

They didn't matter in 1986, they didn't matter in 1994, they didn't matter in 2006.

 

[Vigilante]

BUT they would have mattered to JoeBlows IF the SUBVERSIVES had won.... Bet on that FACT!

 

[Toro]

Keep rationalizing, Joe.

Nobody cares.

The perspective of this election is that "You lost."

No, the perspective is- Midterms don't really matter.

They didn't matter in 1986, they didn't matter in 1994, they didn't matter in 2006.

Oh, who controls the government doesn't matter.

Got it.



And we're supposed to take your "perspective" seriously?

 

[JoeB131]

Sure you will.

You are going to witness Obama being painted into a corner he can't get out of.

You will see your side in there with him.

Honestly, I would love to see the GOP get back to being the party of small, cost-effective government.

If they became the GOP that oppossed Clinton and got him to go along with major reforms, that would be fine.

My guess is- more investigations on Benghazi, more shilling for the rich, and more of the crazy that the GOP has realy turned into in the last decade.

 

[JoeB131]

BUT they would have mattered to JoeBlows IF the SUBVERSIVES had won.... Bet on that FACT!

Which subversives are those? It seems that you have a lot of name-calling going on here and not a lot of substance.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, who controls the government doesn't matter.

Got it.



And we're supposed to take your "perspective" seriously?

Last time I checked, Obama was still president.

 

[Roadrunner]

Sure you will.

You are going to witness Obama being painted into a corner he can't get out of.

You will see your side in there with him.

Honestly, I would love to see the GOP get back to being the party of small, cost-effective government.

If they became the GOP that oppossed Clinton and got him to go along with major reforms, that would be fine.

My guess is- more investigations on Benghazi, more shilling for the rich, and more of the crazy that the GOP has realy turned into in the last decade.

Can they shill for the rich more than Obama?

Can the 1% get more of the pie under Republicans than under Obama?

Can the median household income decline more than under Obama if R's take the WH?

Will non-taxpayer rolls grow greater, and more go on foodstamps, SSI, Medicaid and SS Disability under R's, than under Obama?

Care to answer, Oh Wise One?

 

[Vigilante]

BUT they would have mattered to JoeBlows IF the SUBVERSIVES had won.... Bet on that FACT!

Which subversives are those? It seems that you have a lot of name-calling going on here and not a lot of substance.

Tell me you don't know WHO YOU ARE.... go ahead tell me!!!

 

[Toro]

Oh, who controls the government doesn't matter.

Got it.



And we're supposed to take your "perspective" seriously?

Last time I checked, Obama was still president.

Well, yes, if you expect that Executive Orders will be used to pass every single piece of legislation for the next two years, then your inference would be correct.

If not, however, then a party that controls both chambers matters.

I imagine you probably know that, though.

 

[Vigilante]

One of the BIGGEST DemocRAT donors.... who is this BILLIONAIRE?