GOP Cleans Up At The State Level Too

Listening

Gold Member
Aug 27, 2011
14,989
1,650
What Senate Republicans can learn from the GOP-led states - The Washington Post

While President Obama has downplayed Tuesday’s Senate results, arguing that Democrats were fighting on GOP ground, Republicans also picked up governorships from Democrats in liberal strongholds like Massachusetts, Maryland and Illinois, as well as in Arkansas. Result? The number of GOP governors has risen from 21 to 31 since Obama took office (32 if Gov. Sean Parnell holds on in Alaska) — just short of the all-time high of 34 Republican governors in the 1920s.

*************************

Voters have also given those governors Republican legislatures to enact their agendas. When Obama first took office, Republicans held just 3,220 state legislative seats. After Tuesday’s vote, the number stands at 4,111 — a net gain of nearly 900 seats on Obama’s watch. Thanks to the 291 state legislative seats Republicans added in 61 chambers across the country last week, there are now more Republican state legislators than at any time since 1920.

Put another way: In 2008, the GOP controlled just 36 state legislative chambers. It soon will control 69 — and voters have given the GOP total control of state government in nearly half the country. In 2008, Republicans held both the legislature and governors’ mansion in just eight states. Today, the number is 24. By contrast, Democrats now control both the legislature and governor’s office in just seven states, down from 15 before the 2014 election. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, that is the lowest number of states Democrats have controlled since 1860.

************************

Wow. Getting better all the time !
 
Tell me about it:

CongrssionalHeat2014_zps422edd08.png
 
But yet the Dems say the election results were not at all significant that they would have won if their base turned out to vote.Then why didn't they come out?
 
:eusa_shhh:

Don't get them started again

Well Obama said they are so stupid they didn't even know an election was happening so this is the RESULTS. :dance::dance:

SNIP:
Obama: ‘Most Democratic Voters Not Aware There’s An Election On November 4′
Share
Tweet
Email
BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
October 3, 2014 3:31 pm


President Obama insulted America’s Democratic voters in a new video released by the DCCC on Friday, claiming “most of our Democratic voters aren’t aware there is even an election on November 4.”
The video, entitled “Are you in for 2014?” continues the DCCC tradition of begging for money and support ahead of the 2014 midterm elections, this time implicitly disparaging Democrats for remaining oblivious to the fact that there is an election.

ALL of it here:
Obama 8216 Most Democratic Voters Not Aware There 8217 s An Election On November 4 8242 Washington Free Beacon
 
Last edited:
Just think what it would be like if all that Red had any human beings living there! The Pacific Rim areas, and the urban North Midwest, and the Northeast do have Blue people(?) in them, by comparison.

A comparison with the Coolidge/Hoover era is likely more alarming, than any cause for celebration!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
("Red" now bad word, anyway, on network sports! "Quaker," is actually bad word: "For they bade the people quake at the fear of the Lord!" Now mostly little kids, maybe victims!)
 
Just think what it would be like if all that Red had any human beings living there! The Pacific Rim areas, and the urban North Midwest, and the Northeast do have Blue people(?) in them, by comparison.

A comparison with the Coolidge/Hoover era is likely more alarming, than any cause for celebration!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
("Red" now bad word, anyway, on network sports! "Quaker," is actually bad word: "For they bade the people quake at the fear of the Lord!" Now mostly little kids, maybe victims!)

So the 250 seats in the house all represent who ?
 
Probably the other 185, there being a total of 435 set in 1911.

All 435 represent the effectively franchised, who register to vote--not all do or can--and then vote--not all do or can. You will recall that from 2008. The effectively franchised in 2008 actually registered, showed up, and got rid of the Republicans. Within two years, that abruptly changed. The effectively franchised got rid of the Democrats. This time out, not much changed. The Democrats are down 16 or so, in the House. The comparisons with Hoover and Coolidge are apt. The 1930's and 1940's were different. In the 1950's, Eisenhower initially had tiny majorities in both houses. What he did next was to go to bat against the Joe McCarthy types of his time, not Ted Cruz at the time. Eisenhower wanted a progressive GOP. Earl Warren became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

"If the right wing wants a fight, they are going to get it. . . .either this Republican Party will reflect progressivism, or I won't be with them, anymore!"

Famously, Kansas is different, now.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!)
(Hmm! Land of Arapaho. . .different now!)
 
Last edited:
What Senate Republicans can learn from the GOP-led states - The Washington Post

While President Obama has downplayed Tuesday’s Senate results, arguing that Democrats were fighting on GOP ground, Republicans also picked up governorships from Democrats in liberal strongholds like Massachusetts, Maryland and Illinois, as well as in Arkansas. Result? The number of GOP governors has risen from 21 to 31 since Obama took office (32 if Gov. Sean Parnell holds on in Alaska) — just short of the all-time high of 34 Republican governors in the 1920s.

*************************

Voters have also given those governors Republican legislatures to enact their agendas. When Obama first took office, Republicans held just 3,220 state legislative seats. After Tuesday’s vote, the number stands at 4,111 — a net gain of nearly 900 seats on Obama’s watch. Thanks to the 291 state legislative seats Republicans added in 61 chambers across the country last week, there are now more Republican state legislators than at any time since 1920.

Put another way: In 2008, the GOP controlled just 36 state legislative chambers. It soon will control 69 — and voters have given the GOP total control of state government in nearly half the country. In 2008, Republicans held both the legislature and governors’ mansion in just eight states. Today, the number is 24. By contrast, Democrats now control both the legislature and governor’s office in just seven states, down from 15 before the 2014 election. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, that is the lowest number of states Democrats have controlled since 1860.

************************

Wow. Getting better all the time !

Which give them a tremendous advantage to win the Presidency in 2016.
 
Probably the other 185, there being a total of 435 set in 1911.

All 435 represent the effectively franchised, who register to vote--not all do or can--and then vote--not all do or can. You will recall that from 2008. The effectively franchised in 2008 actually registered, showed up, and got rid of the Republicans. Within two years, that abruptly changed. The effectively franchised got rid of the Democrats. This time out, not much changed. The Democrats are down 16 or so, in the House. The comparisons with Hoover and Coolidge are apt. The 1930's and 1940's were different. In the 1950's, Eisenhower initially had tiny majorities in both houses. What he did next was to go to bat against the Joe McCarthy types of his time, not Ted Cruz at the time. Eisenhower wanted a progressive GOP. Earl Warren became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

"If the right wing wants a fight, they are going to get it. . . .either this Republican Party will reflect progressivism, or I won't be with them, anymore!"

Famously, Kansas is different, now.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!)
(Hmm! Land of Arapaho. . .different now!)
I hear a teenage girl in your whine
 
Probably the other 185, there being a total of 435 set in 1911.

All 435 represent the effectively franchised, who register to vote--not all do or can--and then vote--not all do or can. You will recall that from 2008. The effectively franchised in 2008 actually registered, showed up, and got rid of the Republicans. Within two years, that abruptly changed. The effectively franchised got rid of the Democrats. This time out, not much changed. The Democrats are down 16 or so, in the House. The comparisons with Hoover and Coolidge are apt. The 1930's and 1940's were different. In the 1950's, Eisenhower initially had tiny majorities in both houses. What he did next was to go to bat against the Joe McCarthy types of his time, not Ted Cruz at the time. Eisenhower wanted a progressive GOP. Earl Warren became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

"If the right wing wants a fight, they are going to get it. . . .either this Republican Party will reflect progressivism, or I won't be with them, anymore!"

Famously, Kansas is different, now.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!)
(Hmm! Land of Arapaho. . .different now!)
I hear a teenage girl in your whine

me too:crybaby::crybaby:
 
Probably the other 185, there being a total of 435 set in 1911.

All 435 represent the effectively franchised, who register to vote--not all do or can--and then vote--not all do or can. You will recall that from 2008. The effectively franchised in 2008 actually registered, showed up, and got rid of the Republicans. Within two years, that abruptly changed. The effectively franchised got rid of the Democrats. This time out, not much changed. The Democrats are down 16 or so, in the House. The comparisons with Hoover and Coolidge are apt. The 1930's and 1940's were different. In the 1950's, Eisenhower initially had tiny majorities in both houses. What he did next was to go to bat against the Joe McCarthy types of his time, not Ted Cruz at the time. Eisenhower wanted a progressive GOP. Earl Warren became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

"If the right wing wants a fight, they are going to get it. . . .either this Republican Party will reflect progressivism, or I won't be with them, anymore!"

Famously, Kansas is different, now.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!)
(Hmm! Land of Arapaho. . .different now!)

Eisenhower would go on to call Warren one of the two largest mistakes he ever made.
 
But yet the Dems say the election results were not at all significant that they would have won if their base turned out to vote.Then why didn't they come out?


It always goes this way. Americans keeping forgetting just how bad liberalism is so they have to get a good dose of it from time to time before they wake up and wonder the in the world they were thinking about when they voted for the somebody like Obama and jackasses they just voted out of the congresses at the federal and state level.
 
Goes along with Gruber's stupid remark. Just maybe, more Dems will catch on now.
:eusa_shhh:

Don't get them started again

Well Obama said they are so stupid they didn't even know an election was happening so this is the RESULTS. :dance::dance:

SNIP:
Obama: ‘Most Democratic Voters Not Aware There’s An Election On November 4′
Share
Tweet
Email
BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
October 3, 2014 3:31 pm


President Obama insulted America’s Democratic voters in a new video released by the DCCC on Friday, claiming “most of our Democratic voters aren’t aware there is even an election on November 4.”
The video, entitled “Are you in for 2014?” continues the DCCC tradition of begging for money and support ahead of the 2014 midterm elections, this time implicitly disparaging Democrats for remaining oblivious to the fact that there is an election.

ALL of it here:
Obama 8216 Most Democratic Voters Not Aware There 8217 s An Election On November 4 8242 Washington Free Beacon
 
No doubt the Democrats have been decimated. It was a historic Election for the Republican Party. But let's keep it going. Gotta boot Landrieu in Louisiana next.
 

Forum List

Back
Top