Yes, the GOP will probably take the Senate....but

[TemplarKormac]

I challenge you to prove such a claim.

Next some idiot is going to say that voter ID laws are all about fair and open elections.

Uh yeah, keep dodging.

No doubt you can produce the incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.

Sure.

First case of voter fraud confirmed in Rio Arriba Co. KOB.com

Colorado election law prompts concerns about voter fraud Fox News

RALEIGH Report points to possible voter fraud in NC - WNCN News Weather Raleigh Durham Fayetteville

Bridgeport State Rep. Christina Ayala arrested on 19 voting fraud charges

Of course what they fail to tell you is that almost every case of voter fraud has been through absentee ballots.

It's still voter fraud genius.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I think it's safe to say that voter ID law proponents are just about as completely full of shit as they can possibly be.

would you want your doctor to be skilled enough to produce an ID before he worked on you?
A voter should obviously be able to produce an ID and pass a test too!

 

[Pogo]

There's no doubt that republicans will take the Senate – and a win is a win, regardless how it's achieved.

But the problem for most on the right is that they'll incorrectly infer that this is some sort of an 'endorsement' of republican policies, when in fact it is not. And republicans need to seriously consider the value and meaning of a victory in the context of low voter turnout, with those voting not representative of the Nation as a whole.

Democrats deserve to lose, no doubt – the consequence of their failure to get out the vote, and the propensity of most democrats to not vote during Midterms; but republicans will still have many problems they need to address, problems that will be too late to fix come 2016.

The GOP will have 2 years to prove themselves worthy of the votes of the American people.

If they continue to play obstructionist games they will pay a heavy price in 2016.

In essence this is their last and best chance to gain some credibility. I am not holding my breath given that Cruz, et al, will be grandstanding for the GOP nomination.

I'm registered as unaffiliated.
But, I'd rather have obstructionist activity than passage of bad law.
In my opinion, I would always prefer that the House and Senate were controlled by a party opposite of the President's party, regardless of the President's party.

The country as a whole agrees with you Alan, because that's exactly what we do almost every mid-term election.

If when the dust settles the RP has swept election day, that will not be news. What will be news is if they don't.

 

[Discombobulated]

Next some idiot is going to say that voter ID laws are all about fair and open elections.

Uh yeah, keep dodging.

No doubt you can produce the incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.

Sure.

First case of voter fraud confirmed in Rio Arriba Co. KOB.com

Colorado election law prompts concerns about voter fraud Fox News

RALEIGH Report points to possible voter fraud in NC - WNCN News Weather Raleigh Durham Fayetteville

Bridgeport State Rep. Christina Ayala arrested on 19 voting fraud charges

Of course what they fail to tell you is that almost every case of voter fraud has been through absentee ballots.

It's still voter fraud genius.

I look forward to your explanation about how the new voter ID laws prevent absentee ballot fraud.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

ALAN1 SAID:

“I'm registered as unaffiliated.
But, I'd rather have obstructionist activity than passage of bad law.
In my opinion, I would always prefer that the House and Senate were controlled by a party opposite of the President's party, regardless of the President's party.”

The problem with this is that it prevents the passage of good laws, laws that are necessary, proper, and reflect the will of the people with regard to issues they consider important.

It was not the Framers' intent that there be a 'do-nothing' Congress.

 

[Antares]

ALAN1 SAID:

“I'm registered as unaffiliated.
But, I'd rather have obstructionist activity than passage of bad law.
In my opinion, I would always prefer that the House and Senate were controlled by a party opposite of the President's party, regardless of the President's party.”

The problem with this is that it prevents the passage of good laws, laws that are necessary, proper, and reflect the will of the people with regard to issues they consider important.

It was not the Framers' intent that there be a 'do-nothing' Congress.

It was not their "intent" ANY President could just do as he pleases.

 

[JimH52]

It's fun to watch all of this "weeping" and "gnashing of teeth" going on by these assholes on the Left.

Like 12 year old's it's always "someone else's" fault, not theirs.

Actually, the GOP should be winning bigger than they are. It is a historical cyclical voting pattern. The party in the white house of a second term President loses. There have been very few exceptions during the years.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

There's no doubt that republicans will take the Senate – and a win is a win, regardless how it's achieved.

But the problem for most on the right is that they'll incorrectly infer that this is some sort of an 'endorsement' of republican policies, when in fact it is not. And republicans need to seriously consider the value and meaning of a victory in the context of low voter turnout, with those voting not representative of the Nation as a whole.

Democrats deserve to lose, no doubt – the consequence of their failure to get out the vote, and the propensity of most democrats to not vote during Midterms; but republicans will still have many problems they need to address, problems that will be too late to fix come 2016.

The GOP will have 2 years to prove themselves worthy of the votes of the American people.

If they continue to play obstructionist games they will pay a heavy price in 2016.

In essence this is their last and best chance to gain some credibility. I am not holding my breath given that Cruz, et al, will be grandstanding for the GOP nomination.

Liberal's definition of GOP obstruction in 2015 = Obama veto of all GOP passed legislation

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Here's another slant:

The Supreme Court Will Be a Disaster If a Justice Dies During a Republican Congress
"...
With their vitriolic obstruction throughout the Obama presidency, including a fight over the debt ceiling and a government shutdown, some Senate Republicans have shown a willingness to paralyze the basic functions of government—and might be comfortable with an evenly divided Court of eight justices, which could mean repeated 4-4 deadlocks and opinions that lack precedential value. There may be a parallel in the recent drawn-out fight over the D.C. Circuit, in which Republicans accused Obama of "packing" the court—he wasn't—and were perfectly happy to leave seats unfilled. That prompted Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to eliminate the filibuster with the nuclear option, which in turn led to Republicans promises of retaliation.

That retaliation may come at the expense of a fully functioning Supreme Court."

A Republican Senate in 2014 Could Stall Supreme Court Vacancies New Republic

 

[AvgGuyIA]

[

"

Next some idiot is going to say that voter ID laws are all about fair and open elections.

Or that one of them is going to deny it.

 

[Rotagilla]

..and the excuses and rationalizations begin.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Republicans, even if they win the Senate, will accomplish nothing in the next 2 years, and their do nothing-ness will look worse when they're the majority.

Then in 2016, they have to defend about 25 Senate seats to the Democrats' 10, worse than the Democrats had it this year, and,

2016, being a presidential year, will bring out the vote, which will favor Democrats.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Republicans, even if they win the Senate, will accomplish nothing in the next 2 years, and their do nothing-ness will look worse when they're the majority.

Then in 2016, they have to defend about 25 Senate seats to the Democrats' 10, worse than the Democrats had it this year, and,

2016, being a presidential year, will bring out the vote, which will favor Democrats.

The job is to Obstruct Obama...............and his BS policies................That job has been done and will continue to be done for the next 2 years...............

It will now force him to use the VETO..................Get it ready.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Just so I understand what's going on here, let me see if I have this right:

Assuming the GOP takes the Senate, their goal over the next 18 months (before the next horrific and insulting campaign season gets up to speed) is to pass bills that Obama may or may not sign. And it is their belief that the bills he signs will clearly be positives for America -- enough that the electorate will see it in 2016 and give them credit -- and that they will be able to point to the bills he vetoes and convince the electorate that they WOULD have been good for America.

How close am I here?

.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

It's fun to watch all of this "weeping" and "gnashing of teeth" going on by these assholes on the Left.

Like 12 year old's it's always "someone else's" fault, not theirs.

and we will wait for 2016 and watch the GOP wither away like the flower from a thorn bush in early winter.

What's really funny is that all the money spent for campaigning produces a near dead heat in the polls. If things are so bad why aren't Republicans doing better in the opinion polls? Doesn't exactly look like a sweeping mandate.

A balance of power shift is the definition of mandate. The American people want obama held by the balls so he does no more harm. If he does amnesty, Hillary won't have a chance to win in 2016.

 

[JoeB131]

Our GOP has two years to make things right, or millions in our party, including me, are going to have to make a tough decision in 2016.

Oh, Jake, you'll get behind bush like the rest of them.

 

[eagle1462010]

.

Just so I understand what's going on here, let me see if I have this right:

Assuming the GOP takes the Senate, their goal over the next 18 months (before the next horrific and insulting campaign season gets up to speed) is to pass bills that Obama may or may not sign. And it is their belief that the bills he signs will clearly be positives for America -- enough that the electorate will see it in 2016 and give them credit -- and that they will be able to point to the bills he vetoes and convince the electorate that they WOULD have been good for America.

How close am I here?

.

Why do we need more laws anyway? Don't we have enough already? And why would we allow bills like Cap and Trade, Amnesty, and etc. to pass anyway.................................

I would agree with E-verify and stricter penalties for immigration and that's about it...........cutting the debt.........fiscal measures...........

But really, WHY do we need them passing more and more laws anyway............

 

[JoeB131]

The Republicans, even if they win the Senate, will accomplish nothing in the next 2 years, and their do nothing-ness will look worse when they're the majority.

Then in 2016, they have to defend about 25 Senate seats to the Democrats' 10, worse than the Democrats had it this year, and,

2016, being a presidential year, will bring out the vote, which will favor Democrats.

The job is to Obstruct Obama...............and his BS policies................That job has been done and will continue to be done for the next 2 years...............

It will now force him to use the VETO..................Get it ready.

Okay, but honestly, that's actually a positive for the President. Reagan issued 78 vetoes, only 9 of which were overridden. Clinton issued 39, of which only 2 were overridden.

George H. Bush issued 44 vetoes, of which only 1 was overridden.

Not that I think it will get to that point. Best case scenario, the GOP only gets 53 seats, that's not enough to end filibusters.

 

[JoeB131]

Why do we need more laws anyway? Don't we have enough already? And why would we allow bills like Cap and Trade, Amnesty, and etc. to pass anyway.................................

I would agree with E-verify and stricter penalties for immigration and that's about it...........cutting the debt.........fiscal measures...........

But really, WHY do we need them passing more and more laws anyway....

Guy, you don't get it.

The people who really run the GOP WANT those illegal aliens. I keep explaining it to you, and you never get it.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

.

Just so I understand what's going on here, let me see if I have this right:

Assuming the GOP takes the Senate, their goal over the next 18 months (before the next horrific and insulting campaign season gets up to speed) is to pass bills that Obama may or may not sign. And it is their belief that the bills he signs will clearly be positives for America -- enough that the electorate will see it in 2016 and give them credit -- and that they will be able to point to the bills he vetoes and convince the electorate that they WOULD have been good for America.

How close am I here?

.

Every bill the GOP passes is good for America