Thursday, March 10, 2016

With either Trump or Cruz at the top of the GOP ticket a Democratic takeover of the Senate is now probable.

Courtesy of Roll Call:  

With Donald Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz seemingly positioned to fight it out for the Republican presidential nomination, Democrats are now poised to take over the Senate in November. 

Up to this point, the burden of proof has been on Democrats to demonstrate that they can oust four or five Republican senators and win control of the chamber. But now, with Republicans in disarray and the party flirting with selecting a weak general election nominee, the benefit of the doubt has shifted away from the GOP and to the Democrats. 

The burden is on Republican strategists and nominees to prove that they can hold the Senate majority even in light of the party’s civil war. 

Some suggest that Republican down-ballot candidates might be able to retain their seats even if the top of the ticket performs poorly, primarily by localizing their races. That conclusion seems more than a bit naïve given what happened in 1964, 1972 and 1980. 

It was one thing for Democrat Heidi Heitkamp to eke out a narrow North Dakota Senate victory even when Republican Mitt Romney was carrying the state in 2012. But the situation would be dramatically worse for a Republican running for re-election in a swing state when his or her party is in the middle of a political civil war and with a controversial, radioactive nominee at the top of the ticket.

I think this article really hits it on the nose.

We are currently watching what could ultimately be the end of the national Republican party but that might not necessarily damage their ability to elect conservatives in state and local elections.

At least no yet.

However as the article states, in this election cycle there is so much infighting that there might no be enough ammunition left to fight off challenges from Democrats.

Which is just another reason to support Hillary's campaign in my opinion.

let's face it folks Hillary and Bill WERE the Democratic party before Barack Obama came along, and they have deep, deep connections all throughout the party reaching even into local districts.

If the Clintons offer their coattails to Democrats running for office, they could usher in one of the biggest turnover is modern political history.


  1. Anonymous9:08 AM

    oh oh oh oh please make so!!! this country truly needs to continue to progress forward and for that to happen Democrats need the White House. the Senate and Congress to !

    1. Leland9:37 AM

      That will happen ONLY if we democrats get the vote out!

      And a little friendly lesson: it is the Senate and the House. Congress is both.

    2. Anonymous9:51 AM

      But look who holds the cards regarding the Supreme Court-not the House.

    3. Anon 9:37, I completely agree with you that the Democrats need to get out and vote, not just during Presidential elections, but also during the off year elections. Republicans are normally more active then the Democrat’s during off year elections, giving them an advantage over the Democrats in putting more Republicans in the House and Senate.

      Whatever is needed to wake-up and get the Democrats to vote during these off-year elections must be done. Whether it’s advertising in the media, making the Democrats more aware that Republicans out vote Democrats during these elections, or just calling Democrats asking them to please get out and vote, and why its needed.

  2. Don't think the Repubs are going to just hand this government to the Democrats. We still need to get everyone out to vote.

  3. Anonymous10:09 AM

    You know, as soon as 2012 was over, they started in on 2016. Any news, national or local, to the point where I'm sure many are sick and tired and/or apathetic to where they flat out stay home.

    We simply must vote! It's the only way we will ever be heard. Don't let the commercials sway you, do your own research and vote your conscience!

  4. Anonymous10:31 AM

    OT GO HRC:

  5. This just in:

    Gordon "Greed is Good" Gekko remains an enduring symbol of Wall Street greed, corporate lawlessness and 1980s excess. That’s why it’s pretty surprising that the guy on whom the Wall Street character was based—former corporate raider Asher Edelman—says Bernie Sanders is the strongest presidential candidate.

    Appearing on CNBC’s "Fast Money" this morning, Edelman responded immediately when asked who he thought the best candidate for the economy would be.

    “Bernie Sanders,” Edelman said, without missing a beat. “No question.”

    Asked to elaborate, Edelman stated his case.

    “Well, I think it’s quite simple," he began. "If you look at something called ‘velocity of money’—you guys know what that is, I presume—that means how much gets spent and turns around. When you have the top one percent getting money, they spend five, 10 percent of what they earn. When you have the lower end of the economy getting money, they spend 100, or 110 percent of what they earn.

    As you’ve had a transfer of wealth to the top, and a transfer of income to the top, you have a shrinking consumer base, basically, and you have a shrinking velocity of money. Bernie is the only person out there who I think is talking at all about both fiscal stimulation and banking rules that will get the banks to begin to generate lending again as opposed to speculation. So from an economic point of view, it’s straightforward.”

    1. Anonymous11:01 AM

      Lol, I've been trying forever to get my conservative ex to understand that money in the hands of the 99% is better for the economy...used the same velocity of money theory.

    2. Anonymous11:02 AM

      This is SUCH an important point. So glad you posted it here. So I didn't have to.

    3. Anonymous12:11 PM

      And you can thank "saint" Reagan for that. I told my husband, "trickle down economics? That has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard."

      So much for stupid $arah's beacon of light. Lands sakes, that woman is an idiot.

    4. Anonymous5:21 PM

      Of course that is logically, the rich also get a lot of freebies,
      however under Bernie with his tax increases, the middle class and poor will have less money to spend.

      Unfortunately I still do not see how he will ever get any tax increases on the rich passed by Congress.

  6. Anonymous11:02 AM

    "If the Clintons offer their coattails to Democrats running for office, . . . " -- that's the best reason I've heard yet to go with Hillary. So important.

    But like a commenter earlier, the Gordon Gecko point is a really really valid one. That makes me see Bernie as the best. But either one is so far superior to any Repug that I will be happy with either one.

  7. Anonymous11:09 AM

    This is good. Democrats, hopefully without Hillary in the oval office, back in control and Bristol and Dakota being mature, civil parents.

    1. Anonymous2:03 PM

      Stay on topic, alicia.

  8. Anonymous11:24 AM

    Unless the Republicans steal it, again. #rememberbushvsgore

  9. That's exactly not the message to send. Dems will hear that, think it's in the bag, and stay home.

  10. Anonymous12:34 PM

    And the former first lady kept a close eye on the Republican party, dismayed by the direction it has taken in recent years.

    "She remained as sharp as ever and was aware of just about everything going on in Washington and in politics, but always was interested in knowing more," says (Judy) Woodruff. "I'll never forget the time we spoke in 2008 just after the Republican nominee for president, Senator John McCain, had chosen Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. I spoke with Mrs. Reagan on the phone, and her first comment was, 'What in the world was he thinking in picking that woman?' "

    (Larry) King adds that Reagan was not at all pleased with the current crop of Republican candidates.

    "She was very disappointed in the [current] Republican nominees," he says. "She said she was embarrassed by what she was seeing."

  11. Anonymous12:44 PM

    Trump - Lord of the Flies

  12. Caroll Thompson1:52 PM

    That would be quite the silver lining of this election season if the Dems could take the Senate.

    All I know is this is going to be one nasty election. Probably the nastiest one since Andrew Jackson defeated John Quincy Adams in 1828.

  13. Anonymous3:23 PM

    O/t, gee Carson is going to endorse trump ? Shocker. The trump people punched a black guy for no good reason and the police or security just walked by. Carson is endorsing that. Omg, all the slaves dead and gone just rolled in their graves. Carson, karma. I wont feel sorry for carson when it hits.

  14. Anita Winecooler5:15 PM

    If you're a democrat and didn't vote for any reason whatsoever, don't complain, you get what you deserve.

  15. Anonymous5:25 PM

    O/T GOP donors pushing Condoleezza Rice to run independent campaign

    TALLAHASSEE — A group of Republican donors and strategists has been working to persuade former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to make an independent bid for president, according to a memo outlining the plan obtained by POLITICO Florida.

    The group has grown increasingly dissatisfied with New York billionaire Donald Trump, the Republican front-runner who has roiled the party’s establishment as he has surged ahead in the polls....

    Gosh just think what fun the Democrats could have with that one.

    What kind of email server did you use Ms Rice? Where exactly did you say the WMDs were in Iraq? Is it true you lied to the American public about WMDs? Are you still in love with GW Bush?


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.