Another Politician caught cheating

[Linda]

But based on yesterday's results, I don't see an all out revolt against incumbents or a major shift in parties.

In the three key races (per the media) PA, KY and AR, the only potential surprise was Specter. In reality, that isn't a true attack on incumbents but the Democrats kicking out a Red-Coat who has shown that he wasn't "liberal" enough for the district. The Dem's that want to move farther left actually won in that race.

Rand Paul isn't surprising either. He has no experience, but was running on a name. IMO, he actually will be good for the GOP, however and it will be fun to watch his future.

Blanche Lincoln is still alive and in a run-off. Since AR requires a 50% majority to avoid a run-off it is more common than not to have one when you have 3+ candidates. If she loses, it actually would be a loss for moderates and again a farther move to the left. BTW...her GOP competition will probably be in a run-off as well.

The one potential "surprise" last night (if you could call it that) was that the Dems retained Murtha's seat with Mark Critz's win. The GOP was hoping to get that seat, but it didn't happen.

Do I believe there is potential some more incumbents to lose.....sure.
Do I believe that there is a strong change possibility in the House/Senate Makeup? Jury still debating....stay tuned.

IMO Rand Paul's win was not due to name recognition. Trey Grayson actually had more name recognition due to the fact that he was our Secretary of State. Rand Paul won because he was the anti-establishment candidate. The national and state republican leaders were all backing Grayson.

 

[Arkiehawg]

Murtha's seat going to a Dem was a surprise? Wow if Dems are worried about losing elections in heavily enforced dem areas you know they are worried beyond belief.

Democrats are going to take a massive beating this November. The administrations failures are starting to reveal themselves with no one left to blame.

The 12 district has a long history of being a republican district. It has a PVI rating as R+1.

Prior to Murtha, the Republicans had held that seat since 1942.

With Murtha out of the equation and the current political makeup, the GOP believed that would win. But they didn't.....

 

[Linda]

The 12 district has a long history of being a republican district. It has a PVI rating as R+1.

Prior to Murtha, the Republicans had held that seat since 1942.

With Murtha out of the equation and the current political makeup, the GOP believed that would win. But they didn't.....

Murtha brought home a lot of bacon for his district. Obviously people are wanting to see that continue. I do find it interesting though that the guy that won ran on a platform that directly opposes the Obama, Pelosi, Reid agenda.

 

[Lynnie]

But based on yesterday's results, I don't see an all out revolt against incumbents or a major shift in parties.

In the three key races (per the media) PA, KY and AR, the only potential surprise was Specter. In reality, that isn't a true attack on incumbents but the Democrats kicking out a Red-Coat who has shown that he wasn't "liberal" enough for the district. The Dem's that want to move farther left actually won in that race.

Rand Paul isn't surprising either. He has no experience, but was running on a name. IMO, he actually will be good for the GOP, however and it will be fun to watch his future.

Blanche Lincoln is still alive and in a run-off. Since AR requires a 50% majority to avoid a run-off it is more common than not to have one when you have 3+ candidates. If she loses, it actually would be a loss for moderates and again a farther move to the left. BTW...her GOP competition will probably be in a run-off as well.

The one potential "surprise" last night (if you could call it that) was that the Dems retained Murtha's seat with Mark Critz's win. The GOP was hoping to get that seat, but it didn't happen.

Do I believe there is potential some more incumbents to lose.....sure.
Do I believe that there is a strong change possibility in the House/Senate Makeup? Jury still debating....stay tuned.

There will be some republican seats lost, certainly. However, I think more importantly we will see more of a balance with our system. This typically happens in midterm elections when one party has too much control. As close as the dems were to a super majority is not what America likes - and, we wouldn't like it with reps either. "Too big for their britches" kinda' thing.

 

[Arkiehawg]

There will be some republican seats lost, certainly. However, I think more importantly we will see more of a balance with our system. This typically happens in midterm elections when one party has too much control. As close as the dems were to a super majority is not what America likes - and, we wouldn't like it with reps either. "Too big for their britches" kinda' thing.

I agree with you on the preference of balance of power.

However, I believe that it will be the democrats will lose more seats, but probably not enough to lose the control of the Senate and/or the House.

The AR race for example will probably go to the GOP (Boozeman) regardless of the outcome of the Dems run-off. That will be an example of an incubant loss that I would agree is actually a statement against the incumbants. Again, I didn't see that last pm.

 

[Linda]

I agree with you on the preference of balance of power.

However, I believe that it will be the democrats will lose more seats, but probably not enough to lose the control of the Senate and/or the House.

The AR race for example will probably go to the GOP (Boozeman) regardless of the outcome of the Dems run-off. That will be an example of an incubant loss that I would agree is actually a statement against the incumbants. Again, I didn't see that last pm.

I think that the GOP will gain control of the House but the Dems retain control of the Senate.

 

[Lynnie]

I agree with you on the preference of balance of power.

However, I believe that it will be the democrats will lose more seats, but probably not enough to lose the control of the Senate and/or the House.

The AR race for example will probably go to the GOP (Boozeman) regardless of the outcome of the Dems run-off. That will be an example of an incubant loss that I would agree is actually a statement against the incumbants. Again, I didn't see that last pm.

Would you consider it balanced if the reps took a majority in one of these? I consider that balanced because it keeps the checks and balances in place. This can easily be successful in November and I believe it will happen. I even believe we will all be wide eyed with surprise.

 

[ASH]

I think one of his biggest problems was that he was a very vocal proponent of abstinence and recorded a video where he was interviewed by the alleged staff member he had an affair with.

Back to the original thread:

Remember this fence has paint on both sides. The mistress was just as guilty and was/is working her way up the political food chain. He obviously was in her mind, a possible shortcut perhaps?

He's sleeping in the bed he made. She needs the same treatment. If she was kicking and screaming all the way to the bedroom, it's probably because that's how she likes it.

FTLOG, if you can't be a leading example, please don't try to lead. What this country really needs is some real leaders we can all get behind.

 

[scooterbug44]

I must have missed the post where someone thought the mistress was not in the wrong.

 

[Andy A]

He stepped down to avoid charges being brought against him by the House Ethics Committee.

Andrew - this is not the guy who said he served in Vietnam. That guy was named Blumenthal.

Since when did the House Ethics Committee bring charges against anybody, even a Republican. They talk a lot, hold committee meetings, threaten, and then as a rule, usually do nothing. They are a joke. If they weren't many Congressmen, both Democrat and Republican, would be out on their ear.