If not...

Go Dems! I'm guessing it'll end up 50-50 in the Senate (still Republican control), but I never thought the Democrats would pick up so many seats in the House.

I'm glad we'll finally have some semblance of a check on Bush.

EDIT: a not so subtle attempt to crush the other thread

Kind of.

I think you're wrong about 50/50. Right now, with 99% reporting, dems are leading both battleground states. By a narrow margin, sure, but how often do recounts change things?

can someone explain to me what it means that LIeberman won?

Actually, I just noticed that. When I was driving into work, it sounded like they still had Republican districts to count in Montana.

I really hope the Dems win the Senate. I'm actually getting kind of excited now.

he only ran as an independent because he lost the Dem, but I hear he still will vote Dem on most issues

Lieberman has said he will caucus with the Democrats.

I was wrong on about half of my predictions.
Nelson, the Conservative Democrat won by nearly 30%, a few more points than predicted
The Republican Governor won by the near 50+ points he was predicted.
All the GOP congressional candidates won by at least 10%, although two of the races were as close or closer than I thought going into it.
For being such a red state, the Dems did a little better here than they normally would have.

I hope this is the case, but I'm not counting on him to be completely loyal to the Dems. It's a good sign that he plans to caucus with them, I guess.

he only ran as an independent because he lost the Dem, but I hear he still will vote Dem on most issues

he's got to be at least a little bitter at everyone for turning their back on him.

and he's made several not-so-subtle statements that he's voting with the dems only if he retains his seniority. but lieberman is exactly the kind of guy who would take a "principled stand" and switch parties (especially over something terrorism/iraq related). if there's a democrat jim jeffords, he's it. at the very least, i'll be shocked if he doesn't at least make a veiled threat of party switching at some point--the lamont crowd only succeeded in making him more powerful than he ever was before.

Beyond the check on Bush part (good) and a handful of "First 100 Days" type legislation (minimum wage, 9/11 Commission Recs.,) which by the way can be vetoed if Bush can figure out how that part of his job works, do you guys really see this as being a big change? I mean these people are still politicians and they will owe the people who got them elected stuff.

Also, the 2008 Presidential Campaign starts today.

we'll probably have free health care for everyon and cars that run on water by next friday.l

Exactly! And even effing Cheney has positive feelings towards him...not a good sign. I bet he'll vote with Dems on most stuff, but will make enough departures to swing the vote in the Repubs favor on a few things.



I think that being able to slow the Republican agenda will be a pretty big change. I'd settle for some gridlock right now

i guess one thing that will keep Leiberman in check is the fact that his state voted 90% democrat

Maybe he'll only vote with the Republicans on Sundays.

One of the grizzled cynics around here (Billz or Rads... I think Rads) said that after the greased lightning course most GOP measures have had over the last 6 years under Bush, that some good old-fashioned gridlock would be a welcome change.

I tend to agree. Just having a check to stop a lot of the bullshit will be an improvement. You're not turning the car around 180 degree right away, but you can slam on the brakes and start the process for making corrections.

some people i've talked to think that a dem victory in the senate would be bad for dems' 08 presidential hopes, because they'll just spend 2 years getting nothing done. an interesting take.

There are so many traps they can fall into, that this particular one doesn't especially frighten me more than any of the others.

Yeah, they need to accomplish something to have a chance in 08. INterestingly enough, there are some states that Repubs won in 02 that will be pretty fucking competetive, though, sadly, Georgia ain't one of em.

(Hey Norm Coleman, I hope you are raising money RIGHT NOW, buddy)

Here's the thing; Dems haven't been in power in both houses for 12 years, so it's not like they had much power to do anything anyway.

Granted, Nancy doesn't inspire me to rapturous expectations. But I'm optimistic they realize they have to make the most of this opportunity.

I must've said "Nasty Nancy!" to myself about 30 times last night. Thanks loog.

*tips cap*

I think a lot of people are doing an Eddie Murphy impression of teh white dudes who voted for Jesse Jackson....

"They fucking WON?!!?

the funny thing is, no one is claiming that they have won any kind of battle of ideas. Stricly throwing the bums out. I think A LOT of the new members are far more conservative than NN and her ilk.

yeah, my question closer to the beginning of this thread was basically a setup to make that point. This ain't no Rooosevelt Democrats

This is Turd Blossom's real October surprise. By not pulling any strings on the election in '06, he's setting the Dems up to be the Party-of-record in '08, meaning that Romney (mark it; he's going to be the GOP nom. (McCain's sale of his own soul won't amount to anything more than his "maverick" '00 run)) can run as the outsider, intent on giving the federal purse back to "the people" & taking the power back to "the States".

It will be just like Bush '00.

Run, you stupid fucking Mormon, run!




Oh. About Liebermann, but apropos of nothing above, I think to paraphrase Kool Keith (from his Matthew LP of '00) serves best: