Rasmussen Predicts GOP Gain of 55 in House

[Flash]

 

Newport Beach, Calif.—Nationally-recognized pollster Scott Rasmussen last night predicted that Republicans would gain 55 seats in races for the U.S. House of Representatives November 2—much more than the 39 needed for a Republican majority in the House for the first time since 2006.

 

But the man whose Rasmussen Reports polling is watched carefully by politicians and frequently quoted by the punditocracy said that whether Republicans gain the ten seats they need to take control of the Senate is in question.

 

“Republicans should have 48 seats [after the elections next month], Democrats 47, and five seats could slide either way,” said Rasmussen in his banquet address at the Western Conservative Political Action Conference. He was referring to seats in five states in which the Senate race this year he considers too close to call: California, Illinois, Washington, West Virginia, and Nevada (or “that mudwrestling contest,” as Rasmussen described the race between Republican Sharron Angle and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid).

 

 

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39460

 

One can only hope.

 

 

 

[JYD]

When will America start voting for people who actually make sense? [expletive] Republicans and Democrats.

[Flash]

When will America start voting for people who actually make sense? [expletive] Republicans and Democrats.

 

Well, if one group is not doing their job right then that's when you need to make a change. Just like last time the GOP controlled the house in 06. It'll be interesting to see how this new, truly conservative movement does in Washington if they are elected.

Edited October 19, 2010 by Flash

[JYD]

And go back to what? The failed policies of the previous eight years from 00-08?...

 

The reason I like and supported Obama so much wasn't because he was a Democrat but because I thought his ideas make sense - and I still think they do. But I think he's limited by a lot of clowns in government on BOTH sides.

 

I'm not registered as a Democrat or Republican, and never will be. I go with the candidate that seems intelligent, has the ability to make tough decisions, and that makes sensible decisions for the middle class. More then like it's going to be a Democrat, but there's times I would certainly vote Republican if I liked the candidate.

 

Which is why I'd consider myself an independent. I listen to all sides on every issue.

Edited October 19, 2010 by JYD

[Dash]

Lol I just love how people were so pumped for the Democratic takeover of Congress in '06, and now 2 years into the Obama's administration the same people can't wait to go back. People keep changing sides whenever things don't seem to be going right. If the Republicans regain Congress then its going to be Republicans vs Obama for the rest of the term, nothing will get done at all. I just don't see why we can't continue to support the man this country elected 2 years ago. We're not talking 6 years like in the Bush administration, its been 2 god damn years.

[Flash]

And go back to what? The failed policies of the previous eight years from 00-08?...

 

This isn't the same GOP as it was in recent years. With the tea party rising and true conservatives gaining a lot of momentum I think you'll see a different type of Republican party, at least that's what I'm hoping for. In recent memory there were a lot of people running on the Republican platform but weren't true conservatives.

[Flash]

I just don't see why we can't continue to support the man this country elected 2 years ago. We're not talking 6 years like in the Bush administration, its been 2 god damn years.

 

Because things have only gotten worse under someone who promised so much and inspired so many people.

[EastCoastNiner]

Bush did well the first four years for everything he had to deal with. The second term, yes, he [expletive]ed up, but he dealt with a lot more [expletive] than that clown in office right now.

 

I'm not even a Republican, but rather anti-dumbass, which is exactly what Obama is.

 

There's a reason you're season many people that voted for Obama jumping ship right now.

Edited October 19, 2010 by EastCoastNiner

[Flash]

Bush did well the first four years for everything he had to deal with. The second term, yes, he [expletive]ed up, but he dealt with a lot more [expletive] than that clown in office right now.

 

I'm not even a Republican, but rather anti-dumbass, which is exactly what Obama is.

 

There's a reason you're season many people that voted for Obama jumping ship right now.

 

I don't make excuses for Bush as he wasn't great to be honest, but I don't think any other POTUS would have done much better after 9/11. That was a MAJOR blow to our country.

 

Not just Obama supporters, but many Dems running for office right now aren't running on the Obama agenda at all rather staying away from Obamacare and Cap & Trade.

[Lkr]

This isn't the same GOP as it was in recent years. With the tea party rising and true conservatives gaining a lot of momentum I think you'll see a different type of Republican party, at least that's what I'm hoping for. In recent memory there were a lot of people running on the Republican platform but weren't true conservatives.

Except these tea party members think the US is a Christian nation, don't believe in evolution, think the UN is a joke, etc. Why would I feel good about electing people that are not intelligent?

they want to restrict rights by not allowing gay marriage and not letting people make up their own minds about abortion. they think abstinence works(just check out sex ed in Texas...lol) and are lost. I have no reason why I would want someone like that running this country. They should have to take an extensive exam on the country and learn a thing or two about the constitution before being allowed to run(i'm looking at you Christine O'Donnell)

Edited October 20, 2010 by Lkr

[Flash]

Except these tea party members think the US is a Christian nation, don't believe in evolution, think the UN is a joke, etc. Why would I feel good about electing people that are not intelligent?

they want to restrict rights by not allowing gay marriage and not letting people make up their own minds about abortion. they think abstinence works(just check out sex ed in Texas...lol) and are lost. I have no reason why I would want someone like that running this country. They should have to take an extensive exam on the country and learn a thing or two about the constitution before being allowed to run(i'm looking at you Christine O'Donnell)

 

Well that's your opinion, apparently the rest of the country seems to be favoring them so I guess all of America is retarded. Maybe you should move out of the US then?

 

They should have to take an extensive exam on the country and learn a thing or two about the constitution before being allowed to run

 

Examples?

[EastCoastNiner]

Personally, I could care less for Christine O'donnel, but by saying she needs to learn the Constitution, then you need to tell every member that voted for the health care bill to pass to learn it [expletive] well. In general, liberals have been pissing on the Constitution for years. The Supreme Court shouldn't even have the power it has as well, but that's what happens when idiots make stupid decisions and say they should have a lot of power.

[Lkr]

Personally, I could care less for Christine O'donnel, but by saying she needs to learn the Constitution, then you need to tell every member that voted for the health care bill to pass to learn it [expletive] well. In general, liberals have been pissing on the Constitution for years. The Supreme Court shouldn't even have the power it has as well, but that's what happens when idiots make stupid decisions and say they should have a lot of power.

When Mr. Coons interjected that “one of those indispensible principles is the separation of church and state,” Ms. O’Donnell demanded, “Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?”

 

The audience exploded in laughter.

 

The Bill of Rights begins with the command, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” but it doesn’t specifically use the words “separation of church and state.”

 

In 1802, however, President Thomas Jefferson used the metaphor to explain the framers’ purpose, and courts since have followed his guidance.

 

The moderator moved on, but Ms. O’Donnell later returned to this question, demanding of Mr. Coons, “So you’re telling me the phrase, ‘the separation of church and state,’ is found in the Constitution.”

 

Mr. Coons began reciting the Establishment Clause, as it is known, prompting Ms. O’Donnell to ask, “That’s in the First Amendment?”

TEA PARTY, HELL YEAH! http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/10/19/coons-odonnell-debate-the-constitution/?mod=google_news_blog

[Check my Stats]

Guys there is lots of room in Canada.

[JYD]

Because things have only gotten worse under someone who promised so much and inspired so many people.

That's opinion; not even CLOSE to fact...

 

I don't make excuses for Bush as he wasn't great to be honest, but I don't think any other POTUS would have done much better after 9/11. That was a MAJOR blow to our country.

Sure, 9/11 was certainly tough times, and I do feel like Bush was a strong leader right after 9/11. I've always credited Bush for that. He was so wrong with Iraq though, and that was a huge mistake. It's that simple. I was one of the few (and Im being honest) to speak out against Iraq at the time. I just knew it was a mistake to take your attention away from the Osama and go after Sadaam, someone who had no proven track record to be involved in 9/11. Just really pissed me off.

[Flash]

That's opinion; not even CLOSE to fact...

 

Oh no? He's already spent more money than all other US Presidents combined and run up our deficit even more.

 

and lol @ lkr using one gaffe from O'Donnell. We can play that game all day if you want.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Flash

[Lkr]

I'm saying she is a retard. Want more proof? She doesn't understand why monkeys are still around if we evolved. She is a great representation of our country.

 

In Florida, Rick Scott is a great candidate for governor. He ripped off tax payers, lets elect him for governor!

[Flash]

I'm saying she is a retard. Want more proof? She doesn't understand why monkeys are still around if we evolved. She is a great representation of our country.

 

In Florida, Rick Scott is a great candidate for governor. He ripped off tax payers, lets elect him for governor!

 

Or you can look at his political stances and decide on that. Take a look at Alex Sink's record too. Not so squeaky clean either.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Flash

[JYD]

Oh no? He's already spent more money than all other US Presidents combined and run up our deficit even more.

 

and lol @ lkr using one gaffe from O'Donnell. We can play that game all day if you want.

He did that in an attempt to spur the economy with projects like the stimulus package, which although you think it was an utter failure, was necessary at the time - and although it wasn't as successful as I, or, I think Obama thought it would be it was definitely a maneuver that was necessary and unemployment and the economy would be worse then what it is now.

 

And he's had plenty of successes that the right fail to recognize.

[Flash]

He did that in an attempt to spur the economy with projects like the stimulus package, which although you think it was an utter failure, was necessary at the time - and although it wasn't as successful as I, or, I think Obama thought it would be it was definitely a maneuver that was necessary and unemployment and the economy would be worse then what it is now.

 

And he's had plenty of successes that the right fail to recognize.

 

Its a proven failure. Our economy hasn't gotten any better. We still haven't created enough jobs either. You tell me how it was even marginally a success. It wasn't necessary at all either, but that goes by your political beliefs I guess.

 

What successes has he had exactly?

[reno]

Democrats, Republicans, same body, different head. Illuminati does not care what you believe in.

[JYD]

Its a proven failure. Our economy hasn't gotten any better. We still haven't created enough jobs either. You tell me how it was even marginally a success. It wasn't necessary at all either, but that goes by your political beliefs I guess.

 

What successes has he had exactly?

It was necessary. Most on both sides of the aisle agreed it was a necessary measure...the government had to make an attempt to do something regarding the economy.

 

Here is a good article on the bailout/stimulus package, I agree completely:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/16/news/economy/populist_hype.fortune/index.htm

 

FORTUNE -- Beware the revisionists. It was bound to happen eventually, but here we are, less than two years after the U.S. faced its worst financial crisis in decades, and a steady stream of politicians routinely take to the airwaves to declare that the government overreacted with the $700 billion TARP plan and ripped off the taxpayer. That the incredible interventions by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury weren't necessary. That we should have taken our lumps and let the chips fall where they may.

 

Yeah, right. Jimmy Dunne, senior managing principal at investment-banking firm Sandler O'Neill, summed up my feelings perfectly when I asked him recently what he thought of those politicians: "They're idiots," he said.

 

 

Dunne is one of many who watched the meltdown from a courtside seat. "You had to be at your desk every day, but there was just this feeling of hopelessness, like there was nothing you could do," he says of those dark days in the fall of 2008. "You just had this feeling in your stomach that if the government didn't stand up and say, 'We will be there,' the whole thing would be crumbling down."

 

Why would things crumble? Because our financial system is one that operates on the idea of faith. Faith that institutions will back their promises, that people will pay their bills. And this nation went through a period where everyone questioned that faith. Institution after institution came right up to the edge of collapse -- and some plunged off: Bear Stearns, IndyMac, Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG (AIG, Fortune 500), Merrill Lynch, Washington Mutual (WAMUQ), Wachovia. The most frequently asked question on Wall Street back then was: Who's next? And in that environment, everything shuts down.

 

"It's like going to a party and being told 10 out of the 40 people there have a contagious disease," says Dunne. "You don't know which 10. Are you going to shake anybody's hand?"

 

That's why the government had to step in and take such extraordinary steps, from backing the credit markets to insuring money market investments to raising the FDIC's deposit insurance to $250,000 per bank account. Combined, those moves helped stop the run on the banks and kept the panic from spreading.

 

 

Those who think the financial system's collapse would have hurt only Wall Street fat cats are fools -- or terribly naive. When major companies can't get funding, they can't meet their payroll obligations. Some major companies including a few Dow components -- might have fallen into that camp back in the autumn of 2008 when the credit markets seized up, leaving hundreds of thousands of employees without a paycheck. It would have immediately trickled down to smaller companies across the country.

 

Unemployment, which is dogging our nation right now with an official rate just under 10%, could have easily risen to 25% and beyond, just like during the Great Depression. Plus, think of the disruption that would have played out if the banks had frozen up. During the height of the crisis, we were joined on the Squawk Box set by a guest host whose firm now manages over $1 trillion in assets. During one commercial break, he confessed that he had recently told his wife to go to the bank and take out as much money as possible, because he wasn't sure the ATMs would be working the next day. In fact, the smartest people I know, the ones with the most intimate knowledge of what was happening in the markets, all thought things were even more dire than government officials were letting on at that point.

 

The armchair-quarterback lawmakers and candidates who are now second-guessing these moves are dangerous. Not only are they playing on populist anger to advance their own needs (getting elected), but they also threaten to undermine those very necessary and positive steps that were taken by the government during our darkest hours. That, in turn, could prevent future leaders from doing the right thing the next time around. And though Congress was poised to pass a financial regulatory reform bill as Fortune went to press, you can bet that somewhere down the road, there will be a next time.

 

- Becky Quick is an anchor on CNBC's Squawk Box. To top of page

Some Of Obama's accomplishments thus far:

 

-Signed order to close the prisoner “torture camp” at Guantanamo Bay

 

-Protected 300,000 education jobs, such as teachers, principals, librarians, and counselors through the Recovery Act that would have otherwise been lost.

 

-Lower drug costs for seniors

 

-Provided tax credit to workers thus cutting taxes for 95% of America’s working families.

 

-Helped reverse a downward spiral of the stock market. On January 19, 2009, the last day of President Bush’s presidency, the Dow closed at 8,218.22. In October 2010, the Dow closed at 11,132.90.

 

-Shifted focus back from Iraq to Afghanistan. Including withdrawing troops from Iraq and deploying more troops to Afghanistan.

 

-Health Care Reform (no matter what you think of it, it's something he said he'd do as President)

 

Now, has Obama been great as President? No. Has he been worse then I thought he'd be? Not particuarly. I didn't think anyone could do much about the Economy. I think the bank bailouts and stimulus package were necessary, but I didn't think they'd have some type of AMAZING impact.

 

We still need to be fair and give him another two years to see what he can do.

Edited October 20, 2010 by JYD

[Flash]

-Shifted focus back from Iraq to Afghanistan. Including withdrawing troops from Iraq and deploying more troops to Afghanistan.

 

Bush is actually the one who accomplished that with the troop surge, the same strategy Obama voted against but is now using in Afghanistan.

 

 

-Health Care Reform (no matter what you think of it, it's something he said he'd do as President)

 

We'll see how long that lasts. Its something the country seems to be generally against now that they realize how much its going to cost us.

 

As for closing Guantanamo, what do you suggest we do with the hundreds of terrorists that are held there?

[EastCoastNiner]

I just want to know, what does everyone wants to do with the people at Guantanamo Bay? You guys will be the same people [expletive]ing and moaning about how we should have stopped a terrorist attack if people in that prison attack the U.S. in the future.

[Flash]

I'm also 100% for the torture of terrorists if it means getting information out of them. We should absolutely be able to waterboard those [expletive]s.