That’s right, Dio. Always look on the bright side of life.
I’m very happy with how the night turned out. The Democrats didn’t lose anything that mattered. Pelosi was certainly no loss.
Really, Oakminister, what did you expect/want from Diogenes (or the liberals here in general)? Despair, tears, and rending of clothes? Riots? Mass conversion to conservatism? Declarations of how Democrats and liberals will never hold power ever ever again?
I’d have thought you’d know better. 
Nate Silve at 538 tightens up the point spread. Dems are tracking to lose 62-68 seats in the House: Silver rules out 70 seats at 99% confidence. That means that the Repubs will control 241 to 247 seats if I’ve done my math right. That’s less of a majority than the Dems had in the latest session and less than the Dems typically had before 1993. However it would be the biggest majority that the Republicans have held since at least 1949. And the Repubs have very good party discipline.
Feel free to check my work.
http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/house_history/partyDiv.html
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/02/live-blogging-election-night/#more-3235
I hope so. I hope the Republicans can’t and don’t just keep voting everything down. Is that easier than filibuster?
The House map I’m looking at shows Democrats with 183 and Republicans with 238, with 14 undecided, but an estimated 2/3 going Democrat. Given that, I’d guess 242-245 pubbies to 193-190 dems, which is line with your estimates.
The Senate map shows 51/46 with 3 remaining, and predicts 53/47 as the final tally, in case you are curious. And one of those that the Dems lost was my state. 
Ok, please explain this to a foreigner, you’re all right wing nutters to me so there’s no bias here 
To me it seems like no one won. The Dems didn’t do as badly as had been widely predicted and was understandable considering not only the world economy but also what generally happens in first term midterms, but still they managed to lose control of the house quite convincingly.
All in all it is going to be harder to get things done from now on which isn’t good for anyone.
Fair assessment?
Dio, thanks for providing the blind liberal denial. I was beginning to think I drug my chair & cooler in here to enjoy a front row seat for nothing.
Tonight was the official death of any Cap & Trade legislation, along with additional stimulus (or stimuless) plans & bailouts.
On the contrary, our this is a perfect example of the system of Checks & Balances our system of Government was designed to have.
Your statement does not contradict the other.
a) Pretty much what I expected electionwise. Remains to be seen how long will this pattern of short patience from the electorate last.
b) Pelosi never seemed to realize the majority had emerged largely from taking over tight/centrist Republican districts in the “disgust wave” of 06-08. Good riddance.
c) Thinking about it, this makes it 3 consecutive “disgust elections” that are not a grand mandate FOR anything but just a rejection of whatever’s going on.
d) I’d have rather saved the Indiana seat and lost Harry, he really does nobody any favors as the face of the Democratic Senate. I could hope for an inside coup to get him away from the leadership, if I didn’t think him nasty enought to then quit just so to give the seat to the other side.
e) BTW realistically that Indiana seat probably was going blue no matter what.
f) Christine O’Donnell needs lessons on how to concede from Sharon Angle? Will wonders cease…
It wasn’t meant to, being difficult to push things through is a good thing
It’d probably be more accurate to say the dems did about as badly as had been widely predicted; the hope of getting the senate was only a hope, and the pubs did very well indeed on the state level.
And for a lot of us, “harder to get things done” is a marked improvement from letting either set of jackasses have the run of the place.
Not in a recession.
Bingo!
No, especially in a recession
This is a statement that I find hard to make sense of.
To conservatives, it is. Remember, they think that stimuluses in general are a huge, counterproductive waste of money that does nothing at best and causes even more crashing at worst. Tax cuts are a lot easier to push through than spending increases.
62% of voters think the economy is the most important issue, and you are OK with doing as little as possible? Obama by a landslide in 2012!
Only when those things are trivial in nature. We have some big hurdles to address and need to do so sooner rather than later. Infantile obstructionism gets us nowhere, and that is NOT preferable trying out solutions. Checks and balances were designed to control the playing field, not allow one team to take the ball and go home, ruining the game for the rest of the season.
The Dems failed miserably not because of their policies, but because they failed to whip their collective balls out and waggle them at the GOP and get shit done when they controlled things. THAT is what America voted for in the presidential election. Instead, they tried to play ball and got nothing in return. The new house may be composed differently but it has the same mandate from the public. Get Shit Done- or else. Given the the senate and the presidential office are not changing sides, they better offer up some palatable, bi-partisan legislation toot sweet.
We aren’t in recession.
Regards,
Shodan