Prediction Map

* = Pickup via defeat of incumbent; ^ = Pickup of an open seat

Prediction States Won

		19 |	37 |	37 |
Dem	10
Rep	27
Ind	0
Non	0

Confidence States Won

		19 |	37 |	37 |
Dem	8
Rep	23
Ind	0
Tos	6
Non	0

State Pick-ups

	Gain			Loss			Hold			Net Gain
	Inc.	Open	Total	Inc.	Open	Total	Inc.	Open	Total
Dem	0	0	0	-5	-4	-9	7	3	10	-9
Rep	+5	+4	+9	0	0	0	10	8	18	+9
Ind	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Predicted Senate Control (112th Congress):

Party Seats Up Seats Not Up Total Seats Democratic 10 38 48 Republican 27 23 50 Independent 0 2 2

Prediction Score (max Score = 74)

Score	State Wins	State Percentages
59	33	26

Analysis

United States Senate

Republican Seats:

New Hampshire (Ayotte)
Pennsylvania (Toomey)
Ohio (Portman)
Indiana (Coats)
Illinois (Kirk)
Wisconsin (Johnson)
Kentucky (Paul)
North Carolina (Burr)
South Carolina (DeMint)
Georgia (Isakson)
Florida (Rubio)
Alabama (Shelby)
Arkansas (Boozman)
Louisiana (Vitter)
Oklahoma (Coburn)
Missouri (Blunt)
Kansas (Moran)
North Dakota (Hoeven)
South Dakota (Thune)
Iowa (Grassley)
Colorado (Buck)
Idaho (Carpo)
Utah (Lee)
Nevada (Angle)
Arizona (McCain)
Washington (Rossi)
Alaska (Miller)

Democratic Seats:

Connecticut (Blumenthal)
New York (Schumer)
New York Special (Gillibrand)
Vermont (Leahy)
Maryland (Mikulski)
Delaware (Coons)
West Virginia (Manchin)
Oregon (Wyden)
California (Boxer)
Hawaii (Inouye)

United States House of Representatives

Republican - 240
Democrat - 195

Prediction History

Comments History - show

Version History

19: 2010-11-01 @ 18:11:52 18: 2010-10-16 @ 19:13:07 17: 2010-10-10 @ 13:19:25 16: 2010-09-21 @ 23:21:58 15: 2010-09-16 @ 01:01:59 14: 2010-09-03 @ 19:57:45 13: 2010-08-15 @ 03:55:19 12: 2010-07-27 @ 18:05:33 11: 2010-07-24 @ 22:01:20 10: 2010-07-17 @ 00:48:03 9: 2010-07-04 @ 01:38:39 8: 2010-06-09 @ 01:38:13 7: 2010-05-26 @ 01:00:53 6: 2010-05-10 @ 00:59:08 5: 2010-04-16 @ 01:09:42 4: 2010-02-27 @ 16:47:51 3: 2010-02-09 @ 00:10:40 2: 2010-01-08 @ 02:13:52 1: 2009-12-06 @ 17:45:51 View Version

Member Comments

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-01 @ 18:24:23
Well friends here it is, my final prediction for the season. I'd like to go through a some of the changes that I've made from the last map. West Virginia - This seat is still the ultimate nail-biter. I think its 50-50 either way. However, at this point, Manchin has a slight edge in the polling data. While Raese can still win this race, at the moment I credit it to the Democratic column. Washington - Exact same story as West Virginia. Rossi and Murray are essentially deadlocked in the polls with Rossi make just a little more progress right here at the end. He also current leads in those who have already mailed in their ballots. Again this race is 50-50 and could go either way. While Murray can still win this, at the moment I credit it to the Republican column. Please not here that West Virginia and Virginia could switch and the total Senate out come would still be 50-50. Both could go Democratic in which case the Democrats stay in control at 51-49 or both could go Republican giving the GOP majority in the chamber at 51-49. Right now I see it as a tossup. Alaska - Murkowski has polled strong but those polls assume she is an actually option on the ballot. According to a state Democratic party official, despite recent troubles, the Democrats believe he has a base of support at 35% going into the election. They also say that if he gets 37% of the vote he'll be hard to beat. Personally I just don't see the Republican losing in Alaska in this environment. To me this is much like the race in Florida. California - Still very close but I'm afraid Carly couldn't seal the deal. Still good job for keeping Democratic resources tied up. Connecticut - See California but Linda is not as close as Carly. Remaining Tossups - I think that Angle, Buck, and Kirk are on their way to the Senate. Nevada, Colorado, and Illinois have the GOP momentum that when coupled with the wave should be enough to take us over the top. House - The GOP is definitely taking back the House. The question now is how much. Currently RCP has the GOP with 224 seats, Democrats with 167, and 44 tossups. I was even generous here to the Democrats, estimating that the Republicans only pick up 36% of the tossups (or 16) for a total of 62 total pick ups and a majority at 240. However, in most elections like this, the tossup districts break over 50% for the opposition (see 2006). So the GOP could end up with over 245 seats. The rest is now in the hands of the American electorate.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-01 @ 18:27:09
A friendly reminder! I will not be posting much on election night. If I do it will probably be late. In addition to working late much of this week also have a tradition of watching the returns with my dad. However, I will try to stop in and will definitely be here after election day. This final version of my map will serve as my post election discussion section and you are all welcome to join me.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-01 @ 18:52:34
I sure hope you're wrong on Washington.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-01 @ 18:54:16
I sure hope I'm wrong on West Virginia.

---

By: gumball machine (L-CA) 2010-11-01 @ 23:47:47
I hope your predictions are right for our credibility's sake. :P

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-02 @ 01:12:18
I hear ya brother! I think this is as like an outcome as any and tends to fall within the current trends we've seen in the polling data. To be honest, I'm not sure what is going to happen tomorrow. I know that we are going to do well but beyond that I believe its anyone's guess. I think anything could happen at this point. Last Edit: 2010-11-02 @ 01:13:02

---

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2010-11-02 @ 08:53:47
Our estimates are almost identical, but I keep WA in the DEM column.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-02 @ 09:27:46
Cool Bonn. If we generally agree on something then I know it must be right :)

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-02 @ 09:28:09
Remember in November! Go Vote!!!!!!!

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-03 @ 00:45:49
VICTORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Republican House of Representatives!

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-03 @ 00:47:00
REID WON!!!!!!!!!!!!

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-03 @ 00:47:27
If Buck can win the GOP will round out a powerful Senate minority with 48 seats! The governors races and state legislatures are looking great, especially in the Midwest, South, and Southwest. All in all this is a good night for Republicans consider were we came from in 2008 and 2006.

---

By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2010-11-03 @ 10:42:31
Bennet back in lead, with Reid victory and maybe a Washington retention it is a minus 6 for DEMS still a good victory. While I predicted a six seat loss I had two seats switched...PA and NV...Reid ground game was fabulous in its turnout. COngratulations to GOP for a fantastic house result. Many good DEMS lost along with some dead wood. I hope now we can get to governence...less government and less debt/and deficit...but I fear that the extremes in both camps may put this off another two years..the people will revolt again until they get it right... Peace, last note as I am off for several weeks now...peace to all...

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-03 @ 22:35:26
Have a good trip, dnul!

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-03 @ 23:23:59
Indeed dnul, safe travels my friend.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-03 @ 23:57:39
Hey all. Now that we have a lot of the results in I'm ready to offer some initial post election analysis. To be honest I was shocked by the scope of the House and state office victories and surprised by our Senate performance out West. Overall my predictions turned out fairly accurate so far as I can tell. Let me go through a few specifics. House - This was the big prize in my mind. The House controls the appropriation of money for the federal government and it is pretty much were all of Obama and the Democrats legislative agenda began (mostly due to their former super majority). Things will be very tough for Democrats with the House in GOP hands. Not only did Republicans win the House, but we won it with a historic margin not seen sine World War II. Bigger than 1994. At the present time we have gained 61 seats and have a total of 240 to the Democrats at 195. If this number holds I will have corrected predicted the new House margins a day in advance. Since that would be a first for me I think that's pretty cool. Very happy to welcome a lot of new faces to DC like Hartsler, Noem, Scott, West, Hurt, Heck, Berg, McKinley, and many many more. The Republicans now have a very strong caucus in the House of Representatives and they will be our strong arm over the next couple of years. State Races - The GOP picked up an amazing number of governorships in many key states like Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Maine, Oklahoma and more. Additionally, the GOP sweep the state legislatures. We now have control in a majority of the Midwest, South, and West. Hell we took the entire state government of Maine! All in all we flipped 19 state legislatures. The wins here go way beyond redistricting following the census (which is still a big deal in so many key states). Our victories will help us shape the issues and the debate over the next few years, provide a fertile breeding ground for new GOP candidates, and they will be critical to the presidential race in 2012. By all the analysis I've heard, even from Democratic strategists, this is disaster for the Democrats. West Virginia - I had a feeling Manchin would eek out a win as we went into election day. However, the former governor campaigned way to the right and promised his voters he'd be a conservative Democrat. He'll be up for reelection in 2012 so if he does do as he campaigned the good people of West Virginia may just through him out. All in all I'd say Senator Manchin may side with us in the GOP on a few issues. Not too bad a deal I guess. Missouri, Ohio, and Florida - These key swing states weren't even close and broke early. Embarrassing if you ask me. With these days firmly in GOP hands (yes Missouri has Jay Nixon but our GOP legislature is so powerful now it might as well not matter), I think that is a good sign for the GOP. Nevada - I'm disappointed we did not take out Dingy Harry. I think Sue Lowden would have had a better time and may have ousted him. Angle could have too but the Republican establishment disliked her. She got virtually no help from the RNC when she was broke (a key time for Reid to define the narrative) and many state Republicans endorsed Harry over Sharron. For that I say shame on the Republican Party. I won't be forgetting that either. From all accounts Angle actually underscored among GOP voters as she lost or barely won areas that Republicans in Nevada should not have to worry about. Sad story but then again, he's so unpopular I can't think of a better face for Senate Democrats. Colorado - I'm disappointed here too. Going into the race, much like Nevada, we had leads in the polls. It was VERY close but I thought we'd pull it off. Unfortunately I think the governor's race had reverse coattails on the senate race considering how badly we frakked that one up. Still we did pick up two more House seats there and did well in the state legislature. Again, here I think that my girl Jan Norton would have been the better candidate. Washington State - I know it was close and I went ahead and put in our column because of that. However, the Democrats have such a strong machine I just don't think Rossi will win. I mean maybe, we did take Illinois and Wisconsin, but we'll have to see. Alaska - I'm truly shocked here and speechless. No write-in campaign has been this successful since Thurmond in 1952. Lisa Murkowski did an amazing job (of course the GOP machine up there is pretty sharky and her family is one of the big dogs). It looks like she did in fact beat Joe Miller. Really not much changes though. Lisa has said publicly and forcefully that she is and will always be a Republican and caucus as such. That means the GOP retains this seat. That means that without WA (which is likely) the GOP lands nicely at 47 Senate seats with 6 picks. Not bad. The Democrats did this well in 2006 and now we have a strong minority with an even more powerful filibuster. 2012 will present a better playing field for Republicans to try and take the Senate. Overall this was an historic and very very good night for the GOP. I'm proud of all the folks we got elected and saddened by the few we didn't. For the first time in a long time I feel like I have some hope and change I can believe in ;) More to come! Last Edit: 2010-11-04 @ 00:04:18

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-05 @ 01:34:21
Meet the New Republicans! North Dakota Senator John Hoeven Born: March 13, 1957 (Age 53) in Bismarck, North Dakota Spouse: Mikey Hoeven Education: Graduate of Dartmouth College (AB) and Northwestern University (MBA) Religion: Roman Catholic Pervious Occupations: Banker, Governor of North Dakota ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: Hoeven is a fiscal hawk and socially conservative though he does take some moderate positions on issues such as education and the long-term usage of alternative fuels (however in the short-term he believes more oil drilling is necessary). He is currently the longest serving governor in the United States as well as the most popular governor as of January 2010. Under his leadership North Dakota has enjoyed economic prosperity and has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country (the state has gained nearly 40,000 jobs since Hoeven became governor). Indiana Senator Dan Coats Born: May 16, 1943 (Age 67) in Jackson, Michigan Spouse: Marsha Coats Education: Graduate of Wheaton College and the University of Indiana-Indianapolis Religion: Presbyterian Pervious Occupations: United States Army, businessman, Congressman (IN-4), Indiana Senator, Ambassador to Germany ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Establishment Republican Candidate General Info: Dan Coats is a skilled politician with decades of experience in GOP policy making. He describes himself as a conservative concerned with limiting government, balancing the budget, lowering taxes, and dedicated to a strong national defense. He is pro-life (gaining the endorsement of many pro-life organizations such as the National Right to Life Committee and Susan B Anthony List) and favors repeal of the current healthcare law. He will now be serving in the seat that he vacated in 1998 to retiring Senator Evan Bayh. Arkansas Senator John Boozman Born: December 10, 1950 (Age 60) in Fort Smith, Arkansas Spouse: Kathy Boozman Education: Graduate of the University of Arkansas and the Southern College of Optometry Religion: Baptist Pervious Occupations: Rancher, Optometrist, Congressman (AR-3) ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: In Congress Representative Boozman has voted against the healthcare law, cap and trade legislation, for numerous tax credits, improved FDA regulations concerning eye health issues, educational reform (mostly via tax credits), and worked on bills showing Arkansas’ contributions to westward expansion. Prior to being elected to congress he served as a member of the school board for one of Arkansas’ largest school districts. Boozman is only the second Republican elected to the US Senate since Reconstruction. New Hampshire Senator Kelly Ayotte Born: June 27, 1968 (Age 42) in Nashua, New Hampshire Spouse: Joseph Daley Education: Graduate of Pennsylvania State University (BA) and Villanova University School of Law (JD) Religion: Christian, Affiliation Unknown Pervious Occupations: Lawyer, Legal Council, Deputy Attorney General, Attorney General of New Hampshire ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: Ayotte is a typical conservative Republican and was recruited by the National Republican Party to run for the seat being vacated by retiring GOP Senator Judd Gregg. She is pro-life, opposed to gay marriage/adoption, favors repeal of the healthcare law, wants stricter controls on illegal immigration, favors a balance budget amendment, favors term limits (vowing to serve only two terms in office), opposes cap and trade, oppose the financial regulation bill, favors lowering taxes, favors spending cuts, is open to entitlement reform , and backs gun rights. Ayotte has also stated that she would have voted to confirm Justice Sotomayor but not Elana Kagan. She is also reported to favor a timeline for withdrawal in Afghanistan. During the primary Kelly was considered an establishment backed candidate but did receive the endorsement of Tea Party favorite Sarah Palin. Ohio Senator Rob Portman Born: December 19, 1955 (Age 54) in Cincinnati, Ohio Spouse: Jane Portman Education: Graduate of Dartmouth College and the University of Michigan Law School Religion: Methodist Previous Occupations: Lawyer, Congressman (OH-2), US Trade Representative, Director of the Office of Management and Budget ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: Rob Portman is the traditional Republican candidate. A fiscal hawk with a reputation for being able to work well with all his colleagues, he comes from a background in which his father ran a small business. He favors free trade and during his time in the House he worked on bills that lowered taxes, sought to reform the IRS, cub unfunded mandates, and in general provide a more business friendly environment. While an attorney by profession Portman also has a BA in anthropology which he earned at Dartmouth College. Since his time working for the Bush Administration during its second term, Portman has been the author of two books and was at one time considered as a vice presidential running mate for Senator John McCain. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul Born: January 7, 1963 (Age 47) in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania Spouse: Kelley Paul Education: Graduate of Baylor University, Duke University, Georgia Baptist Medical Center, and Duke University Medical Center Religion: Presbyterian Pervious Occupations: Ophthalmologist ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Tea Party Candidate General Info: Rand Paul has never held a political office prior to his election to the US Senate. He owns and runs a private ophthalmologist practice in Bowling Green, Kentucky. He is also the founder of many organizations such as the National Board of Ophthalmology, Kentucky Taxpayers United, and the Southern Kentucky Lions Eye Clinic to help provide eye exams and surgery to those who could not afford to pay. Politically, Paul is conservative on many issues – extremely pro-life, supporters a balance budget amendment, opposes gun control, supports low taxes, less spending, smaller government, and repeal of the healthcare law. However, on other issues Paul has more of a libertarian tilt in his support of legalizing marijuana, opposition to the Patriot Act, and says he would have voted against the invasion of Iraq. Missouri Senator Roy Blunt Born: January 10, 1950 (Age 60) in Niangua, Missouri Spouse: Abigail Blunt Education: Graduate of Southwest Baptist University and Southwest Missouri State University Religion: Baptist Pervious Occupations: Green County Clerk, Missouri Secretary of State, President of Southwest Baptist University, Congressman (MO-7) ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: Roy Blunt is no stranger to GOP politics and is essentially the patriarch of the Republican Party’s political dynasty in Missouri. He was the first Republican elected to the post of Secretary of State for Missouri since 1945 and has served as the interim Republican House Majority leader from 2005 to 2006. His son, Matt Blunt, is a former governor of the state and Roy has represented the most conservative district in Missouri since 1996. His service in key leadership positions within the House GOP makes Roy a very skilled politician and his views are generally conservative on all matters whether fiscal, social, or foreign policy. Kansas Senator Jerry Moran Born: May 29, 1954 (Age 56) in Great Bend, Kansas Spouse: Robba Moran Education: Graduate of the University of Kansas Religion: Methodist Pervious Occupations: Attorney, Bank Executive, College Professor, Kansas State Senator, Congressman (KS-1) ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: Jerry Moran is the standard conservative Republican candidate from a conservative state such as Kansas. He is pro-life, pro-gun, pro-business, for low taxes, less spending, opposes cap and trade, voted against the healthcare law, and favors smaller government. His district, the big first, is the largest in the state and encompasses 69 counties. Moran volunteers with several organizations including the Eisenhower Foundation, Boy Scouts of America, the Special Olympics, and the Board of Trustees of the Fort Hays State University Endowment Association. Because of his conservative positions he is forgiven for being a Jayhawker. Utah Senator Mike Lee Born: June 4, 1971 (Age 39) in Mesa Arizona Spouse: Sharron Lee Education: Graduate of Brigham Young University Religion: Mormon Pervious Occupations: Lawyer ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Tea Party Candidate General Info: Mike Lee gained fame in the party after ousting sitting US Senator Bob Bennett, the first in a long line of Tea Party primary victories. Most of his career has centered around his legal profession and he has clerked for both Dee Benson and Samuel Alito. He is a member of the Church of Latter Day Saints of Jesus Christ, the J Reuben Law Society, the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, and the BYU alumni board. Politically he is a solid conservative. Florida Senator Marco Rubio Born: May 28, 1971 (Age 39) in Miami, Florida Spouse: Jeanette Rubio Education: Graduate of University of Florida and University of Miami Religion: Roman Catholic Pervious Occupations: Lawyer, City Commissioner for West Miami, Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Tea Party Candidate General Info: Marco Rubio is the son of Cuban exiles. His parents were blue collar workers and his family is fluent in Spanish. While gaining his law degree, Rubio interned for Republican Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. He championed a major overhaul of the Florida tax code during his time in the Florida House of Representatives and has worked to limit the size of government. He was one of the keynote speakers at the 2010 CPAC meeting in Washington DC. Initially behind in the GOP primary to sitting Florida Governor Charlie Crist, Rubio steadily gained steam until Crist dropped out of the primary to run as an independent. His election makes him the most prominent Republican of Hispanic background in Washington DC. Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey Born: November 17, 1961 (Age 48) in Providence, Rhode Island Spouse: Kris Toomey Education: Graduate of Harvard University Religion: Roman Catholic Pervious Occupations: Businessman, Congressman (PA-15) ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Mix – Traditional Conservative and Tea Party General Info: After graduating from Harvard, Pat Toomey worked for a variety of businesses that dealt mostly with currency exchange rates, interest rates, and so on. He later opened a restaurant with his two younger brothers in Allentown, Pennsylvania. In 1994 he served in Allentown’s Government Studies Commission where he helped secure the need for a super majority vote in order to raise taxes. In 1998 Toomey ran for the open seat in Pennsylvania’s 15th district. He pledged to serve only three terms and did so, leaving the House at the end of 2002. He failed in his first attempted to primary sitting US Senator Arlen Specter in 2004 after which he became president of the Club for Growth in 2005. His political positions are conservative across the board with a 97% rating from the American Conservative Union. Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson Born: April 8, 1955 (Age 55) in Mankato, Minnesota Spouse: Jane Johnson Education: Graduate of the University of Minnesota Religion: Lutheran Pervious Occupations: Accountant, Businessman ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Tea Party Candidate General Info: Ron Johnson has never served in political office before. He has spent his entire life in the private sector and started the polyester and plastics manufacturing company PACUR with his brother-in-law. Johnson mostly self funded his own campaign in taking down liberal lion Russ Feingold. Politically Ron’s positions are pretty much conservative – against cap and trade, opposed to federal bailouts, favors low taxes, less regulation, favors repeal of the healthcare law, pro-life, and pro-drilling. Interviewed in the New York Times Johnson said he is proud to be associated with the Tea Party movement. Illinois Senator Mark Kirk Born: September 15, 1959 (Age 51) in Champaign, Illinois Spouse: Single, divorced Education: Graduate of Cornell University London School of Economics and Georgetown University Law Center Religion: United Church of Christ Pervious Occupations: Intelligence Officer in Naval Reserves, Congressional Staffer, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of State, Attorney, Congressman (IL-10) ConservRep’s GOP Classification: Traditional Republican Candidate General Info: Congressman Mark Kirk is a typical GOP candidate to run in a traditionally Democratic state. He is a social moderate to liberal with a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood, a grade of A by the NEA, and a grade of F by the NRA. Fiscally he is viewed highly by the Chamber of Commerce but has a lukewarm standing with the Club for Growth, the National Taxpayer’s Union, and the American Conservative Union. Initially a supporter of cap and trade, Kirk has since changed his stance sighting that the bill would be harmful to Illinois as a whole. He voted against the both the stimulus bill and the healthcare law. Throughout his senatorial campaign he has pledge to work to reduce spending and the size of government. Last Edit: 2010-11-05 @ 01:35:43

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-06 @ 10:36:53
"I think Sue Lowden would have had a better time and may have ousted him." Lowden wouldn't have done much better. Had the Republicans really wanted to take this seat, the would have nominated Danny Tarkanian.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-06 @ 11:43:03
I completely agree with albaleman.

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-06 @ 15:04:50
Or they would have drafted Dean Heller.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-06 @ 18:08:55
Or Joe Heck. I was really impressed by him.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-06 @ 19:52:02
You guys are probably right. In truth Reid gunned down Lowden early on and she didn't even make it out of the primary. Still she and Angle came in ahead of Danny Tarkanian. Well win some lose some. I think Harry Reid will make an excellent face for Senate Democrats in the coming years anyway.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-06 @ 20:17:48
"I think Harry Reid will make an excellent face for Senate Democrats in the coming years anyway." Excellent face for Republicans to attack.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-06 @ 21:33:27
Exactly ;) We'll just have to try again in 2016. Perhaps Governor Brian Sandoval will be interested. Last Edit: 2010-11-06 @ 21:39:52

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-06 @ 21:34:29
: ((((((( I'm no Democrat, but I dislike the Republican Party more.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-06 @ 21:39:17
:)))))) Well I'm a Republican and I dislike the Democratic Party period. No offense to my Democratic and liberal friends of course.

---

By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2010-11-06 @ 22:11:49
I would not count any chickens for 2012. If the GOP does what they did after 1994 then they will be ousted...however, if they actually get some aspects of the health care repealed, get a decent balanaced budget then they will own the senate after 2012 even with Obama winning...

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-06 @ 22:35:22
Oh I don't think any one is counting any chickens just yet. As leaders from Boehner to Rubio said on Tuesday night, this is not a celebration. The people are pissed and we are on probation. If the GOP stands on its principles and does as its promised then we will be fine. If we fall back on the old ways of Washington we will be fired again. Its just that simple. I have hope about this new bunch we're sending to DC. And I am looking forward to 2012 as much as I did 2010. We can effect change if we stand on our principles and govern with humility to the people.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-09 @ 01:14:17
Alaska Senate Race Update: As of right now here is what we know. Democrat Scott McAdams has dropped out of the race and conceded. He came in a roughly "distant" third place on election night. That leaves our top two contenders - Joe Miller and Lisa Murkowski - both Republicans biding for the seat. Murkowski ran as a write-in candidate and here is were the total votes stand at this time. Write-In (presumed Murkowski) - 83,201 (41%) Joe Miller (official Republican nominee) - 69,762 (34%) Difference - 13,439 (7%) Now officials in Alaska will start tomorrow to go through each ballot because it has to be verified who the write in vote was for. Most likely 99% of those votes were for Murkowski leaving her still roughly 13,000 votes ahead of Miller. However, there are still 37,000 absentee ballots to be counted and a lot of those are from the military personal overseas. Miller is favored in the absentee count and if it he indeed wins a clear majority of those votes he could theoretically beat Murkowski. I suspect that Lisa will end up pulling out a win but you never know with numbers like that. Each side is lawyered up and we probably won't know the winner for sure until December.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-09 @ 07:45:10
This will be interesting...

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-09 @ 15:48:23
CR, you should really get a forum account; otherwise, you won't be able to comment on my timeline! I'd really like your input!!!

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-09 @ 15:51:09
CR, register on the forum!!!!!!!! You'd be a great addition.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-09 @ 15:59:41
You don't have to use the account all that much, but it comes in handy when you want to post on something like Miles' thread or you want to say, view the Political Matrix scores of most of the rest of the forum members on a scatter plot or send another person a message.

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-09 @ 19:17:56
Here's link to the timeline CR. http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127788.msg2716588#msg2716588 I REALLY encourage you to get a forum profile!! Last Edit: 2010-11-09 @ 19:18:34

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-09 @ 19:27:13
Well I tell you guys what, I'm kind swamped with some projects but I'll look into creating a forum account in a few days. Thanks for the link Miles, that should come in handy.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-09 @ 19:34:38
On to our Alaska race update! I have a couple of corrections from my last post. First off, the write-in ballots will start being counted on Wednesday not today. The whole process should take about 3 days according to Alaska election officials. And there are only 30,500 absentee ballots, not the 37,000 I reported earlier. Those ballots will start being counted today. In fact we already have a new total for our top candidates. Write-In (presumed Murkowski - 85,834 (41%) Joe Miller (official GOP nominee) - 73,309 (35%) Difference - 12,525 (6%) This represents an increase for Miller of 914 votes and comes from the counting so far of only 8,000 absentee and early voting ballots. That still leaves 22,000 absentee ballots left to be counted. Upon review of the last state-wide write in race it was found that roughly 8% of the write-in ballots were disqualified. With Miller and Murkowski only separated by 6% this will be critical as the checking process begins tomorrow. For now the race remains too close to call.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-09 @ 19:39:51
GO LISA!

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-09 @ 19:43:36
Either way the GOP keeps the seat so to me that's good news. 47 senators is sure a lot better than 40 or 41.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-09 @ 19:51:14
But the difference is having a Palin cronie or an enemy of Palin. I'll take the enemy...

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-09 @ 23:34:10
I don't think Palin has anything to do with this. Whether Lisa or Joe caucus with us, its still a seat in our favor. Some of Palin's picks are going to DC and others are not. I hardly see how it matters.

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-10 @ 14:28:04
I'm 85% sure Lisa wins this one, though it will be closer than I thought a couple of days ago. A 6% difference is still quite large.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-10 @ 18:28:53
Murkowski is an enemy of Palin. That is good enough for me.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2010-11-10 @ 21:24:35
Amen.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-10 @ 23:37:14
I too think Lisa will eek out a win in the end. Sad to see some people hung up on one former governor. The woman merely pushed for principled conservative candidates and voiced her own opinion as a private citizen. But she lives rent free in the minds of liberals, driving them crazy. That's good enough for me.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2010-11-11 @ 00:06:34
I can't wait to read a Palin statement when Murkowski is declared the winner. I also think Lisa will be out for blood when she goes back to the senate. Good for her! This shows you that the people will not be swayed by endorsements and muddy fingers. Alaska must approve of her and thats all that counts. Go Lisa !

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-11 @ 00:29:04
I think its okay to endorse people, regardless of who you are. Palin has some wins and some loses from election day. So do I. So does everyone. That's okay. Win some, lose some as the saying goes. If the people of Alaska choose Murkowski as their senator that is by all means their choice. The endorsements of others are merely for their consideration. Lisa has said she'll caucus with the GOP and no doubt wishes to retain her seniority within the caucus. Lisa will do in the Senate what Lisa will do. Its Alaska that will have to live the consequences of its vote, as we all do.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-12 @ 16:39:45
Ballot count is extended into next week in Alaska's senate race. No real new news yet but Miller at this point has made only small gains.

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-12 @ 17:05:04
Who would YOU vote for, CR?

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-12 @ 17:33:02
I assume Miller, that's who he endorsed.

---

By: d-russ (I-OH) 2010-11-12 @ 17:35:10
I would love to see Angle run again in 2012. She was one of my favorite candidates running this year. I wish she could be president. Last Edit: 2010-11-12 @ 17:37:06

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-12 @ 17:45:43
lol

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2010-11-12 @ 18:06:22
Ha, what a joke. I wish she would run for president. That would be pure humor 24/7. Could you imagine her giving interviews. Look how she ducked the media in Nevada. I doubt she could do that very well in a national bid. Angle 2012 LOL. I wonder if now that she has lost, is she thinking about resorting to "second ammendment remedies" I mean I am sure she has been "secretly arming" herself in the event that she were to lose. LOL.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-12 @ 19:08:04
LOL>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-12 @ 20:12:36
albaleman is quiet correct Miles, I would have voted for Joe Miller. Had Murkowski won the primary and Miller mounted the write-in campaign I would have voted for Murkowski. I personally like Miller better as a conservative but we get behind who was nominated. If Lisa retains her seat, and I expect she will, at least she'll still be caucusing with us. As for Angle in 2012, wow. I like most of Sharron's conservative positions but presidential timber she is not.

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-13 @ 09:34:35
Dog Catcher timber she is not. Hey, CR- Have you registered for a forum account yet???

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-13 @ 18:46:04
Shoot I forgot KS. I had a busier week than I thought I would. Tell you what I'll look into it either tomorrow or Monday. I'll put it on my to-do list. Thanks for reminding me.

---

By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2010-11-14 @ 03:42:14
"Sad to see some people hung up on one former governor. The woman merely pushed for principled conservative candidates and voiced her own opinion as a private citizen. But she lives rent free in the minds of liberals, driving them crazy. That's good enough for me." Oh, I have to disagree with you entirely. The woman is power hungry and used the disgruntled masses for her own purposes. Had she really cared about the health and welfare of the GOP, she would never have supported O'Donnell or Angle and who knows, very well the Senate could have fallen like a domino to the GOP. I think you are being far too kind to this woman. She will be the undoing of your party, of this I am sure, just as I was sure that Obama would win within 0.09% of the actual percent that happened. Palin has just set up a disaster for 2012.

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-14 @ 12:35:03
Yep.

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-14 @ 12:38:43
If nobody can beat her endorsed candidates in GOP primaries, what's to stop her from winning the Republican presidential primaries? And yes, if the Republicans allow her to be the face of their party, that will doom them for the next 30 or 40 years. The vast majority of people, even Republicans, are very scared of Palin, and rightly so. Last Edit: 2010-11-14 @ 12:55:36

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-14 @ 12:57:14
The reality is that she doesn't give a d*mn about the future of the Republican party. She just does what is good for her.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-14 @ 14:19:06
I think that is a little over blown. I'm people are acting like she personally cost us something. So Palin's backed candidates in Angle and O'Donnell failed. Alright. What about those that won? Governor Rick Perry reelected in Texas Kelly Ayotte comfortably elected to the Senate in New Hampshire Rand Paul elected to the Senate in Kentucky Marco Rubio elected to the Senate in Florida Nikki Haley elected governor of South Carolina Terry Branstad elected governor of Iowa Governor Sean Parrnell reelected governor of Alaska Ron Johnson elected to the Senate in Wisconsin Her track record is no different than anyone else's. She's had some wins and some loses. Sarah has been working to make sure the GOP stands to its principles, that our party doesn't lose itself to Washington again and become Democrat-lite. And as a citizen she is free to participate in the process. We were told Ronald Reagan would be our undoing. We were told after Obama's election and the disaster that was Bush that our party wouldn't hold power for the next 30 or 40 years. We were told only those moderate Republicans could win. None of that panned out. I don't find Palin threatening and we just have to agree to disagree about that. But I believe that Sarah doesn't want to run for the White House. She will if she feels no one else will step up but I think she is willing to give others a chance, see who rises to the top. She even said so herself. If she chooses to run that is her business and she is certainly free to do so. But she does run, despite her following in our base, she'll have to prove she is ready and make it through the GOP primaries. Some say it would be easy for her but they said the same thing about Rudy Giuliani. Last Edit: 2010-11-14 @ 14:55:57

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-14 @ 14:25:36
"I don't find Palin threatening and we just have to agree to disagree about that." Look at the polls CR. You may not, but just about everybody else sure does. Also, Terry Bradshaw was not elected the governor of Iowa. Clearly you've been watching too much football. Last Edit: 2010-11-14 @ 14:26:40

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-14 @ 14:30:32
Well, lets look at the races she did cost you: California Senate Nevada Senate Colorado Senate Delaware Senate So she cost you control of the senate. A lot of the people you cite would have won their nomination anyways.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-14 @ 14:55:01
LOL, that is the first time I've ever been accused of watching too much football. My apologize, it was Terry Branstad that was endorsed by Palin and elected. I have corrected this error. If people are that afraid of her and she is that disliked then she would not hold this much sway. And whether popular with me or my party's base she still has to make it through the primaries like everyone else. We don't know who will rise up over the next few months. I'm content to sit back and watch for now. But I hardly think Sarah personally cost us the Senate. California, even though it looked competitive, was never going GOP. I see that now. Whether we nominated DeVore, Fiorina, Campbell, or whoever, Boxer would have won. California is a lost cause to me. And Carly was the middle candidate between conservative DeVore and liberal Campbell. Sarah took flack from some in the base by backing Fiorina. Delaware looked good too. However, it wasn't just Sarah that backed O'Donnell - talk radio, the base of the party, DeMint, all went for her. Given the results we saw and with some analysis of the exit polls, pundits now believe that with turnout Coons would have beaten Castle. I don't know how true that is but Castle certainly was certainly more willing to side with the Democrats on many issues than I felt comfortable with. In Colorado that was such a close race that had just 0.5% of the vote swung GOP Buck would be senator. I personally backed Norton. Here the debacle that was the governor's race no doubt had coattails. Here Sarah never made any firm backings that I know of. I know she spoke proudly of strong women running this year and that Jan Norton was one of them. This was a very tight race regardless. As for Nevada, we've been over that. Reid was able to knock Lowden out in the primaries and Tarkanian finished third. Angle was a strange pick but instead of uniting behind her the GOP establishment whined. Some backed Reid and she got little to no financial support. Reid still had a tough race. So I think this idea that Sarah Palin personally cost us the Senate is nonsense. Her other candidates won and her backing was key for candidates like Perry, Haley, and Ayotte. Don't forget that a number of conservative groups, talk radio, Jim DeMint, the Tea Party, and the base of our party said we wanted conservative candidates this year whether we won or lost. That is what we got. Some we won and others we lost. Now we move on to 2012.

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-14 @ 16:36:46
"California, even though it looked competitive, was never going GOP. I see that now. Whether we nominated DeVore, Fiorina, Campbell, or whoever, Boxer would have won." I would point to the LA Times poll which showed Fiorina losing to Boxer by 7 while Campbell beat Boxer by 6. So yes, Campbell very well could have won, and I think he would have. Furthermore, she nearly cost the Republicans Alaska. Had Murkowski not entered as a write-in candidate, I think McAdams would have won. There was the Rassy that showed Miller up by just 6 points in a two way race, and that was before the Miller campaign imploded in rather spectacular fashion.

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2010-11-14 @ 16:52:31
CR, Some of these candidates that you are dismissing were polling very competitively in the polls prior to the Palin endorsements which sunk their nomination chances. California,Campbell posted a few leads against Boxer (he was tailored to this state's progressive electorate- as a Swartzenegger like republican) However that was not good enough for the Palin litmus test. Delaware, Castle was posting double digit leads and was a household name in the state. However again he didnt pass the Palin litmus test despite being an electable republican in a blue state. Nevada, Angle was a disaster- enough said. Colorado, Buck look good on paper until the social issues did pop up even in this economically minded environment. Jane Norton would have beaten Micheal Bennet. Palin is doing more damage then anything else. I do think she could win a divided republican primary and if I was a party insider I would be concerned with poll numbers like her's. Gallup showed her with 52% strong dissapproval. She will need more then the base of the republican party to win a generarl election.

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-15 @ 20:25:49
Albaleman - First off there were some very early polls that showed Fiorina leading Boxer. She eventually fell. Campbell may have looked good on paper but in time I am convinced he too would have dropped. He ran for the senate once before in 2000 and got a whopping 37% of the vote. In a two way race in Alaska Miller would still have beaten McAdams. Early match ups showed Miller with a high single digit lead. Murkowski herself only won by 4 points in 2004. Miller would have done just fine in a GOP year and lot of the dirt slinging was between the two Republicans. McAdams was a sideshow. LR - How is it just Palin's fault? Jim DeMint made endorsements. Club for Growth made endorsements. Various Tea Party groups made endorsements. The base of our party did not want liberal Republicans candidates like Castle or Campbell. Call that what you will but we said we'd rather lose with our principles. In some races we did. We do agree on Norton in Colorado, who I strongly endorsed. I might note that Sarah did not really show strong support for either Buck or Norton in the Colorado primary. Again the governor's race was such a debacle that I can't help but think it hurt Buck. Honestly to listen to some of the reports you'd think we lost on Tuesday! We had a big victory. We sweep state legislatures, we took over key governors mansions, we captured 6 senate seats (same as the Democrats in 2006), and we took the most House seats in a midterm election since 1936! Over 60 seats and control of the chamber fell our way even with the Democrats at super-majority levels. A lot of those House candidates were backed by Palin too. My party had great success and Sarah added to the energy of the overall year. Here is what I don't understand though. People from the center to the left are all worried about Palin. She's dangerous and hurting the Republicans they say. My question is why does anyone care. I mean the goal of Democrats is to defeat us politically and ideologically. If Sarah is so toxic then why not let us poison ourselves and in fact encourage us to do so. Build her up, push her. It should be a Democratic dream not a point of concern. Personally I don't think she'll run. I'm rutting for a Thune/Jindal ticket myself. Last Edit: 2010-11-15 @ 20:30:42

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-15 @ 21:32:44
I agree with albaleman and LR. Palin screwed the whole thing up, no way around it. Sure DeMint did some stuff, but she is the real PR pro, not him.

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-15 @ 22:39:46
"In a two way race in Alaska Miller would still have beaten McAdams." McAdams would have won by at least 5 points. Coming out of the primary, Miller had only a lead of 4 or 5 points with the poll aggregates, and that was when his approval ratings were still respectable. After that his approval ratings plummeted while McAdams' skyrocketed. Also that was right after his primary bounce. Among Republican candidates running statewide, only Dan Maes has a lower approval rating. There's really no other way to cut it: in a two way, he would have won handily. Last Edit: 2010-11-15 @ 22:40:51

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-15 @ 22:40:17
Frankly, a Generic Republican candidate would have beat Murkowski write-in by at least 15 points. Last Edit: 2010-11-15 @ 22:40:31

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-15 @ 22:57:10
Yep. Miller was jsut that toxic. CR, have you registered?

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-15 @ 22:58:21
Miles' thread is really good so far and we need a voice from teh right. The forum tends to be more *ahem* liberal...

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-16 @ 20:44:25
Nonsense. Without Murkowski and the nasty fight between her campaign and Miller's we have no idea was a simple race would have looked like between Miller and McAdams. But what I do know is that in a Republican year in a Republican state the GOP nominee for the Senate would have won. Murkowski won her seat in 2004, a GOP year of sorts, by only 4 points. Miller was at least posting that sort of a lead. We don't know where his campaign would have gone if he had not had to deal with Lisa. And McAdams evidently wasn't that popular or he'd have come in second place instead of Miller. As of right now Murkowski has 36% of the vote and leads Miller's 35% by about 1500 votes. McAdams didn't even crack a quart of the vote. So I think in a two-man race Miller would have emerged the clear winner. KS I will be registering soon. I have become backlogged on a number of projects in addition to dealing with a few crisis that have popped up over the last couple of days. But rest assured I'll be there as soon as I can. Is there a link you can post so that I can at least read it and then I can make comments after I register???

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-16 @ 20:55:53
Here's what I have so far, CR! http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127788.0

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-17 @ 09:43:27
"And McAdams evidently wasn't that popular or he'd have come in second place instead of Miller." He's very popular, CR. It's hard to dispute hard, cold numbers, and the fact is he won only 43% of the votes of the people who approve of him. Most of the rest voted for Murkowski simply out of fear Murkowski and McAdams would split the vote, allowing Miller to get in. When you're less popular than Sharron Angle, Carl Paladino, or Christine O'Donnell, you're not going to do too well. His ceiling is probably about 40-45 percent. And even when he was much more popular, he barely got half of Alaskans to support him. Last Edit: 2010-11-17 @ 09:53:25

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-17 @ 09:46:20
"But what I do know is that in a Republican year in a Republican state the GOP nominee for the Senate would have won. Murkowski won her seat in 2004, a GOP year of sorts, by only 4 points." Miller isn't just a Generic Republican, CR. Lisa Murkowski was from one of the two big families in Alaska, and she is a reasonable conservative. Miller is a nobody whos approval ratings are atrocious. You're saying that a generic Republican would have beaten McAdams in a two-way, and that's true. But it's also true that a generic Republican would have beaten Murkowski write-in by 15 points. What I'm saying is that Miller is far from a generic Republican. I can say with 95% certainty McAdams would have won. Last Edit: 2011-09-09 @ 16:53:34

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-17 @ 09:52:26
When you look at the poll numbers, it's really indisputable. McAdams would have won, in the range of perhaps a 7 or 8 point margin.

---

By: albaleman (D-MN) 2010-11-17 @ 11:23:41
Frankly CR, I think you don't understand how bad of a candidate Miller is. Last Edit: 2010-11-17 @ 19:56:20

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2010-11-17 @ 17:29:43
AP called the race for Murkowski !

---

By: dnul222 (D-MN) 2010-11-17 @ 20:08:06
Hey CR, I happen to stumble onto Obama at the large Buddha in Kamakura Japan. Talk about small world, come to Japan and happen to run into the President of the USA...I waved and thought too bad you blew so many opportunities in irst two years. I just think if we had done a real stimulus for jobs on infrastructure only, roads, bridges, trains, dams and water systems we would be so much better off by now. Oh well get on to cutting....

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-18 @ 07:58:24
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/11/17/extra_bonus_quote_of_the_day.html

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-18 @ 22:27:03
dnul - I hope your travels are treating you well my old friend. I'd love to visit Japan one of these days too. Thank you for sharing that story with me, I must say it made me chuckle :) What a small world indeed. And I agree, on to the cutting. Miles and KS - Thanks guys, I'll read over it and get on the forum as soon as possible. Lots going on at work and prep for the holidays. Sigh, I need a nap, lol. LR - Yes they have called Alaska for Lisa. Quite honestly I'm amazed she pulled off the write-in campaign but I've been certain of her victory since the returns came in on election night. The seat remains in GOP hands, that's the bright side for me. albaleman - We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. We don't know what sort of issues would have been brought up in the campaign had Lisa never launched a write-in bid. The dynamics of the race would have completely changed in a two man race because once Murkowski got back in it was really all about her and Miller. McAdams had support, that was evident from the data on hand. However, with a united GOP (whether Lisa endorsed him or not) and the wave of the year at his back, the Miller campaign would have fared much better. Had Lisa not been in the race I think that her support could have split between Miller and McAdams. It probably would have been tight, much like Murkowski's own reelection 6 years ago. The point is that we will never know because that race never happened. Numbers can changed based on the events of a campaign. I also believe Miller was a more polished candidate that either O'Donnell or Angle. But you brought up a very important point, Lisa is from the very powerful Murkowski family and they dominate Alaska politics. The GOP has a dirty machine in the Last Frontier same as Democrats do in Chicago. So its not like Murkowski didn't have some weight on her side going into this. Of course none of that matters now. Lisa Murkowski was reelected and will be caucusing with the Republicans. That my bright side. Last Edit: 2010-11-18 @ 23:47:32

---

By: CR (--MO) 2010-11-19 @ 00:11:31
Hey All, Well its been a real crazy and fun year, but alas it has come to an end. As we close out this election cycle I'd like to do one final analysis on the results and where we go from here. House - I'm so pleased with this chamber. Republicans picked up 62 seats total, the most since 1948, and may have another 2 or 3 before its all side and done. The lower chamber will have a much more conservative feel to it as the Democrats drop below 200 members for the first time in decades. We know the new Speaker will be John Beonhor and the Majority Leader Eric Canton (first Jewish American in this position). The South, Midwest, parts of the Norteast and West were very kind to us. My prediction was 240 seats so I did pretty well. Senate - We did not take this chamber but looking at all the data on hand its unlikely that we would have. It is apparent now that while competitive California was never really in play nor was Washington state to a large extent. Those two alone would block our majority. Delaware was of little consequence and from the exit polling data it looks like Castle would have probably lost to Coons as well. The margin had been tightening over the summer. Since Castle was even more liberal than Olympia Snowe, I say no lose. Nevada was a bad situation and Colorado a real disappointment. I never really warmed all that much to Ken Buck and its painful how close he got. We should have gone with Jane Norton. However, we did great in Ohio, Missouri, Florida, North Dakota, Arkansas, Indiana, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Kentucky, and Wisconsin. None of our incumbents lost and we held all open seats. Our 6 picks are equivalent to the Democrats gains in 2006. So now, armed with 47 seats and some nervous centrist Democrats, our Senate caucus has some teeth. And good riddance to Arlen Specter! State Governments - We did just a fantastic job in terms of picking up state legislatures and governorships. This will aid us in redistricting, 2012, and provide us with a breeding ground for new candidates in the future. In this respect we did great east to west and I'm very proud of all the local state GOPs. Republicans control a majority of the state governments to go with our congressional victories. The lessons of this year is pretty clear. The American people did not vote for Republicans but against Democrats. They have rejected the policies of Washington. The GOP is on probation and they have two years to prove that they can govern and produce ideas that are favorable to the people. I think they have some good ideas that the people liked. But it is key that they stand on principles because this is our chance to improve our brand name. We have been given a second chance and must not blow it. Democrats are on probation now too. In my opinion, I think they should moderate and come back to the center like Chuck Heath wants to do. But we'll see. The big enchilada is 2012. President Obama is up for reelection and I think the real race to watch will be the GOP primaries. I don't think that the eventually Republican nominee is even on the stage just yet. I like John Thune, Bobby Jindal, or Bob McDonnell. We shall see who runs. There will also be more interesting senate races and I'm optimistic about a number of them (NE, MO, OH, VA, MT, etc). More to come on that front and right now its just too early to tell. Once again thanks all for making this sure a fun and exciting year. I have enjoyed blogging with all of you and the debate has been great. I will most likely be joining the forum in the coming days but there is nothing like the Atlas. I expect to see all of you back here in 2012! So to all my atlas buddies - KS, dnul, Miles, Liberalrocks, doniki, Bonn, colin, albaleman, d-russ, BushCountry, and everyone else - its been a blast. My warmest wishes and God bless. Andrew -aka ConservRep Last Edit: 2010-11-19 @ 20:04:40

---

By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2010-11-19 @ 15:11:44
Best Wishes to you friend. It has been fun watching the last two election cycles winning some and losing some! Hopefully I too will be able to return to this forum in 2011 for the leadup and eventual GOP primaries (hopefully democratic as well).

---

By: KS21 (I-KS) 2010-11-19 @ 20:29:10
See you later, CR. It's been fun. And congratulations on historic gains, including the election of Blunt and Boozman. I wish the GOP leadership the best in the coming congress, becuase when Congress succeeds, America does too. I'll be here year-round, especially on the forum in the off-months. If any of you have a forum account (or register for one, as I encourage everyone to do), just send me a message. It would be great hearing from you all. It was a blast everyone, even if we didn't always agree. KS21

---

By: MilesC56 (I-VA) 2010-11-19 @ 20:44:01
Thanks CR. I really value people like you; conservatives who aren't confrontational or over-reactive, who are capable of a substantive debate. I had a good time blogging with you. This was one of your party's years. Enjoy it.

---

By: colin (I-ON) 2010-12-01 @ 22:59:09
it's been an absolute pleasure CR! I'm a little late...it's been a busy month! lol What a much better taste in my month than in 2008. =) On to 2012! I wish you and all of our friends here KS, Miles, Bonn, dnul, doniki, LR, and the rest of the gang, all the best! Before you know it, we'll be doin it all over again! =)

---