Unfair but Nearly Balanced

Published: October 22, 2006, 12:22 pm

Updated: October 22, 2006, 12:33 pm

Conservative Roundup

by Jerome Armstrong, Republicans are widely spreading the prospect from Drudge and Barron's that: Our analysis -- based on a race-by-race examination of campaign-finance data -- suggests that the GOP will hang on to both chambers, at least nominally. We expect the Republican majority in the House to fall by eight seats, to 224 of the chamber's 435. At the very worst, our analysis suggests, the party's loss could be as large as 14 seats, leaving a one-seat majority. But that is still a far cry from the 20-seat loss some are predicting. In the Senate, with 100 seats, we see the GOP winding up with 52, down three. 8 in the House and 3 in the Senate for Dems, hmm... Mark Kennedy in MN and Conrad Burns in MT will win?

Matt Stoller, C-Span this morning, jabbering about something or other political.

C-Span this morning, .

Update: Well wow did I whiff that first question. Ironically, it was about Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont, something I know a lot about relatively speaking. The question was about the Q-poll, and the 17 point lead. What I wanted to say, but did not, is that it is Joe Lieberman's explicit softening of his war stance, where he uses antiwar rhetoric, that has led to his electoral position. I also wanted to point out that the poll is overstated, but having two ideas in your head at the same time on TV is not something I'd recommend.

The rest of the roundtable was good. There was one particularly poignant question from a WWII veteran who discussed his fears about the nature of the republic in the context of George W. Bush. He asked Mary Katherine Ham what she stands for, at what point she would say enough is enough, what her principles are. It was a very difficult question for all Republican voters, and one that I hope they ponder and take seriously.

Unfair but Nearly Balanced

Conservative Roundup

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Log In

Not a member yet?