Posted on 10/29/2010 1:44:54 PM PDT by BigEdLB
I’m stuned by this!
13 points? Really? That means the Demon-rats would have to take 100% of the undecided voters and still be 3 points behind.
ha.
We COULD take the Senate, couldn’t we?
This verifies the Gallop results.
I’m confuse about something in the polling, 10% of the people who already voted did not know if they voted for the republican or dem canidate?
We could take Delaware.
“I just love Fon News.”
My favorite was when the two of them jumped the shark ... who could forget the Fons?
I thought that's what he wanted that massage therapist to do for him.
You can say that again (oh, never mind).
I'm betting that Republicans pick up 131 seats in the House, which would make this the highest ever midterm shift of seats.
This is HUGH!
Second throught It is likely not that bad for the since people are far more likely to now which party their currert congressman is a memmber of. My guess it like a 8-1-1 spilte So I think we like see a 50-43-7 in the early vote, plus I think some of the 7% other is people who voted for the republican but calls them tea party, so I think we likely at 53-43-4 in the early vote...
Devastating and catastrophic for the Rats if it holds up.
Damn I read your post vit nary a bumbly. Must need sum sleep.
U speak with fork tongue there Lone Ranger...bawhahahha! ;)
1)find every House seat that the Dems won by +23 points in 2008.
2)Subtract from 435.
3)That's the number of Republican House seats to be won in 2010.
That's about as scientific as it gets, until Tuesday, when every congressional district will get polled.
Right, tsunami and all. The signs are getting repeated everywhere.
Tea Party candidates, like Christine, will outperform the polls. Everyone has been saying that tea partiers, not all of them, but a significant number, are new to the process. Being new, they won’t be considered “likely voters”. Most pollsters, if not all, require that you have voted before, often in the last general, or 2 out of the last 4, or something like that, in order to be considered a “likely voter”. These tea partiers, or many of them, are not regular voters. But they’re psyched for this election, especially for the tea party candidates.
R+13 would put 356 of the 435 Democrat seats theoretically in play (R+8 or so if you take into account incumbency). With that said, I can see why Rhode Island 1 (Kennedy Open) and Michigan 15 (Dingell) were competitive in recent polls.
That’s hard to model, there were a lot of Democrat seats in ‘08 where the Rs didn’t field a candidate, but are this year. At the end of the day, my guess is that you’re looking at gains in the 55-75 seat range.
The most optimistic projections I’ve heard are picking up 13.
Technically, we could pick up 19. There are 6 seats that no one is talking about. We pretty much haven’t been battling in those states. We don’t have great candidates there, those candidates don’t have a lot of money, etc.
Oregon
New York
Hawaii
Maryland
Vermont
New York.
I’d call Vermont and New York safe. That brings it down to a possible 17 seat pickup. We need 10 to pick up the Senate.
Oregon, New York (Gillibrand), Hawaii and Maryland are all possible. Our candidates aren’t great there, there’s no money there, etc etc. But it’s possible.
This week, Rasmussen shows Huffman down 11 in Oregon.
The most recent Rasmussen show Cavasso down 13 in Hawaii.
Most recent Rasmussen in Maryland shows Wargotz down 18.
In New York, Dioguardi was as close as -1 in September but it’s about 20 now.
We definitely could win 1 or more of those races.
Theres a good chance we will win all the 13 that they say we have a shot at. I think we take the Senate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.