Skip to comments.Final count in Senate is 55 Dems, 45 Repubs (net gain of 2 for dems?)
Posted on 11/10/2012 5:22:01 AM PST by Evil Slayer
click here to read article
Because we nominated Romney - we pissed away our chance of hamstringing Obama.
This is so terrible - had we simply defended the ground, we would only have to make up 3! Count ‘em, 3! Seats.
Totally mindboggling that with obozo at the top of the ticket we lost senate seats in deep red states like Montana, North Dakota, Missouri and Indiana.
It’d be like with Bush at top of ticket and Dems losing in places like new York, California, Mass, Illinois, etc.
Get a dose of reality. Murdoch and Brown lost. Was it Romney’s fault that Murdoch made a stupid comment about Abortion? Connie Mack and George Allen ran horrible campaigns.
there will never be enough cash to beat dem machines
I’m not buying this. The entire election reeks of voter fraud.
Not inept - FRAUD!!
voter fraud....ya really think? ........
Itd be like with Bush at top of ticket and Dems losing in places like new York, California, Mass, Illinois, etc.
You're right. Totally inept and it really brings home the fact that this election was a disaster for 'Pubs/conservatives. We lost, and lost badly. Before the election we were touting ND and MO as "sure pickups". We lost them both. MT was a bit closer but we were confident. Gone. IN was looking strong and we pissed it away. IN is a real killer because we traded an 80% conservative voter (old Lugie) for a 99.1% Obama voter.
I know Mourdock was a Tea Party darling, but facts are facts and he made stupid statements in the middle of a campaign and that blew the contest away. Same with Akin in MO. I'm not saying they were wrong in their positions, they were just stupid to say the things they said in the way that they said them. We need candidates who understand that the 'Rats and the media will jump on any kind of misstatement and kill us with it. We need to field candidates who are not only correct in their positions on the issues, but politically astute and understand the importance of the elections they compete in.
Same deal in 2010 when we pissed away two possible pickups (DE and NV) with lousy candidates. Those two, plus the four we lost this year, would have put us over the top, even writing off MA and ME. Instead, we get at least two (probably more) years of Harry Reid running the Senate. *vomit*
I forget who said running “retreads” like George Allen and Tommy Thompson might not have been the best idea. I wonder if other Republicans might have done better but the turnout and trends were just against us. With the GOP being down to 45 though I am not too optimistic about them gaining 6 next time, unless there are several Demo retirements.
I remember taking some heat for pointing out that many pro-lifers can be one issue blinded, ideological retards, penny wise, pound foolish,anyone? How the freekin hell do you garantee rights to potential humans when proven ones, like use, are getting them stripped? Save the effing Constitution and it`s Lockean principles first, shmucks! "Oh, parish the thought, sir.",because "its for the CHILDREN!"
Funny how it’s always everyone else’s fault but Romney’s. No, it can’t be because Romney delivered fewer republican voters than John McCain.
Hey - face the facts. This would have been a massive blowout, if Obama had performed up to par. Obama did terrible, but fortunately Romney failed to take advantage of a 9 million drop in voters.
Look at North Dakota, folks. If the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate was able to win a race in a state where Obama got only 39% of the vote, there's clearly a lot more at work than just Republican turnout and a piss-poor presidential candidate at the top of the ticket.
“IN is a real killer because we traded an 80% conservative voter (old Lugie) for a 99.1% Obama voter.”
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Lugar refused to campaign for Mourdock. Why are we shedding tears for traitors?
In 2014, 20 democrat senators (including Senators Durbin, Franken, Baucus, Hagan, Harkin, Kerry, and Lautenberg) can run for re-election, and only 13 Republicans (including Senators Alexander, Johanns, Cochran, and Roberts) can run for re-election.
It’s “perish the thought” not “parish”.
You assume it was a fair fight. That's the trouble with Republicans. We play by The Marquess of Queensberry rules. They don't.
Berg of ND ran a very poor campaign. His dem opponent, Heidi Heitkamp painted herself independent and as much of a conservative as Berg, even though she was funded by out of state anti oil and anti military interests and is a die hard socialist.
Berg had real stupid advertising. Many of his TV adds had the following statement: “I like Heidi, but - - - “ He basically endorsed her by saying she was likeable. I put this in the same category as that “let’s reach across the isle” bullshit mentality the typical RINO has where every time you reach across the isle to a commie you lose something!
Heitkamp ran fierce attack adds, one of which painted Berg as a rich mean landlord, and he did nothing to defend himself.
Simply put, Berg brought flowers to a gunfight.
If someone came up to you and told you he was from the future and told you that Mitt Romney would get fewer votes this election than John McCain - would you have believed him?
Three of the Senate candidates had mouth problems: Akins, Mourdock, and Allen (remember macaca?).
Several seats that were supposed easy GOP pick ups got lost. Just weeks ago, many of the ‘professional prognosticators’ were saying the GOP could pick up about 5 seats.
The GOP needs a massive revamping of their message or their messengers.
Romney problems were Romney, no doubt about it, but why is Romney to blame for Akin stupid comment, Murdoch stupid comment after Akin’s? Is Romney to blame for Connie Mack? George Allen Jr? Ted Cruz did very well.
We won NE, all 5 electoral votes. In 2008, McCain lost an electoral college vote in Nebraska. This time Romney won all of them. Maybe Romney did poorly in OH, VA, and FL because of bad Senate candidates.
Well, sorry about what happened nationally, but yaaaa-hoo for us down here in Texas. We got rid of our worthless RINO and traded her in for an honest to goodness Tea Party Senator!!!!
Just wish he had more company!
Romney is responsible because he had negative coattails that depressed the vote. Do you really think people show up to a presidential election just to vote for a Senate candidate?
Romney drove away plenty of conservatives who chose to stay home, and this lowered the vote for all these Senate candidates, robbing them of what would and should have been several percent in their favour. Hence ND, MT, and MA.
MO and IN - he destroyed the campaign of two conservative candidates (as well as his own campaign), by backstabbing conservatives. Do you know how many of my friends were calling me and telling me - “you were sooo right about Romney”, after he cut off Mourdock and Akin. “You told me he was not a friend of us, and not one of ours, and you were right”.
That’s 5 senate seats right there. Had he stuck with Mourdock and Akin - they would have won and he would have won as well.
I thought our Senate candidate in OH (Mandel) was actually pretty good. OH is a bit schizophrenic when it comes to Senate candidates, and, as a rule, in OH once a 'Rat gets into office, it is very, very difficult to dig it out. We had that old liberal fossil Metzenbaum for decades. Likewise John Glenn (apologies to his military and NASA service). Sherrod Brown is perhaps more liberal than Obama was as a Senator, and his politics don't really align with the majority of voters, but they don't seem to care, they just re-elect him because he's in office and he's a 'Rat.
Romney lost OH because of the electorate, not because he was a bad candidate. He tried very hard here. He came here a lot and had good crowds at his rallies. But the auto bailout and unions, combined with Santa Claus voters (i.e., the Obamaphone lady), put Obama on top.
Plus Sen Snowe’s sudden retirement screwed us up too. I know she often votes with the Dems but it would have been a GOP seat at least, and one vote against Soiled Harry for majority leader.
I like many Tea Party ideas but I agree it is better to be pragmatic at times. As you say, if Republicans had nominated stronger candidates in 2010 we might have won CO and NV. Even though Mike Castle was indeed “moderate,” it would have been one more vote for Mitch McConnell for majority leader. Even if Republicans hadn’t taken a majority their numbers would be stronger. Now with a mere 45 seats they are going to have to hope the Dems’ numbers absolutely nosedive in less than 2 years if they have any hope of gaining the 6 they need to get to 51.
There was absolutely no energy in VA for retread Allen (or Kaine, really). NoVA was fraud central from the way it sounds. I hope they put up somebody decent to go after Warner in 2014, but it will be a real struggle-he doesn’t do much, stays quiet, and was popular as a governor. The only people I could think of to try it would be Cantor or Gov. Bob McDonnell.
Nor am I. How is it possible to have won the House with such overwhelming numbers and yet lost so many Senate seats. It does not compute.
Akin, Mourdock, Berg...
Missouri, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana....how the HELL could we not win those?
Obama’s coattails seem really really short.
A plus-2 in the Senate is not a bad election. We would’ve been crowing about it, had it been our +2. I wouldn’t call that “short”.
EXCELLENT POST!! I RECOMMEND ALL FREEPERS WATCH THE VIDEO!!!
Dems are not going to let us win the Senate or the WH from here on out. They don’t worry about the House too much because it is a 2 year stint and they like to keep them there to whip around and blame.
Missouri and Indiana were dead in the water because those races had unprepared dolts as candidates for the House.
They may as well have said “I am not a witch”.
Akin & Murdock = 4 Senate seat swing
In two of them (IN and MO), we had candidates who were not politically savvy enough to avoid making bonehead remarks that the media and the ‘Rats were able to conflate and twist so that in the end they were a caricature of what was intended. Our candidates need to be smart enough to know what to say to avoid those kind of “gotcha” setups. It was “Macaca” all over again. We need to field candidates who are smart enough to understand two things. One is that the media is your enemy and they will always be digging for any kind of misstatement that they can use against you. The second is that the average voter isn’t very smart and that leaves them vulnerable to manipulation by the media and the ‘Rats. So you have to be extra careful to say things in the right way and avoid the traps they set for you.
Unfortunately for us in Texas, we will have an influx of the locusts coming from the northeast and Kalifornia to avoid what they created in their own states. Not to mention all of the ILLEGALS that are flooding in across the borders.
Texas seems to be a safe haven for now, but it won't be in less than 5 years. Mark my word.
There was nothing to stop those millions of conservatives from going to the polls and voting for the Republicans for Senate regardless of Romney.
Indiana voters gave Governor-elect Pence and candidate Romney a solid majority while electing a Democrat Senator ,then elected Republican super-majorities in the state legislature bur put a Democrat in charge of Indiana education. Just try to make sense of that !!!!
Evidently one of severl things happened:the conservatives don’t exist in the numbers we hoped,or the conservatives were lulled by over-exuberant polls and predictions into thinking they didn’t need to vote, or the candidates were rejected by the conservatives,or the conservatives have given up.
I am AFRAID that evn many so-called conservatives don’t really want abortion outlawed just in case “something happens....in their family...”,AND that even self-identified conservatives have grown accustomed to getting “free” government goodies.
I went to support Cruz and cast my ballot for him. I don’t think we did a very good job of communicating just how important the Senate races were - and I think that when Romney turned voters off they were saying, “a pox on both their houses”.
We have enough to call for secession as well.
...and for future reference...this was Huckabee's boy.
2008 was such a disaster that in 2014 Maine is the only non deep red state to elect a Republican senator so that is the only state where a seat could be lost, unless there is a third party split in some other states. So that is good news.
Bad news though is that some of those Demo incumbents are really well entrenched. Hard to see Franken getting beaten now. I had thought Shaheen would be vulnerable but NH lurched to the far left this year. Unless there is a tremendous GOP tsunami I can’t see Durbin going anywhere. Even if Louse-enberg retires (is he 90 yet??) another Dem will probably win in NJ.
GOP pick up chances are probably best in AK and SD, and I they are gearing up already to go after Landrieu in LA. Even a gain of a few seats will at least be a step in the right direction.
Teachable moment for Akin and Mourdock and any other Republican candidate:
when the MSM asks you about rape, abortion, contraception, or anything having to do with sex, immediately start talking about the $16 trillion debt.
Let them think that. They needed +5 going into the mid-terms to even think of being safe, and they know the GOP generally does well in those elections.
All we need to do is pick up 3 seats.
Missouri has a habit of voting for one party for the Presidency and the other for the Senate, one for the House and the other for the Governorship. They balance one against the other — unfortunately. Given that this was a Republican year for the Presidential vote in Missouri, the Democrat McCaskill had the advantage in the Senate race, plus she was the incumbent.
Romney performed badly because of a terrible combination of groupthink and voter fraud.
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.