House bet

[nick1985]

$50 says the Republicans will take control of the house. I'll offer the bet to the first taker.

 

[OCGuy]

 

[JSt0rm]

what would jesus do?

 

[Atreus21]

$50 says the Republicans will take control of the house. I'll offer the bet to the first taker.

I hope they don't. I hope it's an even 50% both ways. Eternal gridlock in congress is the best outcome for the citizenry.

 

[nageov3t]

I don't think they will but wouldn't put money on it.

I do think, however, that if the democrats keep the house and senate and if the republicans nominate someone who's not a complete train wreck in 2012, Obama is doomed.

 

[nick1985]

I don't think they will

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

"Republican candidates have jumped out to a record-setting 12-point lead over Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the week ending Sunday, August 15, 2010. "

 

[JSt0rm]

oh snap loki you been called da fuck out!

 

[nageov3t]

oh snap loki you been called da fuck out!

we'll see.

I'm not strong in my convictions

 

[Pens1566]

Generic candidate polls for congress are meaningless. Everyone hates congress but loves their rep, or hates their rep less than the rest of congress.

 

[Fern]

I hope they don't. I hope it's an even 50% both ways. Eternal gridlock in congress is the best outcome for the citizenry.

If you want gridlock, you'd want firm control of one chamber (e.g., House) by one party and the other (Senate) in firm control of the other.

With a a 50/50 House you'd just see a few members getting 'bribed' with benefits for their state/corporate constituents to get the 51% vote so a bill could move on to the Senate. That ain't gridlock.

Fern

 

[EagleKeeper]

We have seen what firm control means in the Senate.

Excuses when they have an super majority because they can not get things right.

 

[CrackRabbit]

I'll put $1 on the fact that it isn't lupus.

 

[Lemon law]

Cheer up Nick, getting back in charge should be the worst GOP nightmare.

Because then the GOP would be responsible for good governance, and that Nick, is something the GOP sucks at.

If the GOP ever gets back in charge this country will be so fucked up within a year, and the GOP may never get a chance thereafter to govern for at least 50 years.

But meanwhile, the GOP has one virtue, they know how to bitch and sabotage. As they sell proven failure.

 

[JSt0rm]

everyone can be pissed because of the economy but I highly doubt people have forgotten the incompetence that is the republican party.

 

[jman19]

Who cares? Republicans can lead about as well as Democrats - that is, very poorly. Rooting for a party is pathetic.

 

[khon]

It would be helpful to know what the Republicans want to do if they take office, so far they've only done what Mitch McConnell described the other day:

"I wish we had been able to obstruct more. They were able to get the health care bill through. They were able to get the stimulus through. They were able to get the financial reform through. These were all major pieces of legislation, and if I would have had enough votes to stop them, I would have."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/us/politics/15memo.html?_r=2&scp=5&sq=mitch mcconnell&st=cse

As such it might actually be a good thing if the GOP takes the house, at least then they'd have to actually try to help solve the problems the country faces.

 

[werepossum]

I'm not sure that the Pubbies are going to take either body, although granted they could take both. But most polls have the Republican Party even lower the Democrat Party in approval, which tells us they are leaning Republican only because the Democrats suck such major ass. When the voters hate you more but are leaning toward you anyway there's a lot that can go wrong on the way to the polls.

Best from my point of view would be firm Republican control of the Senate and a very narrowly Democrat-controlled House - and the former can't happen mathematically. A close second would be Republican control of both chambers - but then what happens in 2012? Republican control of both branches was the same as Democrat control of both branches, just at a slightly slower speed, and a Republican sweep might only buy us two years of blessed gridlock.

It would be helpful to know what the Republicans want to do if they take office, so far they've only done what Mitch McConnell described the other day:

"I wish we had been able to obstruct more. They were able to get the health care bill through. They were able to get the stimulus through. They were able to get the financial reform through. These were all major pieces of legislation, and if I would have had enough votes to stop them, I would have."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/us/politics/15memo.html?_r=2&scp=5&sq=mitch mcconnell&st=cse

As such it might actually be a good thing if the GOP takes the house, at least then they'd have to actually try to help solve the problems the country faces.

Sometimes the best way to save the patient is to simply quit stabbing him. If government "solves" many more problems we'll be a third world-equivalent nation.

 

[Orignal Earl]

As such it might actually be a good thing if the GOP takes the house, at least then they'd have to actually try to help solve the problems the country faces.

lol
Dream on, the only thing that will change is the postings here

 

[MotF Bane]

Generic candidate polls for congress are meaningless. Everyone hates congress but loves their rep, or hates their rep less than the rest of congress.

I hate Congress, and all of my representatives. :awe:

 

[nick1985]

Any takers?

 

[JS80]

Any takers?

I'll do it if you give me 2-1 odds.

 

[Lemon law]

Why should I bet against the collective stupidity of the American people?

 

[Turin39789]

It would be helpful to know what the Republicans want to do if they take office, so far they've only done what Mitch McConnell described the other day:

"I wish we had been able to obstruct more. They were able to get the health care bill through. They were able to get the stimulus through. They were able to get the financial reform through. These were all major pieces of legislation, and if I would have had enough votes to stop them, I would have."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/us/politics/15memo.html?_r=2&scp=5&sq=mitch mcconnell&st=cse

As such it might actually be a good thing if the GOP takes the house, at least then they'd have to actually try to help solve the problems the country faces.

It might be nice to have an actual full house and Senate, instead of almost half deciding they are taking their toys and going home and not doing their jobs.

 

[Kappo]

Cheer up Nick, getting back in charge should be the worst GOP nightmare.

Because then the GOP would be responsible for good governance, and that Nick, is something the GOP sucks at.

If the GOP ever gets back in charge this country will be so fucked up within a year, and the GOP may never get a chance thereafter to govern for at least 50 years.

But meanwhile, the GOP has one virtue, they know how to bitch and sabotage. As they sell proven failure.

Your idea of "fucked up" is that handouts aren't as common, businesses can actually make their own decisions and people who work like dogs get paid for their labors. Of course you would think it's going to get fucked up, and in this case, I REALLY hope so.

 

[Turin39789]

The real question is which is more common:
Nick posting a Rasmussen link

or

Nick trying to entice people into wagering on elections and feeling he proves a point by doing so?