Is it worth it to hand the country over to the Dems (essentially) for a decade or more if we come out with a stronger, new party? I want to break from the Republican Party--the religious conservative GOP, that is--and form a new Republican Party based on fiscal spending responsibilities, and get back to what I feel was always our strengths.

My ideal new party would be moderate to centrist on social values, would be absolutely against any further interference of religion in state affairs, and would focus on the original GOP ideal of less spending, less taxes. And frankly, the Christian right can go do whatever they want to with themselves.

ya know I could probably get behind that, depending on some of the social values

Seriously, it really bothers me.

My family and I owned racing greyhounds for a number of years and the overwhelming majority of the kennels and trainers are good, hardworking people who know their stuff and really care about the dogs.

Are there one or two unscrupulous types? Yeah, but there are in any industry and they lose their licensing when they caught, as it should be.

I am thrilled that after so many years of historic tragedies and wrong decisions that we're finally witnessing such a hopeful turning point. Yes we can, America.

No, it actually means that Obama will be in good shape to do what he wants (so long as it doesn't break too far from the party line). That does not, however, necessarily mean it will be a successful presidency. It will make it even more important that he make good decisions, because there won't be much of a check on his policies.

That's what I'm hoping for. I'm not the most optimistic in the world - I think those left in the GOP base are in Jon's mold right now, the idea that "we're not socially conservative enough." I expect at least in the next two years we'll see a harder-right bent.

But I think by the election of 2012 there's at least a chance of seeing a "new, stronger party."

That is what I hope for. I'd there wasn't much hope when it was McBama on the ticket. The country would be better off with a split executive and legislative branch, but I didn't want to vote McCain and wound up going Constitution Party. Hopefully Obama winning and there not being a split government will help the Republican party make gains if they do actually go to being a fiscal conservative party, while improving socially and with foreign policy. As it is I can't see supporting the Republican party as it stands right now though.

For Minnesota, hopefully Coleman will be able to hold on to the Senate seat with the slight lead he holds now. Not a fan of Coleman in the Senate and would have prefered Barkley, but Coleman hodling his seat will prevent a filibuster proom majority and electing Fraken would be an embaressment.

Right now, there's no place in the GOP for people like Jon that support abortion.

Florida's Ban on Gay Marriage is at 62% "Yes" with 98% reporting. CNN still hasn't projected it to pass or fail, but hard to see how it will not pass at this point (if the numbers are accurate).

Time will tell and to each their own, but I believe we, as a nation, have bottomed out and there is a lot of room for improvement. Therefore, even minor improvements will make Obama appear as if he is doing pretty well. Of course that involves making good decisions, but my opinion is that Obama will act more pragmatically and more humbly than his present detractors expect. As I earlier said, the bar has been set pretty damn low by folks that currently share JiMG's current feelings, so I feel like it will not take a dramatic feat (beyond avoiding the apocolypse) to win at least some of them over.

The interesting thing now is what happens with Liebermann? The Dems want to kick him out, but they could hit 60 if he still caucuses with them.

If Franken were to win his race over Coleman and Barkley, I wonder if that would be the first time in U.S. history that three men who have been U.S. Senators would have been in the same race.

To be honest, I'm not sure you would see a hard stand on any social issue except that it couldn't go too far to the left.

Fiscally conservative, but socially moderate if not liberal? Yes please.

i think there's a fairly large appetite for a party like that

At last you guys did something we can applaud ;)

I have been accused of being an Obama/D sheep.. in this one thing, maybe there's some truth. I found this speech uplifting, with a call to action. I think a Chuchill quote fits here.

"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.""

Remarks of President-Elect Barack Obama—as prepared for delivery
Election Night
Tuesday, November 4th, 2008
Chicago, Illinois

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

It’s the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen; by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the very first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different; that their voice could be that difference.

It’s the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled – Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America.

It’s the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day.

It’s been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America.

I just received a very gracious call from Senator McCain. He fought long and hard in this campaign, and he’s fought even longer and harder for the country he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine, and we are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader. I congratulate him and Governor Palin for all they have achieved, and I look forward to working with them to renew this nation’s promise in the months ahead.

I want to thank my partner in this journey, a man who campaigned from his heart and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton and rode with on that train home to Delaware, the Vice President-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.

I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last sixteen years, the rock of our family and the love of my life, our nation’s next First Lady, Michelle Obama. Sasha and Malia, I love you both so much, and you have earned the new puppy that’s coming with us to the White House. And while she’s no longer with us, I know my grandmother is watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight, and know that my debt to them is beyond measure.

To my campaign manager David Plouffe, my chief strategist David Axelrod, and the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics – you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you’ve sacrificed to get it done.

But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to – it belongs to you.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didn’t start with much money or many endorsements. Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington – it began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston.

It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give five dollars and ten dollars and twenty dollars to this cause. It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation’s apathy; who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans who volunteered, and organized, and proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has not perished from this Earth. This is your victory.

I know you didn’t do this just to win an election and I know you didn’t do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime – two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us. There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wonder how they’ll make the mortgage, or pay their doctor’s bills, or save enough for college. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair.

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America – I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you – we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won’t agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can’t solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it’s been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years – block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

What began twenty-one months ago in the depths of winter must not end on this autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek – it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you.

So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us remember that if this financial crisis taught us anything, it’s that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers – in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people.

Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long. Let us remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House – a party founded on the values of self-reliance, individual liberty, and national unity. Those are values we all share, and while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress. As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, "We are not enemies, but friends...though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection." And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn – I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world – our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand. To those who would tear this world down – we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security – we support you. And to all those who have wondered if America’s beacon still burns as bright – tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope.

For that is the true genius of America – that America can change. Our union can be perfected. And what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that’s on my mind tonight is about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She’s a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing – Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.

She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn’t vote for two reasons – because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin.

And tonight, I think about all that she’s seen throughout her century in America – the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can’t, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can.

At a time when women’s voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can.

When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs and a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.

When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.

She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "We Shall Overcome." Yes we can.

A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination. And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes we can.

America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves – if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time – to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth – that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we can’t, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people:

Yes We Can. Thank you, God bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.

If the Republican party went this way, I would be on board (I voted for Obama).

Fixed that for you.

Unhappy though it may make both segments of the Reagan-through-Bush R voters, our fates as far as control of the White House are concerned are joined at the hip. And the ability of the two to at least cooperate are linked with regard to controlling Congress. Me, you, and everybody else can wish that weren't true until we're blue in the face (or should that be red in the face?) but wishing doesn't make it so.

Want to remake the GOP into a fiscally conserative/socially moderate party, even at the expense of having a shot at winning nationally? That's cool by me, I understand the sentiment believe me. But don't kid yourself about the reality of what happens if that remodel takes place. At best you end up with the D's dominant nationally and either the social conservatives as a third party ala '68 or '48 or leave them in control of the GOP and join forces with the Lib. and create what amount to a pair of third parties.

Inspiring Americans isn't at all irrelevant and it's a hugely important thing and a beneficial part of Obama's victory.

But it's still just a speech. I'm so tired of speeches. Looking forward to the actions.

Yeah, I didn't realize how much this would even affect me. I know I mentioned it before, but both of my parents are from Birmingham, Alabama. And while I am not sure how both parents voted (since they have been independent for decades), I could already tell from talking to them what this moment meant for them regardless of which candidate they liked. The fact that he was even a consideration is a huge leap from my parent's generation.

And it hit me particularly harder than I thought thinking that I am only one generation away from Civil Rights movement in which most people didn't even believe they could even be president of a company, let alone a country. So, in other words, I am happy for them to witness this.

/rockin chair

You hear Liddy Dole is 86?

you speak in certainties and absolutes where to be blunt, you do not have the expertise to do so.

The GNP is here. Enter this thread and contribute if interested. Maybe it;s just a bunch of us talking. Maybe there are threads and discussions like it across America. Whatever. At least we have a place to make ourselves heard, even if only we ourselves only hear it.

http://operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=68795

DT, I live here.

If I know one thing beyond how night follows day, even in the often unpredictable local political environment (i.e. only a fool tries to predict a county or city level race here), it's what will or won't play here from a national politician.

It'd take a blind man not to see the outcome of the "refocusing of the GOP" that we kick the tires on here from time to time. Good Lord, look at the Senate race here. Martin seemed to do little more than scream "Look, there's Saxby" and "I'm a liberal, love me, touch me, hold me" and he pulled just under half the vote. You split the 51ish% Chambliss got & you're handing the Dems the seat. And you will split them without an acceptable message to both the fiscal & social conservatives. And "acceptable" means at least noticeable nods to both at the very least.

edit to add: Let's be real. I love my money. I mean looooove it. And I take an extremely dim view of anybody dipping their hand in my pocket to take it without damned good reason, and by that I mean a reason I agree with not just one they think is a good reason. And I really really despise seeing money thrown toward crap I have no use for at best & utter contempt for at worst. But there are some things that I hold even more dear than my bank account, so we're talking about some really high priority to top the fiscal stuff. But if you hand me a candidate who does precisely everything right with my money but doesn't share my values on social issues to a high extent, I can't go with him. I'll find another candidate or I'll stay away from voting in the race completely, but unless you're running against the next anti-Christ, you can't buy me strictly by getting just the money stuff right. Since I don't believe you're going to swing any Obama Dems your way any time soon (since they think they've found their Messiah already), how exactly do you think you're going to win an election without me? And I'm easier than most since I'm already neutralized on the biggest social hot button of them all. What on earth chance do you have with Randy & Rhonda Righttolife if you cross them trying to go moderate?

As much as I'm pro-choice, I can at least *understand* why people aren't. But not letting unmarried couples (meaning gays and lesbians basically) adopt is disgusting. Now they are fucking with a child's life who may end up in a foster home instead of a loving home. Fuck them.

Obama's victory speech was one of the best I've ever heard. That was amazing.

Anyone hear nader of fox? he asked if obama will be uncle sam or uncle tom. way to be that guy.

but what you fail to account for is the % of those that in your example voted for Martin who would have voted for that "new GOP" candidate

:+1::+1::+1:

CNN hasn't projected it, but some of the local Florida news websites have started to call the Florida Gay Marriage Ban as passed.

Florida and Arizona down, California to go.

I'm a little lost here, getting bogged down in looking at the future (or what's left of it).

What did Arizona end up doing (I don't even think I realized they had a gay marriage mention of some sort on the ballot).
And last I saw here on Cali I ended up confused as to which way Prop 8 was going (the whole Yes means No, No means Yes thing).

Arizona defined marriage as 1 man 1 woman. Not sure about civil unions or domestic partnerships. I didn't know they had a ballot measure for it either until tonight.

Florida too defined marriage as 1 man 1 woman. Not sure again on the implications of civil unions or domestic partnerships.

Nor do I know if marriages between gay couples have been going on in those states like they have been in California.

And in California, yes means to ban gay marriage. Only 32% reported so far there and it's at 53%.

What?

huh?

Thanks Sab, hard to keep track of everything simultaneously. I'd guess that the Cali one (since someone said SF was still outstanding) will be a tomorrow outcome at the earliest since absentees sound likely to come into play.

misunderstood and thought sab was for banning gay marriage - have deleted my incensed response and this elaboration of it

*scratches head*

What the hell gave you the idea I was for banning gay marriage?

As a fly on the wall, I'm guessing it was the "one to go" comment (that was you, right?). Mostly likely misinterpreted as you commenting positively on the outcomes instead of neutrally or negatively. I'm thinking you just meant it as mostly a numbering of the outcomes still in doubt rather than any editorial comment.

I dunno, the "Florida and Arizona down, California to go" comment.

Seemed like you were saying "two down, one to go" which is generally a positive-type comment.

yep. exactly. i shall retract and edit.

deleted and edited sabotai.

Because you said Az/Fl down, California to go.

Guess he took that to mean you were satisfied with the results in Arizona and Florida and just meant you needed California now.

snip from My Way News - Exit poll: Obama built win on women, minorities


I don't think there's a way to parse this out accurately but I'd love to know how many of the 9/10ths would have bothered to vote for McCain absent Palin (or equivalent).

okay everyone - clearly i misunderstood sabotai. Case closed, he's not a target of my vitriol clearly. And I'm going to sleep.

People are sure quick to unleash the Bigot or Racist tag around here sometimes. When in doubt, I at least give someone the benefit of the doubt and ask them to clarify rather than lay the hammer down...

DT and JimGA just agreed on something!

*head explodes*

Ah, ok. Yes, I just meant two decided, one still not.

I am completely against banning gay marriage (just for future reference. ;) )

I think I'm finally seeing why you're saying that Palin was important for the Republican base. I take it that McCain and another moderate would have never been able to encourage the base to even go out and bother to vote?

One more projected ballot measure. Michigan projected to pass it's amendment to allow stem cell research.

Yep. Michigan passed stem cell research and medical marijuana. I was a little surprised by both, though I've heard that the anti-medical marijuana people really fumbled their campaign and didn't mount any advertising effort until it was too late, so that one wasn't even close.

McCain squeezed out about every vote possible given the hand he was dealt. There is no way that any republican candidate could have beaten any democratic candidate in this election, with the possible exception of Dennis Kucinich.

C'mon, I deserve some love for this.

Fox News calls Indiana for Obama.

Well, in terms of the presidential race, all it would have probably changed is the margin of victory for Obama, not the eventual outcome. But the secondary effect may have eventually been more important. Do Chambliss (R-GA) and McConnell (R-KY) win their Senate races without Palin on the ticket? The margins seem to suggest at the very least that it could have made the difference simply by influencing Republican voter turnout.

funny stuff....McCain won my county by 2 votes out of 48,600ish

Depends upon how far you go with the definition of "the hand he was dealt".

The level of pro-McCain enthusiasm even among those who voted for him was pretty damning, so if you include that in his hand then yeah, this was about as good as it could get. But virtually anyone with an (R) beside their name running against Obama could have done the same IMO.

Tom Brokaw was on MSNBC saying he was thrilled with the outcome and once backstage was going to have a celebratory drink.

Ummmm...is Ted Stevens really going to be able to pull this out?

I disagree. Romney or Huckabee would have lost by larger margins. Giuliani probably would have made it closer, but there's no way that he could ever win the republican nomination in the first place.

Just in general terms, after looking at some of the various exit poll data, I wonder: is there any nation on earth where as many peculiar outcomes occur?

I mean, there's such a disconnect sometimes with how people vote on a ballot measure versus how they vote for national level offices. I see it on a large scale when I look at exit polls, I see it on an anecdotal level when I look at my parents & grandparents voting history.

Is every other country that votes as schizo as we can be?

I answer your question with a question.

Is it worth it to hand the country over to the Dems (essentially) for a decade or more if we come out with a stronger, better country? And to add to that, if that is the case and happens would you still be dead set against the Dems just because they didn't do things the way you wanted them done going in?

JiMG is an extreme example of this. It doesn't matter if/how much the country improves under Obama, it wasn't done his way so it still sucks. He not only won't give the guy a chance, he is ready to say it is the worst day in our history as a country. That is a stance I can't understand. I just wonder how many people who label themselves as strictly Dems/Reps are pretty much the same (though not as extreme and angry about it as Jon)? I have always felt it is most, at least for the core of those parties.

I think that it's indicative of most people actually having their own opinions and leanings on each issue rather than having one blanket opinion that covers all the issues. It just shows how diverse America is as a country.

There seems to be a legitimate disconnect somewhere here, let me take a quick stab at it. I'm running out of steam at this point so I'll boil it down without even trying to go into any nuances. I'll stipulate the ones that I believe you're able to fill in without them being spelled out, not trying to shortchange the answer, just trying to get to bed.

Bottom line: I want what I want, just like most voters. We all have different stuff we want & assign varying weight & priority to those things. The more of those things we get, the better we like it. But how is not giving me what I want "an improvement"? And how could often giving me the direct opposite of what I want "an improvement"? I mean, that seems like the most elementary of concepts.

If Obama suddenly decides to give me what I want, it's all good (although that would be one heck of a heel/face turn in wrestling parlance). In other words, perception of "improvement" is directly related to giving me what I'm looking for. How could it possibly be otherwise (for anybody)?

But what about those that are directly contradictory to each other? Just to pick one example, voting to restrict affirmative action and voting for people who advocate it? How does that make any sense?

On something like splitting a Pres/Cong vote, I can at least figure that you're shooting for gridlock. Not my preferred situation but at least I can get my head around how you're thinking. Some of the other contradictions though, not nearly so much.

Perhaps affirmative action is not the issue why that person if voting for that candidate. The voter may vote against affirmative action and still support someone who is for affirmative action but whose leanings on other issues coincide with that voter's leanings.

I've been thinking about this, too.

I understand what your point is I believe, and it did cross my mind during and after I posted that. At the same time, it kind of supports how I feel. You are never going to love the guy, or lets just say the Democrats, because they don't want all the things you want. When it comes down to it though you also know (as I have seen you post along these lines before) you (or anyone else) would never get exactly what they want from anyone in office (including hardline Republicans) unless that anyone was you as Dictator and Supreme Commander of the Universe. Even then you wouldn't be happy because you would end up fighting off coups. ;)

So because you will never get everything you want, you will never be happy. Even if the economy is riding high, wars and terrorism are not a worry, there is less poverty, compromises are made that help the energy problem across the country, jobs are created, the national debt is reduced, you will still want the other side out because even though those things got better, you still have high taxes on tobacco products and other more "minor" issues (not using minor to make them seem trivial, just we all have our own issues which we watch out for). You don't care if their way of doing things improved things for the whole country in many ways, and perhaps keeping them in there would keep things going on the right track in those areas, you would rather things be done your way even if your way may or may not screw those things up just so you can get more of the other issues taken care of how you would like them to be.

Not sure how well I am explaining here, getting tired and trying to finish some work still. Basically, even if they improved some things for you doing it their way there is no being happy with the compromise of some things getting better and others not, even though it is unrealistic to think you will ever get everything you want. So therefore you won't say "Hey, they did a pretty good job," you will just want them out even though it may risk those improvements going away.

I'm assuming this monster thread will die shortly, so I wanted to say congrats to President-Elect Barack Obama on running a great campaign and winning the Presidency. I am dissapointed only along party lines, but I hope we all recognize the symbolic importance this brings to our country. There are many nations that are historically "better" than us who have never elected a minority into the highest office of their land. So, well done Barack Obama, but well done America for allowing politics, (and not race) decide this election.

I'm starting to wonder, and if he indeed does then I wonder about something else: If he resigns is Alaska a state that would have the governor appoint his replacement? And if so could Palin appoint herself? And if she did, at what point could she make the appointment for the full term instead of temporarily until a special election (day one? 3 yrs + 1 day? something else?)

I just hope he keeps the promise of eliminating tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. I really hope he goes a little farther and adds tax breaks for companies that keep (and create) jobs here and penalties to companies that send jobs overseas.

I believe I read that in Alaska, if he resigned, it would go to a special election immediately, without anyone being appointed in between. Could be wrong though.

Some unbelievably close races as I wake up. Wow!

Well crap, that takes the comedy potential out of it. I was picture a scenario where the legislature appointed Palin in spite of her protests that she didn't want to go. Would have been a laugh riot I'm tellin' ya.

Certainly an interesting election night. It does appear that most of the trends that I had pointed out in previous posts did pan out for the most part. I said that the national vote would be much closer than the 6-7 point prediction by most polls on average. As of right now, my 3 point win by Obama prediction looks like it will be right on target. In regards to the battleground states, they were similarly very close as I had brought up in my posts. The electoral vote is a bit misleading as there were many state results that were very close. Even a turnout of 1% less Democrats as a whole could have produced a much different result. The one result that did surprise me was the Pennsylvania election. I think we'll find that the black vote in the urban areas along with the female vote gave Obama that huge cushion.

Obama supporters should enjoy the euphoria that comes from an election win. Hopefully this election will allow America as a whole to move past one more level of discrimination. I honestly think that may be the biggest positive thing that this Obama win does for this country, but even if it's the only thing, it's a good thing.

Where are you looking at, MBBF.com?

The sites I am looking at are showing close to a 6 point spread for Obama with many votes in California, Oregon, and Washington still uncounted. This will settle in the 6-7 point land.

Cartman, he is trying to spin the actual election results. Please get in here.

{shakes head}

CNN now has it up to a 5 point lead (was smaller when I checked earlier but you may be correct about the west coast voting) while FOX had it at 3-4 last I checked.

BTW........It appears Al Franken is behind by a few hundred votes with 99% of the vote in. Hopefully common sense will prevail there. Those 400K people that voted for the independent candidate may end up with buyer's remorse if Franken ends up winning.

Have to agree with Jon that a move to the left socially by the Republicans would do nothing but expand the Democrats' power. They are a big part of the Republican base, and to pretend otherwise is fooling yourself.

Could there be room for a third party that is fiscally conservative and socially moderate/liberal? Maybe. But more likely is that the religious right wins a battle for the GOP soul, and the GOP continues to take a beating in the 2010 mid-terms until they get this figured out.

The best thing that could happen for Republicans is that Obama turns into a crazed tax-and-spend liberal with a majority in both houses of Congress. If that happens, they really won't have to fight as hard internally, because the choice will be clear. But if Obama governs as moderate, from the center-left, it's going to be quite difficult for Republicans to present themselves as a clear choice without appealing to the religious right, which is a big turn-off for a lot of independents. It's quite the conundrum.

Anyone know what's going on in GA? I'm reading there are thousands of early ballots cast that were not counted. Can anyone confirm or deny?

If Obama struggles and the Democrats don't deliver on most of their promises, I'd say the climate is right for a Perot-like 3rd party candidate. Pick out a big businessman that would run the government like a business and put him on the ballot. People could very well buy into that. I'd personally like it because I could have a fiscal conservative candidate without the moral strings attached.

Franken trails Coleman in Minnesota by 762 votes out of 2.68 million cast. Wow.

Despite Fox calling Chambliss a little early, I do think he will hold on with about 50.2% of the vote to avoid a runoff.

I think Merkley is poised for a comeback win in Oregon, in looking over which counties still have not had their votes counted.

And Alaska... seriously, what the fuck?

All tolled, it looks like it will be 57-43 for the Democrats, if they want to continue to include Lieberman in their party for the votes sake. Right about where everyone thought it would be. Obama's rising tide couldn't quite lift the boat all the way to 60, but man was it close.

I know that everyone keeps saying that here and on tv and in the papers, but I just don't see how this is the case. My impression of the last three elections (2000, 2004, 2008) is that roughly 48% of the country will vote republican and roughly 48% of the country will vote Democrat regardless of how worthless or good the candidate either side offers up. The winner of the past few elections has been the party that got that middle 4-5% of voters to go to their side.

I understand that every other moderate is not exactly like I am in my beliefs, but the only reason I did not vote republican in this election is because I can not get on board their social agenda. I feel that I am a religious person, probably moreso than most on this board, however I temper that with my strong feelings that the government just shouldn't get involved in some things, some of which are the strong conservative social agendas that the religious right tries to push.

I honestly feel that many if not the majority of my fellow moderates are tired of the government getting involved where they shouldn't, are tired of too much government both fiscally and socially. That is reflected with how the country flip flops every few years in their votes for various national races. No one is ever satisfied any more with the job that the people in Washington are doing.

I honestly believe if the Republican party got rid of the religious right, dropped the social agenda from their platform, focused entirely on reducing government bloat, and removing the government from meddling in things they shouldn't be (both foreign and domestically), that there would be a stronger draw from the middle of the country to this party.

By pushing further right, you may get more ultra-conservatives to vote than otherwise before, but you also push the middle to the opposing camp. So you gain some votes, but they gain more. You (the republicans) need to work on realizing that you don't win the election by alienating the middle 5% of the country, you win by listening to their desires.

I'm not sure why anyone is surprised about that. Alaskans aren't voting for Ted Stevens. They're voting for the Republican Partly fully knowing that another election will take place right after the sentencing where they can vote for another Republican that isn't in trouble with the law. No one should be surprised by that.

You do that, and you lose the south. What was the only big part of the nation that went for McCain in this election? The South.

So, doing what you suggest would earn the GOP Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Utah every year. Nee-ha.

Lemme see here, yesterday's map on one browser tab, primary results on another tab. Assignment to Obama or McCain based CNN.com totals when I started marking these. Oddities in delegate totals due to various things, such as delegates being reallocated after voting, caucus procedures, etc. "Winning" primary candidate listed first based on CNN's designation of winner.

Obama states - 30
CA - Clinton 232/200 ... McCain 158/Romney 15
CO - Obama 45/23 ... Romney 43/McCain 2
CT - Obama 36/24 ... McCain 30
DE - Obama 14/8 ... McCain 18
DC - Obama 25/13 ... McCain 19
FL - Clinton 54/46/1 ... McCain 57
HI - Obama 21/8 ... McCain 20
IL - Obama 133/49 ... McCain 57/Romney 2
*IN - Clinton 42/41 ... **McCain 30
IA - Obama 35/17/4 ... Huckabee 17/Romney 12/McCain 4/Paul 2
ME - Obama 21/10 ... Romney 18/McCain 3
MD - Obama 55/39 ... McCain 37
MA - Clinton 66/51 ... Romney 22/McCain 18
MI - Clinton 38/36 ... Romney 0/McCain 26/Huckabee 4
MN - Obama 58/27 ... Romney 38/McCain 1
NV - Clinton 13/20 ... Romney 25/McCain 7/Paul 4/Huckabee 2
NH - Clinton 12/15/1 ... McCain 7/Romney 4/Huckabee 1
NJ - Clinton 71/55 ... McCain 52
NM - Clinton 20/17 ... **McCain 29
NY - Clinton 159/121 ... McCain 101
NC - Obama 78/51 ... **McCain 52/Huckabee 8/Paul 5
OH - Clinton 82/74 ... **McCain 86
OR - Obama 41/23 ... **McCain 25/Paul 4
PA - Clinton 101/80 ... **McCain 2(74)
RI - Clinton 21/10 ... **McCain 16/Huckabee 4
WA - Obama 61/31 ... **McCain 16/Huckabee 8/Paul 5
WI - Obama 53/34 ... McCain 31/Huckabee 6
VA - Obama 63/33 ... McCain 61
VT - Obama 14/7 ... **McCain 17
PR - Clinton 42/19 ... McCain 23
** indicates wins after Huckabee withdrawal

McCain states - 22
AL - Obama 29/28 ... Huckabee 26/McCain 22
AK - Obama 14/4 ... Romney 12/Huckabee 6/Paul 5/McCain 3
AZ - Clinton 35/31 ... McCain 53
AR - Clinton 38/8 ... Huckabee 32/Romney 1/McCain 1
GA - Obama 70/29 ... Huckabee 54/McCain 12/Romney 6
ID - Obama 19/3 ... **McCain 18/Paul 5
KS - Obama 30/10 ... Huckabee 36/2
KY - Clinton 40/16 ... **McCain 44
LA - Obama 39/26 ... Huckabee 0/McCain 47
MS - Obama 25/13 ... **McCain 38
*MO - Obama 46/41 ... McCain 58
MT - Obama 17/7 ... Romney 25
NE - Obama 22/8 ... **None (McCain beats Paul 87%/13% non-binding)
ND - Obama 15/5 ... Romney 8/McCain 7/Huckabee 5/Paul 5
OK - Clinton 25/21 ... McCain 35/Huckabee 6
SC - Obama 39/14 ... McCain 19/Huckabee 5
SD - Clinton 9/12 ... **McCain 27
TN - Clinton 46/35 ... Huckabee 24/McCain 22/Romney 9
TX - Clinton 79/75-Obama 39/28 ... **McCain 122/Huckabee 16
UT - Obama 17/11 ... Romney 36
WV - Clinton 23/12 ... Huckabee 18
WY - Obama 12/6 ... **Romney 2/McCain 5
** indicates wins after Huckabee withdrawal

Tightens to 571 votes over the past few minutes. Only 1 county, a heavily Democratic one, is still listed with any votes outstanding, and it is only about 1% of the county's vote outstanding.

So, how can you do a recount with electronic voting? "Aw, shit, Excel didn't have the Sum function all the way down the column! We've got it now."

I am suggesting that I don't buy that the south is suddenly going to be voting Democrat if you get rid of the religious right. I don't see the south as a social conservative, fiscally liberal area. I see them as a social conservative, fiscal conservative area. I am saying that I feel the south would still view the republican party as the lesser of two evils, but you would now have a much stronger base in any battleground state that consistantly flip flops.. Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, the East coast of Virginia, North Carolina and you might just possibly start getting some of the entire Northeast back in the way of house seats or such.

Which shows you how dumb the south is.

Strictly guessing here since I've been busy for the past hour or so (see post above), but it sounds like you might be referring to 40k-60k early/absentee ballots that haven't been counted yet.

Since the margin is less than 15,000 votes there's going to be a recount. Hopefully they can dig up a few more Franken votes.

Minnesotans have already disappointed enough by reelecting fundie McCarthyist Michelle Bachmann to the House.

Obama wins Indiana and North Carolina, a big wow from me there. I didn't think he had a chance in hell in Indiana, despite the tightening over the closing weeks of the election.

And Obama was never close in North Dakota or Arizona despite what the tightening in polls there suggested. I think the North Dakota polls were half-assed at best, while Arizona was maybe just showing a standard poll tightening of things towards the end that wasn't borne out by the results.

All in all, it seems the polls got most of it right. Virginia and North Carolina were considered close but ultimately went for Obama. Ohio was close, but also a lean Obama which is where it ended up. Pennsylvania was an 11 point margin, which is about where the polls had it all along. Missouri was a virtual tie towards the end with a tiny lean for McCain, and that's exactly where that one went.

I think Fivethirtyeight.com has proven itself with this election.

Martin-Chambliss Race Still Too Close To Call - Vote 2008 News Story - WSB Atlanta

The race between Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss and Democratic challenger Jim Martin remained too close to call early Wednesday morning, as Martin hoped to force a runoff.

With 98 percent of precincts reporting, Chambliss led Martin 51 percent to 46 percent. Both candidates worried that Libertarian Allen Buckley held roughly 3 percent, according to figures from the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office.

WSB-TV Channel 2 political analyst Matt Towery believes some counties have not reported ballots cast during the advance voting period.

"Something just doesn't add up," said Towery.

So, is this the thread for Democratic gloating? Or do we need to take it outside?

Because I am so damned happy I am going to be able to watch the news again, I don't know what I'm going to do with myself.

nah - we've been conversing and agreeing more and more lately (see my signature)


I guess I see MBBF's point, but still I find it disgusting. Talk about making yourself look bad.

In Georgia, Chambliss just dropped to 49.9% ... but there are still a number of precincts outstanding. I'm going to try to see if I can get a halfway decent read on what those might show. Still unclear to me is whether those are all absentee ballots (typical GOP lean in Georgia, at least prior to early voting which includes a portion as absentees) or if they may be early votes (which were skewing more heavily Dem.

It seems most of the outstanding early votes are from Fulton, Cobb, and Gwinnett Counties. Fulton is, obviously, Democratic. But Cobb and Gwinnett are heavily Republican.

If those are where most of the outstanding votes are left, it will be down to the wire to see who wins there depending on which county has the majority of outstanding votes to be counted.

Just so I am clear though, the numbers are set now where I can safely root for Saxby to lose and not give the Democrats too much senate power (60+) right? That would be ideal for me. Moderation in all things and all that :)

Rahm Emanuel is Obama's CoS:

Most Emailed News Stories

GA Sec. of State office is listing both Cobb & Gwinnett as completed.
I'm still working my way through the list (159 counties takes a while to sift through) but right now I'm thinking run off since Fulton has 3 precincts still outstanding and he's already down to 49.9 as it is.