Dems have BIG Advantage in 2008!




I took a look at the Senators whose terms end at the end of 2007. Just by the numbers the GOP must be having Heartburn. There are 34 Senate seats up for election—33 in regular elections and one special election to fill out a term in Wyoming. The GOP has 22 (21 regular and one special election) members and the Democrats 12. “OUCH”

There is an outstanding Web site that provides in-depth information about the Senate election in 2008. That sight is:

http://en.wikipendia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2008


After reading this information I believe the GOP will be in a REAL FUNK because they appear to be in BIG trouble in 2008! If the Democrats can elect a President all they need is the 60 Senate Votes to be able to pass the new agenda that most Americans appear to want.
15,229 views 53 replies
Reply #2 Top
here's my prediction, we aren't going to let the senate get loaded down to one side or the other. that truly doesn't serve what most americans want.

but you have a little time to drool over the idea i guess.
Reply #3 Top
Dream On Bushies-- Dream ON!
Reply #4 Top
If the Democrats can elect a President all they need is the 60 Senate Votes to be able to pass the new agenda that most Americans appear to want.


Where do you get this nonsense that democrats will do what the "majority" want?  I know you are a democrat supporter and apologist, but stop speaking for what American "wants".


Reply #5 Top
gene you are as about a moderate republican as I am a liberal Democrat, stop the lying about who you are. We all see through this charade that you think you are being so clever about. Why can't you just say who you really are? Many of us Republicans are very unhappy about the job Bush is doing, but I don't see a single republican rooting for a complete democrat takeover.

Never in my entire life have I ever seen a man so hate filled as you gene, so obsessed, so fixated on the destruction of one man, after all in the end that's all Bush is a man with a job that is failing to do it well, but according to you Bush is the devil incarnate, not fit to live, let alone lead a nation. Maybe it's time for you to just be truthful, if you know how to be truthful and just come out of the closet and shout to the world , I am a DEMOCRAT AND PROUD OF IT!.
Reply #6 Top
“Where do you get this nonsense that democrats will do what the "majority" want? “

The Majority want Health Care

They want Social Security and Medicare benefits paid as promised.

They want our ports and borders protected

They want us OUT of the fighting in Iraq.

They want us less dependent on foreign oil.

They want improved education at both the grade level and in college

They are willing to increase taxes on the wealthy to where they were under Clinton.

They want to STOP good paying jobs from leaving our country.

ALL these issues are supported by the Democrats and opposed by the GOP.

The Amnesty for illegal aliens is one area where the Dems and the general public are NOT in agreement!

Reply #7 Top
The Majority want Health Care


Hmm, you mean the poor majority who can't afford it and don't have decent jobs that provide it. Funny, if I'm not wrong some of those jobs that some politicians claim Americans won't do that illegals do probably offer health care and about the same salary as the jobs these people without health care get. But they want free health care too. Free seems to be a common word in Americans these day, why work for anything when idiots like Col are willing to give it to you for free.

They want Social Security and Medicare benefits paid as promised.


Duh! I want it too, I did pay for it after all. That does not make me a Democrat you moron.

They want our ports and borders protected


So you think the Dems can get that done? How exactly when they wanted that Amnesty bill almost as mush as Bush did if not more? Do you really think they would let go such a population as a bunch of poor illegals turned legal that will vote for their hero's the Democrats? You're only fooling yourself.

They want us OUT of the fighting in Iraq.


Most want us to finish our jobs and go home. Not give up, surrender and leave the Iraqi's to their own fate. This would go against everything this country was built on other wise we might as well level the entire country and be done with this war. It would be the same thing as leaving with our tails between our legs.

They want us less dependent on foreign oil.


I seriously doubt Dems are more likely to change that then Reps are considering that out countries economy is still dependent on oil. They couldn't change this if they had 15 years of control in the House, Senate, and the White House. You're delusional.

They want improved education at both the grade level and in college


I will agree with this, but then again smart Americans means Americans making more money and that would mean no poor and therefor no minority vote for the Dems so this will actually backfire on them.

They are willing to increase taxes on the wealthy to where they were under Clinton.


LOL, of course. Poor and most Middle class people don't like rich people. What they don't get is that rich people are the ones who provide them the jobs they have and the paychecks they get for doing the work.

They want to STOP good paying jobs from leaving our country.


Funny considering that the only reason we don't export farming is because these farmers could not buy land in other countries and grow food with cheap labor just like all these orther jobs that go over seas so if Americans don't want to do the jobs illegals do cause they don't pay good, what makes them think they want the overseas jobs that don't pay good either. Just ask those in other countries how much they get paid. I bet they do not get paid $20 of $25 an hour. What a fool.

The Dems have done nothing since they took over. Remember how happy you and the rest of the Dems were when they won? Congress has the worst performance rate ever and they criticized Bush for having the worst ever. If anything they have lost the one chance they had to take over 100% (BTW it was you who said no single party should be in control of all the houses at once, yet that is exactly what you want, Hypocrite) and only McCain is more idiotic than the Democratic Presidential candidates .
Reply #8 Top
Hmm, you mean the poor majority who can't afford it and don't have decent jobs that provide it. 46 Million People have no health insurance.


“Duh! I want it too; I did pay for it after all. That does not make me a Democrat you moron.”

That is NOT what the conservative’s want- They just want to cut the benefits rather then pay the cost. The Bush change to Social Security actually made it more impossible to pay the benefits to the Boomers. His plan addresses the POSSIBLE help for the X and Y generations and made the current issue worse. Even the Social Security trustee's admitted the private accounts did not address the problem of paying the Boomer benefits. After all that, Bush is still pushing for his plan to create private accounts within Social Security and create more Billions in profits for brokers and the people who would manage these accounts while adding TRILLIONS to the imbalance in the Social Security System and its ability to pay the promised benefits. The Democrats want to KEEP the system as is and provide the added money to pay the benefits!

“I will agree with this, but then again smart Americans means Americans making more money and that would mean no poor and therefore no minority vote for the Dems so this will actually backfire on them.”

When you see what Bush and the GOP did to the cost of the Pell loans you know that college is not important unless you are wealthy and can afford to pay the cost.


, of course. Poor and most Middle class people don't like rich people.”

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LIKE OR DISLIKE. it HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THE WEALTHY GOT THE big bucks FROM BUSH AND HIS TAX CUTS AND CAN AFFORD TO PAY MORE TO HELP BALANCE THE BUDGET AND PAY FOR THINGS WE need!
Reply #9 Top
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LIKE OR DISLIKE. it HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THE WEALTHY GOT THE big bucks FROM BUSH AND HIS TAX CUTS AND CAN AFFORD TO PAY MORE TO HELP BALANCE THE BUDGET AND PAY FOR THINGS WE need!


Bush doesn't make people rich, that is achieved on their own, something you democrats don't seem to like.  Here you go again telling people what they should do with "their" money because you think they make too much.  People should support themselves and not rely on "the rich" to pay it for them.  That's what's really wrong with this country.


Reply #10 Top
The Majority want Health Care --actually, no, socialized medicine has been roundly REJECTED by the majority when it has been made an issue. Remember when the dems had the presidency and the Congress? That's why it didn't get passed!

They want Social Security and Medicare benefits paid as promised.--which is why they've raised the retirement and proposed raising it further, BREAKING the promise they made with my generation and beyond.

They want our ports and borders protected--and have proposed NO legislation to that effect.

They want us OUT of the fighting in Iraq.--which is why Democrat leaders have not only supported the war, but have been the ONLY party to suggest reinstating the draft!

They want us less dependent on foreign oil.--by refusing to allow us to drill or build new refineries in America?

They want improved education at both the grade level and in college --ahh, yes...the party of ebonics comes to speak to us about education!

They are willing to increase taxes on the wealthy to where they were under Clinton --only those who are too stupid to realize it is the CONSUMER who will ultimately foot the bill!

Reply #11 Top
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LIKE OR DISLIKE. it HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THE WEALTHY GOT THE big bucks FROM BUSH AND HIS TAX CUTS AND CAN AFFORD TO PAY MORE TO HELP BALANCE THE BUDGET AND PAY FOR THINGS WE need!


Col

Burger King, McDonalds, KFC and other places like these are Billion and million dollar companies. Do you think they should pay their employees more since they can afford it? I mean do you think a burger flipper deserves, what, $10 an hour? Do you think a cashier deserves $12 an hour? These fast food places can afford the extra dollars, why not make them pay more?

I would like to know, considering that if I was rich I already spend more than the average person who is not rich because that is what rich people do, why should I have to pay more just because I have more? I deserve to pay the same amount for a Whopper as anyone else, I deserve to pay for a house for the same price as someone who has less money than me and I deserve to pay just as much of a percent in taxes as everyone else does. (this if I was rich of course)
Reply #12 Top
"Bush doesn't make people rich, that is achieved on their own,”

Under the Bush tax policy the rich keep more of their wealth and it compounds that much faster. The point I made is the Rich have done far better in the amount of money they have saved in taxes and can afford to pay more!
Reply #13 Top
Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Tuesday, July 17, 2007
The Majority want Health Care --actually, no, socialized medicine has been roundly REJECTED by the majority when it has been made an issue. Remember when the dems had the presidency and the Congress? That's why it didn't get passed!

I did not say socialized medicine. The issue is the 46 Million with NO Health Insurance. The Bush plan of giving tax credits to pay for private insurance only solved the problem for 3 of the 46 million-- SOME SOLUTION!
Reply #14 Top
"They want us OUT of the fighting in Iraq.--which is why Democrat leaders have not only supported the war, but have been the ONLY party to suggest reinstating the draft! "

Given the NIE and the growing danger, we may have to reinstate some sort of a draft. The Army failed to meet their recruiting goals for the past two months and we are lowering the standards and increasing the incentives and still have not met the needs. To increase the military may not be possible with just volunteers.
Reply #15 Top
“They want us less dependent on foreign oil.--by refusing to allow us to drill or build new refineries in America?”

That is another NON answer from Bush. It would take 10 years and the amount of oil that is estimated in less then 3% of our needs. We would be better off with increasing MPG by) ONE mile then all the oil in Alaska. Bush has not allowed the Cafe Standards to be updated and applied to SUV's and Trucks.

If the oil companies wanted to build more refineries, they could have passed the legislation during the first 6 years of Bush!
Reply #16 Top
They are willing to increase taxes on the wealthy to where they were under Clinton --only those who are too stupid to realize it is the CONSUMER who will ultimately foot the bill! BULL S**T
Reply #17 Top
The issue is the 46 Million with NO Health Insurance.


You mean the 46 million who most likely chose not to educate themselves to get better jobs with health care, you mean the 46 million who mostly are on welfare, you mean the 46 million who most are just plain lazy. You mean 46 million out of 300 million Americans, right? And you want me to give them more than what we already give? No wait, you want the rich people to pick up the tab. Yes, I create a business, I eventually become a million thru my own sweat and now that I have millions I should be responsible for providing health care, money, food and transportation for all those lazy ass, uneducated, selfish, drug using, alcoholic Americans, you know, the majority of the 46 million you speak of. Because I highly doubt that we have 46 million handi-cap people in this country without health care. Then we would really be the cruelest nation in the world. Get a education and then get a good job you bunch of lazy asses.


Given the NIE and the growing danger, we may have to reinstate some sort of a draft. The Army failed to meet their recruiting goals for the past two months and we are lowering the standards and increasing the incentives and still have not met the needs. To increase the military may not be possible with just volunteers.


Oh so now we need a draft so that we can send more soldiers to fight a war you say can not be won? And you are still relying on a documents that actually says mostly the opposite of what you claim it does. What a genius.

That is another NON answer from Bush. It would take 10 years and the amount of oil that is estimated in less then 3% of our needs. We would be better off with increasing MPG by) ONE mile then all the oil in Alaska. Bush has not allowed the Cafe Standards to be updated and applied to SUV's and Trucks.


LOL, you really are stupid. What do you think would happen if they raised the MPG? That would be applied to new cars and would take years before we see the differences which probably wouldn't matter cause we would still be dependent on oil. And with all the used vehicles, because according to you there are a lot of poor people and the economy is not doing too good, on the streets the CAFE Standards would make no difference cause it would only affect new cars.

You're a funny guy Col, you don't think that helping 3 million out of 46 million is any progress at all but are willing to settle for a few cars on the streets with a better MPG since not every car in the country is bought brand new everyday.
Reply #18 Top
“Oh so now we need a draft so that we can send more soldiers to fight a war you say can not be won?”

The war that can not be won is the Civil War in Iraq where the VAST majority of our military are fighting. We had success in Afghanistan until we diverted our efforts into Iraq where al-Qaeda was not a problem. Bush points to al-Qaeda operating in Iraq now- that is because our invasion allowed them to set up operations in Iraq. Again even if we eliminated al-Qaeda from Iraq, they have reestablished their operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan according the NIR released yesterday. The problem is the way Bush has chosen to fight the War on terrorism is wrong. We committed the majority of our force to battle against the WRONG group of Moslems!
Reply #19 Top
, you really are stupid. What do you think would happen if they raised the MPG? That would be applied to new cars and would take years before we see the differences which probably wouldn't matter because we would still be dependent on oil.”

It is a step that should be taken to reduce our dependence on oil and at the same time we need to move ahead with alternate propulsion systems for our cars. If Bush had done this 5 years ago we would have millions of cars on the road using LESS gasoline! You the IDIOT!

We need to move foreword with Hydrogen and electric powered cars. We need to provide more power generation that does not use oil. We need to expand natural gas exploration that is controlled by the U.S. Bush has done NONE of these things. Some OIL men we elected. Their idea of helping the energy needs are to give BIG OIL $12 Billion in tax breaks. The original plan Cheney came up with in 2002 would have given Big Oil $60 Billion.

Here is WHY your BS about higher taxes on the wealthy harming the average person is not true-- In the 1990's we had the higher tax rates for the wealthy and these was NO evidence that the low and middle income Americans were harmed. In fact the after inflation disposable income of the poor and average workers what higher then today. ONLY the wealthy are better off under Bush! Your argument is the same old lame smoke screen the rich put up to try and stop from paying higher taxes.
Reply #20 Top
We need to move foreword with Hydrogen and electric powered cars. We need to provide more power generation that does not use oil. We need to expand natural gas exploration that is controlled by the U.S. Bush has done NONE of these things. Some OIL men we elected. Their idea of helping the energy needs are to give BIG OIL $12 Billion in tax breaks. The original plan Cheney came up with in 2002 would have given Big Oil $60 Billion.


"YOU'RE" the idiot! Where do you think the electricity comes from to recharge the cars OR to create the hydrogen fuel? Hydrogen is created by the electrolysis method which uses electricity. And "most" electricity in the USA is created by burning hydro-carbon fuels. Which means OIL!

We already "have" an alternative method. Tell the greenies and the dems to pull their collective thumbs out of their butts, and let build more nuclear plants! And before you bother to run you yap as per usual....the USA hasn't been allowed to build "any" new plants for over 20 years.
Reply #21 Top
ONLY the wealthy are better off under Bush! Your argument is the same old lame smoke screen the rich put up to try and stop from paying higher taxes.


Many people are much better off than in the 90's.  The government doesn't create your success, the individual does, which is something democrats like yourself don't want.  You want government to mandate how much you make and you are a clear advocate of class warfare.


Reply #22 Top
It is a step that should be taken to reduce our dependence on oil and at the same time we need to move ahead with alternate propulsion systems for our cars. If Bush had done this 5 years ago we would have millions of cars on the road using LESS gasoline! You the IDIOT!


So was the plan that would have given health care benefits to 3 million out of 46 million people who don't have health care benefits. But what was your response to this?

The Bush plan of giving tax credits to pay for private insurance only solved the problem for 3 of the 46 million-- SOME SOLUTION!


Some solution, that's what you said. You would rather have all 46 million without health care than to use a plan that could have given help to a part of them for starters. Better to have 46 million with no health care than to start off with a few right? All or nothing. But you don't apply that to our dependency of oil. That we can start small and work our way up right? And you call me an idiot.
Reply #23 Top
"YOU'RE" the idiot! Where do you think the electricity comes from to recharge the cars OR to create the hydrogen fuel? Hydrogen is created by the electrolysis method which uses electricity. And "most" electricity in the USA is created by burning hydro-carbon fuels. Which means OIL!”

You are truly DUMB! This is what I said: “We need to provide more power generation that does not use oil.” Drmiler - You are a STUPID ASS!!!!!!!!! Go back to sleep!
Reply #24 Top
“Many people are much better off than in the 90's.”

That is NOT true. People at the top of the economic ladder are the people that are better off. The salaries of the low income workers have not changed and they have to deal with higher Food, Energy and health costs. The After Tax and after inflation disposable income of Most middle income working families is lower. Wealth distribution has shifted to the higher income people. Personal debt is at an all time high. Mortgage foreclosures are becoming a major issue and they all are adversely impacting the low and middle income Americans. The average equity that middle income families have in their homes has dropped. Home values, the largest asset for middle Americans has fallen. The net worth of the top 10 % has grown faster then in almost any other period. The Bush tax policies and economic policies are adding to class warfare by taking money from low and middle income working families and shifting it to the top 10%. 80% of the Bush tax cuts have gone to the top 10% of Americans.
Reply #25 Top
GOP Senators that need to be removed in November 2008. These are the members of the Senate that voted to continue KILLING our military in the Civil War in Iraq:

Jeff Sessions – Alabama
Ted Stevens – Alaska
Wayne Allard – Colorado
Saxby Chambliss – George
Larry Craig – Idaho
Par Roberts – Kansas
Mitch Mc Connell – Kentucky
Norm Coleman – Minnesota
Thad Cochran – Mississippi
John Sununu – New Hampshire
Pete Domenici – New Mexico
Elizabeth Dole – N. Carolina
Jim Inhofe – Oklahoma
Gordon Smith – Oregon
Lindsey Graham – S. Carolina
Lamar Alexander – Tennessee
John Cornyn – Texas
John Warner – Virginia
Mike Enzi – Wyoming
John Barrasso – Wyoming ( Special Election)