It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hillary Clinton won the 2014 midterms.......Huh?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Hello ATS,

Here's an article where the author says that even though the Republicans won last nights mid-term election, Hillary is the actual winner in the long-term.




But that map will be upended in 2016, when 23 of the 33 seats at stake will be held by Republicans. Six of them will be in states that Obama won in 2008 and 2012 (Illinois, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Wisconsin). Two will be in states Obama won in 2008 (Indiana, North Carolina). Two are held by senators who may be retiring (John McCain in Arizona, Chuck Grassley in Iowa). And two are held by senators who may be running for president, which means they can’t run for re-election (Marco Rubio in Florida, Rand Paul in Kentucky).

In other words, for every Senate seat that Republicans flipped in 2014, there’s one — or more — that’s likely to flip back to the Democrats in 2016. The chances that the GOP will still control the upper chamber of Congress after 2016 are slim.


More interesting points....




This means that Clinton, assuming she’s the nominee, will start out with 242 electoral votes in 2016; she’ll need only 28 of the remaining 183 tossups to win the election. To defeat her, the Republican candidate will basically have to run the table in the purple states — “not a game plan with a high probability of success,” according to Republican pollsters Glen Bolger and Neil Newhouse. Making matters worse is the fact that Republican senators will already be playing defense in several of these states, attracting additional Democratic attention and resources that will ultimately bolster the candidate at the top of the ticket as well.

The math is just as bad for Republicans — and just as good for Clinton. In 2012, Mitt Romney won 59 percent of white voters, a higher share than Ronald Reagan's in 1980 and George W. Bush's in 2004. But Romney still lost to Obama. Why? Because America’s minority electorate is growing every year. To hit 50.1 percent in 2016, the Republican nominee will have to win a whopping 64 percent of the white vote on Election Day — or significantly improve the party’s standing among nonwhite voters, especially Hispanics. Otherwise, he or she will lose just like Romney.


Wow. This is very...um....political. I see why the author came to his conclusions though. "In the long-term, Hillary wins...." What does ATS think?

news.yahoo.com...
edit on 5-11-2014 by lostbook because: word add




posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Turning a loss into a victory is what slimy politicians do.

The logic that Obama pulled states back then so they will again flies in the face of the losses yesterday.

Super Majority for the Repubs is the current trend when projecting to 2016. Nobody wanted Obama campaigning for them, and his own State went Red for governor.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   


"In the long-term, Hillary wins...." What does ATS think?


I think it would be really hard to look at her ugly mug for four years.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

the republicans better start trying to make themselves look attractive to various minority voters.. or attempt to suppress this advantage.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:27 PM
link   
There won't be two firsts for president in this country back to back, especially after the failure of the current first.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:29 PM
link   
It's not so much that Hillary won but rather that the Democrats are set up for a massive win in 2016. Remember 2010? It's going to be a repeat of that. This has to do with the 6 year cycle of the Senate and how the seats are currently positioned. Remember the backlash in 2010? Those same people are up in 2016... 1 Senate term later. Remember the landslide in 2004? 1 Senate term earlier. Throw in a huge House win this time around and the Republicans stand to lose big time come 2016. 27 of the 33 seats in 2016 up for grabs are Republican seats, so they're automatically on the defensive.

The Republicans going into office are aware of this too, I promise you that. Congress for the next two years, if they hope to not lose is going to have to be moderate and not create any controversial issues, and they can get away with that because quite frankly their base doesn't matter again until 2018. This next election will be about the platforms of presidential candidates rather than already passed legislation. No one wants to go into that with additional baggage.
edit on 5-11-2014 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-11-2014 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Sounds like they have 2 years to put or shut up

We all know what their track record is like for helping out minorities, women and the middle class. They must evolve or be left in the dust.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook


This means that Clinton, assuming she’s the nominee, will start out with 242 electoral votes in 2016;

Assuming the states flip back to democrat and assuming she's the nominee.

You know what they say about assuming, it makes an "Ass" of "U" and "Me" (ass/u/me).

Heres to hoping she won't get that chance.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   
As much of the media likes to push Hillary,she has too much baggage to be successful,it will be a dark horse for the Demos,I`m afraid.



posted on Nov, 5 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
It's not so much that Hillary won but rather that the Democrats are set up for a massive win in 2016. Remember 2010? It's going to be a repeat of that. This has to do with the 6 year cycle of the Senate and how the seats are currently positioned. Remember the backlash in 2010? Those same people are up in 2016... 1 Senate term later. Remember the landslide in 2004? 1 Senate term earlier. Throw in a huge House win this time around and the Republicans stand to lose big time come 2016. 27 of the 33 seats in 2016 up for grabs are Republican seats, so they're automatically on the defensive.

The Republicans going into office are aware of this too, I promise you that. Congress for the next two years, if they hope to not lose is going to have to be moderate and not create any controversial issues, and they can get away with that because quite frankly their base doesn't matter again until 2018. This next election will be about the platforms of presidential candidates rather than already passed legislation. No one wants to go into that with additional baggage.


Thanks for the insight into this matter.



posted on Nov, 6 2014 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I don't know how it will work out for Clinton, having a couple years of Republican Congressional control, but it will most likely swing things back towards Democrats in the House and Senate elections. Neither party holds control of both the House and Senate for long.




top topics



 
2

log in

join