I personally feel that many people voted AGAINST the Republicans - rather than FOR the Democrats.
No excuses here - the Republicans dug their own grave by alienating their base of conservatives. They didn't deserve to win.
Personally, it was a very tough choice for me - I rather like voting FOR a candidate rather than AGAINST a candidate because he/she seems the lesser of two evils.
What do you think - did we vote FOR our candidate or AGAINST the opposing candidate?
Do the results, for the most part, indicate support for the elected candidates or opposition to the present administration?
No bashing, please, I've already heard it all.
2006-11-08 13:48:43 · 30 answers · asked by LeAnne 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
An interesting point brought up on the evening news was that with the major wars - at the midterm election for each second term of the President (WW 1, WW 2, Korea, Viet Nam) whichever way Congress WAS - it went the other way and- this was the interesting part - it was by an average of 37 seats in the House and 7 seats in the Senate. Almost exactly what just happened. The analysis was that - when wars take too long - we want a change and vote the old, out - and the new, in - in hopes of getting the war over and done with.
2006-11-08 13:55:03 · answer #1 · answered by appalachian_panther 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Political celebration gadget is a comic tale. it relatively is basically there to have facets and carry money for President candidate advertising. all of us thinks that an element watches out for you greater. this is BULL Abraham Lincoln replaced right into a Republican and Confederates have been Democrats!!!! Hilarious good this is a comic tale. i'm Black, My race thinks that Democrats are for them Bull, some applicants, yet no longer the celebration. i do unlike Bush ( he's a Dummy) He has never been an A scholar, yet he have been given into YALE ( Daddy) have been given him there. I nevertheless understand he particularly is attempting to bigger usa. i do no longer accept as true with 40% of what he does, yet yet another president will come to alter that in the time of four years SO. If Kerry marketing campaign replaced into greater suitable than "i'm no longer George W. Bush" than i might have voted for him. Rage against device suggested It maximum suitable. " there is a few events right here, yet they're all bought OUT" those events are for the particularly rich. common each and every 3 hundred and sixty 5 days, artwork, goto to college, greater suitable your self and shop money because of the fact those events are not going to alter something.
2016-10-15 13:31:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It went both ways and the Republicans did alienated their
conservative base and the weird thing is that most of the democrats that were voted into office are conservatives.
I vote for whoever I think is the most intelligent on the issues of this country and not the party.
2006-11-08 13:57:06 · answer #3 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It was, and in my opinion, always been a vote AGAINST a political party. I say that because we only have a two party system. The Republicans dug a hole for themselves not only because of Iraq, but they continuously hampered the middle class - both Democrats and Republicans. Job loss, tax cuts for the wealthy, rising health care cost, and watching CEO's giving themselves a 300% raise while workers get 1%. They had enough of what what going on over the past 6 years.
2006-11-08 14:02:37 · answer #4 · answered by linus_van_pelt68 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
For weeks on yahoo answers we have seen the Democrats answers about how they Hate Bush, Hate Republicans not about what their party stands for. Leaving the polling place yesterday I even heard them say I voted against all the Republicans I just voted a straight ticket.
2006-11-08 13:59:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Many people voted against the Republicans due to the unremitting "time for a change" hype from the Left, even though the Democrats have been ominously reluctant to express exactly which changes they plan on implimenting. But this sort of thing historically happens in a 6th-year election as people who are getting tired of the sitting president's policies express their dissatisfaction by voting out governers, senators & congress of the same party.
Somehow, I seriously doubt the Democrat's changes will be for the better...
2006-11-08 13:56:08 · answer #6 · answered by My Evil Twin 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I think it was a vote against the incumbents. If the Dems had been in power it would have hit them- they just had good timing this time
I don't buy that they would not have gotten us into the war- all of the powerful democrats were for the invasion of Iraq, as was Kerry. We would have been in the same mess there either way.
2006-11-08 13:59:29 · answer #7 · answered by castlekeepr 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm inclined to believe that it was a vote against Bush and the Republican controlled Congress. Notice that people didn't really stand up and say "I'm voting for so-and-so Democrat because they're going to do this and that", but rather, they said "I'm voting for so-and-so Democrat because I'm tired of the direction we're going with Bush and the Republicans".
Just my opinion, of course. I may be wrong, but I try not to make a habit of it.
2006-11-08 13:52:01 · answer #8 · answered by Chris S 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think they voted against Republicans.
ABC did a exit poll in the state where Lincoln Chafee(REP) was an incumbent and had a 62% approval rating. He lost to a Dem and people thought he was doing a good job!
2006-11-08 13:53:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
You are correct. This was much more a vote AGAINST the current crop of Republicans in Washington and around the country than it was a vote FOR the Democrats.
People may have voted FOR change, but I don't think many of them would think the Democrats and their agenda are the change they voted for.
2006-11-08 13:51:56 · answer #10 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋