a blowout? The Democratic Party won a majority of the state governorships and the U.S. House and Senate seats. For the first time in the history of the United States, no Democratic incumbent lost, nor did Republicans capture any open House, Senate, or Gubernatorial seat previously held by a Democrat.
2007-02-05 22:26:30 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The voters tossed out every available republican, and replaced them with democrats.
2007-02-05 22:33:25 · update #1
Not a single Democrat lost his or her seat. That's pretty impressive if you ask me.
It was a blowout IMO.
2007-02-05 23:03:29 · answer #1 · answered by ck4829 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As Elana said, it was more a vote against the Republicans than a vote for the Democrats. People are simply sick of Bush and his neo-conmen handlers.
While the Democrats have some momentum at the present time, they could very easily fritter it away in the next two years. For whatever reasons, the majority of Americans are simply NOT going to vote for Hillary Clinton or the black guy. If the Dems are going to put either of them on the ticket they might just as well hand the White House back to the Republicans.
Now is not the time for social experiments. The voters won't give either of those people a majority.
Just sayin'
2007-02-06 07:21:30 · answer #2 · answered by normanbormann 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, the victory in the Senate was pretty thin, but elsewhere, yeah, it
was a blowout.
Doesn't mean things won't change back in 2008. People were voting
against Bush and corruption. If those are the major issues in 2008, we'll
probably end up with an even more Democratic Senate and a Democratic
Presidency.
Republicans are going to spend a LOT of time trying to get off those issues.
2007-02-06 06:31:06 · answer #3 · answered by Elana 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
tch tch tch...you liberals never quit do you....a BLOWOUT???? lmfao. it was a razor thin..."mandate" ,moreover, what it WAS was a conjob on the american people..how would you figure a blowout considering most of the races were too close to all that mattered and the end result is if you didnt have installed a congressman with a brain hemorrhage you wouldve lost one of the houses. what happened is you succeeded in selling the american public a bill of goods. there isnt a quick fix to Iraq and the problem is that al qaeda will make the next stop here on our soil. thats not just my opinion, its also John Mccains and Robert Gates as well. As a survivior of wtc in Manhattan and also a proud american who has over twenty years working experience with the Middle eastern people I can say the election of a party so consumed with tax and spend by covering themseleves in cowardice and a cut and run strategy on a war is the most shameful thing ive seen in american politics as long as ive been alive. war is certainly not always popular or poltically correct, but as evidenced from the first hundred hours and John Edwards recent statements, those who use a ploy like Iraq to install tax and spend philosphy back in governent that hasnt worked since the sixties ought to be condemned.
a wise old man once said those who dont learn from history are condemed to repeat it and i for one dont want the extreme left wing 20 percent Carter inflation back...thanks but no.
2007-02-06 06:38:33 · answer #4 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Tom Delay's name was on the ballot before he resigned and ultimately decided to not run for re-election. Democrats argued that the Republican Party could not legally name another candidate. Shelley Sekula-Gibbs overwhelmingly won the special election (to serve the rest of Delay's term) but lost in the general election to Nick Lampson 51% to 43%.
This is my district and while I was waiting in line to vote they wouldn't let a lady take a piece of paper with her to the voting machine so she could remember how to spell Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. There were also several elderly people having problems figuring out the machines.
2007-02-06 06:34:28 · answer #5 · answered by Abu 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It was a Blowout.
The people showed a loss of confidence in the republican party.
2007-02-06 06:36:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Given the margains of support, I say it thin. The people voted for who offered them the biggest carrot.
History has shown the democratic party to be no better than any other.
Kennedy myths and facts show indeed Kennedy knew about Bay of pigs and approved it. Kennedy was fully aware of Vietnam war and approved of it. Kennedy stalled thoughout his entire first term on african-american issues.
Clinton used affairs to distract from Whitewater, weak gun laws, rising cost of medical care and rising number of HMOs leaving people to die.
2007-02-06 06:49:11 · answer #7 · answered by bright_neon 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'd say razor thin in the Senate but significant in the House. In any case, it was enough to set the neocons on this board to whining.
2007-02-06 06:37:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
51-49 isn't a blowout, and not every Republican was put out.
2007-02-06 06:42:20 · answer #9 · answered by kitty fresh & hissin' crew 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Looks like the Dem,s have been assimilated by the GOP
2007-02-06 06:33:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋