A banal US election statistic

Independent UKIP · 08-11-2006, 12:04 AM

I randomly noticed that not all House of Representative seats are contested so being a very amateur psephologist I had a look at just how many of those there are.

For some reason websites don't seem to agree on who is and who is not a candidate nor what party they are standing for. But I am fairly certain that before the votes are counted there are 56 out of 435 House seats already decided plus one Senate seat.

The Indiana Senate seat held by a Republican is not being contested by the Democrats and is opposed by a Libertarian and 2 write-in candidates. Go Libertarian party says I!

In the House of Representatives there are 10 Repbublican candidates and. amazingly to me, 46 Democrat candidates not opposed by the other major party. That is over 10% of the House already near certain Democrats before any votes are counted. More than half those Democrats are totally unopposed.

I hope the Democrats reallocated their resources to take advantage of that notional advantage in order to try to take control of the Senate.

Britannist · 08-11-2006, 04:23 AM

Dick Morris, who took part in the UKIP 2004 EU Election campaign (working as strategist) was interviewed on BBC 2 Television Newsnight last night (7.11.2006) Of course the pro-EU BBC never introduced him as the former UKIP election strategist, but I think they may have said that he used to advise America's President 'Bill' Clinton.

Mr. Morris forecast that Hilary Clinton would hold her seat (which she has) and that she would go on to be elected as America's next President (a bold prediction in view of the fact that 40% of Americans - according to opinion polls - don't like her one bit even before she's announced she's standing).

There's also the 'Arnie' factor which Mr. Morris may have forgotten about (i.e. the possibility of Republican and former actor Arnold Schwarzanegger standing as a Presidential candidate in the same election in 2008 as leftist Hilary Clinton).

One thing which I have noticed in the American mid-term election coverage over the last few hours is that some states are holding mini-referendums on various matters (mostly on what could be described as 'moral' issues).

So - in parts of the USA people can vote on the status of marriage (as one electoral district of America did yesterday), but we here in the UK can't even vote to either IN or OUT of a Franco-German Superstate (the EU) which politicians have illegally passed British sovereign powers to.

Britannist · 08-11-2006, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Independent UKIP

I hope the Democrats reallocated their resources to take advantage of that notional advantage in order to try to take control of the Senate.

There are more pro-British people in the Republican Party than there are in the Democrat Party.

The Democrats are, unfortunately, making some gains (as is expected of an opposition party in the mid-term) - but, as Dick Morris said on BBC 2 Television's Newsnight (even before the polls closed in America) - the Democrats would not have a 'big night' in the mid-term elections but a 'smaller big night'.

It looks as if Mr. Morris was right.

The Republicans (the party of President Bush) have lost control of the House of Representatives to the Democrat Party (ending 12 years of Republican control). The Democrats have 210 seats and are sure to win 8 more they need for a majority.

Republican Arnold Schwarzanegger was re-elected in the normally pro-Democrat Party state of California.

Joe Lieberman (the unsuccessful former 'running mate' of Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 American Presidential election) was convincingly re-elected as an independent (having been de-selected by the Democrats for being pro-Iraq 'war'). I'm not in favour of UK troops being inside Iraq, but what the Americans do is a matter for them. The Democrats were foolish to drop the popular Joe Lieberman as a candidate over Iraq - and it serves them right that they lost and he won as an Independent. They may now have to rely on Mr. Lieberman for his vote if he holds the balance of power.

* The AFP news agency said at 4.56 am on 8.11.2006 that the White House confirmed that the House of Representatives had been won by the leftist Democrat Party.

harryaldridge · 08-11-2006, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Britannist

There's also the 'Arnie' factor which Mr. Morris may have forgotten about (i.e. the possibility of Republican and former actor Arnold Schwarzanegger standing as a Presidential candidate in the same election in 2008 as leftist Hilary Clinton).

I don;t think it is possible for a person not born in the USA to become president. Not unless the constitution is changed.

mkpdavies · 08-11-2006, 11:13 AM

They are working on it. Arnie says he wants to be a dictator and his Dad was in the SS, so he should make a fine president. :shock:

Republicans and Democrats, you couldn't put a fag paper between them.

This whole left right puppet show is a sham.

Britannist · 08-11-2006, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

They are working on it. Arnie says he wants to be a dictator and his Dad was in the SS, so he should make a fine president. :shock:

Republicans and Democrats, you couldn't put a fag paper between them.

This whole left right puppet show is a sham.

I'm a fan of Arnie, but most people I talk politics with don't like him.

I like his 'Terminator' films, too. Very professional and very well made.

If the Democrats try to block legislation facilitating a law allowing someone born outside the USA to stand for President (in order to to stop Arnold standing) they are likely to cause themselves a lot of damage. It would actually help Arnold, because it would show the Democrats are scared of him (which they are).

He is too liberal for me on abortion (I am strictly against) but he has charisma, is not a lefty and has proved he can win California (the state with the biggest block of votes in a Presidential contest). Anyone who can win California (as Republican the Late Ronald Reagan was able to do) is in a strong position politically in the USA.

Tom Wilde · 08-11-2006, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Independent UKIP

The Indiana Senate seat held by a Republican is not being contested by the Democrats and is opposed by a Libertarian and 2 write-in candidates. Go Libertarian party says I!

If you don't want to know the result, look away now:

http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5647403

Quote:

Senator Richard Lugar cruised to his sixth term as Indiana's senior Republican senator Tuesday night.

The Democrats did not run a candidate against Lugar. Libertarian Steve Osborn got 13 percent of the vote.

13 percent - not bad, all things considered.

Independent UKIP · 09-11-2006, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Wilde

Quote:

Senator Richard Lugar cruised to his sixth term as Indiana's senior Republican senator Tuesday night.

The Democrats did not run a candidate against Lugar. Libertarian Steve Osborn got 13 percent of the vote.

13 percent - not bad, all things considered.

I wouldn't have expected much more than 13% either. From the Libertarian Party website (which is very far from comprehensive on their own election results) their top House of Representatives result was 26% against the Republicans in Arizona district 6. There were various similar results at State House/Senate level eg 26.3% for an Idaho State House Representative.

http://www.lp.org/media/article_438.shtml

Quote:

Texas Libertarians Make Major Gains, Break Records

(AUSTIN, TEXAS) The Libertarian Party of Texas (LPT) showed
major improvement in the 2006 general election, relative to its
performance in previous years.

The party had 168 candidates on the ballot, its highest count ever.

By getting more than 5% in at least one statewide race, the LPT is
automatically qualified for ballot access in 2008.

Overall trends:

In 2002, Libertarian candidates in a three-way race for U.S. House
received an average of 1.6% of the vote. In 2004, they received an
average of 1.7%. In 2006, they received an average of 2.6%. (Note,
"three-way" means a Libertarian running against a Republican and a
Democrat, with no other candidates in the race.)

In 2002, Libertarian candidates in a two-way race for U.S. House
received an average of 8.8% of the vote. In 2004, they received an
average of 6.9%. In 2006, they received an average of 17.0%.

In 2002, Libertarian candidates in a three-way race for Texas House
received an average of 2.4% of the vote. In 2004, they received an
average of 2.7%. In 2006, they received an average of 3.6%.

In 2002, Libertarian candidates in a two-way race for Texas House
received an average of 10.3% of the vote. In 2004, they received an
average of 9.7%. In 2006, they received an average of 16.0%.

LPT Executive Director Wes Benedict said, "The results show that voters
are no longer afraid to vote Libertarian. More and more voters know who we are and what we stand for."

In this 2006 election, 22 Libertarian candidates for federal and state
offices received over 20% of the vote. The last time Libertarian
candidates for federal or state offices earned more than 20% of the vote was in 1992: two Libertarians broke the threshold that year.

More detailed info available by clicking the link. They also seem to have had record results in Georgia and Wyoming. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they have done better than before in a great many other States.

Britannist · 10-11-2006, 01:29 AM

Michael Portillo, the former Conservative Defence Secretary and MP, said on ‘This Week’ on BBC 1 Television on 10.11.2006 at 0003 hours “The Democrats have moved to the left since Clinton (was President). I think its looking good for the Republicans to win the 2008 American Presidential Election.”

08-11-2006, 12:04 AM	#1 (permalink)
Independent UKIP Uber Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 2,406	A banal US election statistic I randomly noticed that not all House of Representative seats are contested so being a very amateur psephologist I had a look at just how many of those there are. For some reason websites don't seem to agree on who is and who is not a candidate nor what party they are standing for. But I am fairly certain that before the votes are counted there are 56 out of 435 House seats already decided plus one Senate seat. The Indiana Senate seat held by a Republican is not being contested by the Democrats and is opposed by a Libertarian and 2 write-in candidates. Go Libertarian party says I! In the House of Representatives there are 10 Repbublican candidates and. amazingly to me, 46 Democrat candidates not opposed by the other major party. That is over 10% of the House already near certain Democrats before any votes are counted. More than half those Democrats are totally unopposed. I hope the Democrats reallocated their resources to take advantage of that notional advantage in order to try to take control of the Senate.

08-11-2006, 04:23 AM	#2 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	America holds mini-referendums Dick Morris, who took part in the UKIP 2004 EU Election campaign (working as strategist) was interviewed on BBC 2 Television Newsnight last night (7.11.2006) Of course the pro-EU BBC never introduced him as the former UKIP election strategist, but I think they may have said that he used to advise America's President 'Bill' Clinton. Mr. Morris forecast that Hilary Clinton would hold her seat (which she has) and that she would go on to be elected as America's next President (a bold prediction in view of the fact that 40% of Americans - according to opinion polls - don't like her one bit even before she's announced she's standing). There's also the 'Arnie' factor which Mr. Morris may have forgotten about (i.e. the possibility of Republican and former actor Arnold Schwarzanegger standing as a Presidential candidate in the same election in 2008 as leftist Hilary Clinton). One thing which I have noticed in the American mid-term election coverage over the last few hours is that some states are holding mini-referendums on various matters (mostly on what could be described as 'moral' issues). So - in parts of the USA people can vote on the status of marriage (as one electoral district of America did yesterday), but we here in the UK can't even vote to either IN or OUT of a Franco-German Superstate (the EU) which politicians have illegally passed British sovereign powers to.

08-11-2006, 11:13 AM	#5 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,841 Party: Libertarian Party	They are working on it. Arnie says he wants to be a dictator and his Dad was in the SS, so he should make a fine president. :shock: Republicans and Democrats, you couldn't put a fag paper between them. This whole left right puppet show is a sham. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

10-11-2006, 01:29 AM	#9 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	Republicans likely to retain USA Presidency says Portillo Michael Portillo, the former Conservative Defence Secretary and MP, said on ‘This Week’ on BBC 1 Television on 10.11.2006 at 0003 hours “The Democrats have moved to the left since Clinton (was President). I think its looking good for the Republicans to win the 2008 American Presidential Election.”

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode