- ‹ previous
- 2948 of 8807
- next ›
10 House Races All Headed in One Direction
Charlie Cook and the folks at the Cook Political Report have changed their ratings on 10 different House races. A Republican is the incumbent in all of them. Guess which direction they're heading:
CA-04 — OPEN (Doolittle) — Solid Republican to Likely Republican
CO-04 — Marilyn Musgrave — Lean Republican to Toss Up
CT-04 — Chris Shays — Lean Republican to Toss Up
IL-10 — Mark Kirk — Lean Republican to Toss Up
NM-02 — OPEN (Pearce) — Likely Republican to Lean Republican
NY-29 — Randy Kuhl — Lean Republican to Toss Up
NC-08 — Robin Hayes — Lean Republican to Toss Up
OH-01 — Steve Chabot — Lean Republican to Toss Up
VA-02 — Thelma Drake — Likely Republican to Lean Republican
WA-08 — Dave Reichert — Lean Republican to Toss Up
And wait till they get some of that sweet Obama money.
Jonny says:"wait till they get some of that sweet Obama money." Obama is politics as usual. Buying election with money. For a real change, vote for Ralph Nader.
i agree with kathy, if we don't want to end up in the toilet,vote for nader.
Kathy and Joe,
If you want to advocate voting for Nader, you're eititled to do that.
But you can't credibly say that because Obama is likely to collect 300 times more in contributions than Nader from essentially the same sources (regular folks like me) that it makes Obama "just another politician."
All I want to know is when exactly mojoblog turned into Jonathan Stein's personal blog world?
15 out of 20 articles today are his....what about those of us who are tired of hearing his opinion? what happened to MJ's dedication to diversity and variety?
If you don't want to end up in the toilet vote Nader? Oh come on now, we know that Hilliary was politics as usual, though not nearly as much as McBush, but Obama? Egalitare is right Obama is funded by small donors and average citizens not lobbyists and influence peddlers, and that is the way that politicians should have always funded their campaigns. Here is a candidate that comes closer to the ideal of a candidate who is for the people and funded by the people than any other candidate possibly in US history and all you can do is insult him because he has too much money from his 1.5 million donors? If you really want a candidate like Nader to be viable then fight for instant runoff balloting by the next presidential election,but don't sit here and insult one of the best mainstream candidates to ever come along. I plan to donate to Obama and do so representing no special interest other than myself and my hope for and end to war and other senseless policies.
PS to KM, can't everyone else have a day off once and a while?
Totally agree Michael. I am in fact a big supporter of Ralph Nader, and the Idea of third parties in general. Because my state was safe for bush in 2000 and 2004, I would have voted for him if he was even on the ballot. But in an election where the two candidates are neck and neck, I feel comfortable voting for Obama. He is by no means a perfect candidate ( I think he tends to be far too centrist on economic and energy issues ), but I believe he is at the very least an honest broker ( at least about as honest as any politician can be ). If Obama actually follows through on his proposals to open the political process, this will also allow much more room for third parties. I think an Obama landslide would probably be the best chance we have in the country to get a system that allows alternative parties to be viable. Republicans and democrats will never allow any significant changes to the electoral system when they are so close to each other. They have way too much invested in gaming the present system.
Hey, KM, lay off Stein - don't punish a guy for productivity.
It's hilarious that Kathy thinks that a candidate for president giving money to a congressional candidate is "politics as usual." What else can you apply that to - giving speeches? "Oh, Obama gives speeches just like President Bush did, that proves that he's just politics as usual. Ralph Nader would never give a speech, so you should vote for him." Goofy.
Nader lost all credibilty when he used, then bolted the Green Party. Ralph yammers endlessly about how corrupt the Dems & Repugs are, but has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to build a viable 3rd party. All he does is pop his head up like a silly jack-in-the-box clown every 4 years, and says "vote for me". If Ralph wants to regain any credibility, he needs get off of his butt and start doing some old-fashioned grass roots organizing. Until then, he's nothing but a joke.
Lets face if folks, Obama is a whore like all the rest. Sorry, I don't patronize whores, I am voting for a man of integrity, Ralph Nader.
Sorry Professor but Hillary was the only major Dem that truly reeked of DLC/corporate interests, now if she had won one would have had a viable argument based on a lot of actual verifiable facts. Unfortunately for you third party types a better candidate won and a bunch of silly labels and insults do absolutely nothing to further you arguments. Of course people will need to pressure any congress and administration if they want true progress, but it still shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which candidate is the smart bet to bring change Professor. Now of course if you want to fight for electoral reform that is something I think most people would support, but name calling and proclamations of support for a guy that admits that he can't win will get you nowhere. Heck I think Nader first endorsed Edwards, and then as he jumped into the race he said Obama was OK, he just needed to be pressured to do the right thing. In another interview on democracy now Nader calls Obama someone with 'great capacity' look @
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/7/9/ralph_nader_on_the_candidates_corpo...