Fuck its silent in here.......

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

Jesus... That stupid recall amendment is gonna pass, isn't it?

Pretty resoundingly, I think.

Probably DRLP or something, but why wouldn't we want that option?

I voted against it because it's expensive and unnecessary.  If you don't like the guy you JUST ELECTED, then wait until he runs for re-election and vote him out then.  I don't understand this need to install some sort of a mulligan just because the electorate had second thoughts about the guy they just elected.

And if a an elected offical is deemed unfit for the office for which the electorate had installed him, well there are already checks and balances in place for that.  We didn't need a recall election to get Blago out of office--the state legislature did that for us.

[Internet Apex]

All valid arguments, which I understand. But...

"Any effort to recall a governor would need to be signed by what amounts to several hundreds of thousands of voters. And it'd need support from 10 state senators and 20 representatives - an equal number Democrats and Republicans. "

http://www.wbez.org/story/news/politics/election-2010-close-look-illinois-recall-amendent

So, this is actually kind of slapdick. I doubt it ever gets used.

[Eli]

So are the people electing these Tea Party candidates with zero political experience the same people who bitched about Obama's lack of experience in 2008?

[ChuckD]

So are the people electing these Tea Party candidates with zero political experience the same people who bitched about Obama's lack of experience in 2008?

They're not the best kind of inexperienced; but they're the right kind of inexperienced (?). Also, I hate America and the troops. Also I'm drunker than TDubbs' mother.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Jesus... That stupid recall amendment is gonna pass, isn't it?

Pretty resoundingly, I think.

It needed a threshold of 60%. Which it appears to have cleared.

[Gilgamesh]

Democrats to retain control of the Senate. Looks like Kirk's pulling away, along with Toomey. Nevada, Colorado, and Washington state still too close.

[SKO]

We can all now hope for the legislative paralysis that, coincidentally or not, seems to spur economic growth in this country.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Alexi is out of politics for now.  America and Illinois wins.

[Gilgamesh]

Harry Reid, you magnificent bastard, you won me 250 dollars!!!

[SKO]

Harry Reid, you magnificent bastard, you won me 250 dollars!!!

Thank the Tea Party. That moron was right there in the crosshairs and they gave us Sharron Angle.

[Internet Apex]

Alexi is out of politics for now.  America and Illinois wins.

THI

[Gilgamesh]

Interesting.  20%+ of the electorate in this midterm were voters over 65 years old.  They overwhelmingly voted Republican.  Should be fun to watch the dynamic between this constituency and the Tea Party faction's desire to cut the very sources of their livelihood (Medicare and Social Security).

Also, I think any proclamation that this election is a portent for 2012 is wildly overblown.

Welcome to thunderdome, indeed.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Harry Reid, you magnificent bastard, you won me 250 dollars!!!

Thank the Tea Party. That moron was right there in the crosshairs and they gave us Sharron Angle.

Harry Reid is not only still in the Senate, but still the majority leader because of one person: Sarah Palin.

[R-V]

We can all now hope for the legislative paralysis that, coincidentally or not, seems to spur economic growth in this country.

Or not.

So the midterm elections themselves give the stock markets a bounce. But what about what comes after the elections—in this case, gridlock?

There, research shows that gridlock—contrary to general opinion on Wall Street—does not actually do much for stocks. Sam Stovall, the chief investment strategist for Standard & Poor's Equity Research Services, finds that gridlocked Congresses hurt the markets—and that the combination of a Republican House, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic White House might be particularly awful.

Stovall studied the performance of the S&P 500 from 1900 until this year under three scenarios: total unity (one party controlling the House, Senate, and White House), partial gridlock (one party controlling both houses of Congress and the other controlling the White House), and total gridlock (a divided Congress).

Over all years, the S&P rose at a 6.8 percent annual pace. During times of total unity, 67 of the 111 years analyzed, it gained 7.6 percent annual pace. During times of partial gridlock, accounting for 32 years, they gained 6.8 percent. And during the 12 years of a gridlocked Congress, the S&P gained just 2 percent per year. Looking at more recent years, since 1945, the pattern holds. Under total unity, stocks climbed at a 10.7 percent annual pace. Under partial gridlock, they gained 7.6 percent per year. And under total gridlock, which accounts for eight of the 65 years, they gained just 3.5 percent per year.

Of course, it's possible that gridlock is the result of a bad economy: Congress and the voting public can't agree on a way out of the mess. And Stovall allows that his analysis might be "simply another example of coincidental correlation." But, in a note to investors, he argues that the reason total gridlock hurts big stocks is uncertainty. Divided governments do not lay out their priorities, and the infighting endemic to gridlocked Congresses hurts businesses. "Should a split Congress be the result of the November 2 elections, the resulting uncertainty may just end up adding one more stone to this already high wall of worry, limiting the otherwise strong performance that is typically seen in a president's third year in office," Stovall concluded.

[Waco Kid]

Interesting.  20%+ of the electorate in this midterm were voters over 65 years old.  They overwhelmingly voted Republican.  Should be fun to watch the dynamic between this constituency and the Tea Party faction's desire to cut the very sources of their livelihood (Medicare and Social Security).

Also, I think any proclamation that this election is a portent for 2012 is wildly overblown.

Welcome to thunderdome, indeed.

Now that GOP has successfully used the Tea Party for their own gains, those tea party candidates will be shoved aside as the GOP returns to their version of big government and deficit spending.