If you’re buying in to Doug’s analysis, you can go to bed now.

The guy has a State House voting record that makes Ralph Nader look like a conservative, it should have been like shooting fish in a barrel.

One only needs to look at the ordering of who is on their ballot: Barack Obama is listed firt, Jim Martin is listed first, and Democrat is listed first.

If there was any alphabetical nature to the listing, Bob Barr would have been listed first on the presidential question.

If there was any alphabetical nature on the US Senate question, Buckley would have been listed first.

Eff You Dems and your effing media effs.

Given Saxby’s heavy lead and current position, I wouldn’t discount Johnny from that list.

With the large class of D’s were putting into the Senate this year from potentially R states, it will be 2014 before we have any real shot at the Senate. Could possibly make the House competitive sooner, but that will depend a lot more on the dems mis-reading this victory and Way over-reaching (I’ll give them about a 75% chance of that). The Republicans will still have to settle on our message, and we’ll be having a nice internal civil war between the fiscons and the socons for at least the next two cycles.

Looking into the future, the Senate isn’t changing hands in 2010.

The only Dem up for reelection in 2010 who might not be safe is Ron Wyden and maybe Inouye if the HI governor gets in the race.

I never underestimate the dems ability to screw up a gift being handed to them. And several times, they seemed to be trying as hard as ever.

But even I called this one for Obama a few days ago. And frankly, without a Newt Gingrich type already on deck, we’re probably going to have to screw around with our own identity crisis for 2 or 3 election cycles until Republicans can present a compelling case why we need to be in charge again.

There was a chance for McCain (and Republicans in general) to win this year?

Huh. Missed the last two years I guess.

They did. Many times over the past 12 months.

http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php

That battleground chart showing the differences between results and predictions is bunk. I research all the major polls since 2000, and none of the published ones were that close. I seem to recall that Battleground’s last published poll had Bush winning by double digits in 2000.

Although, I think that it is interesting that their final “prejected” election result has Obama winning by only 1.9%. In my state by state differential calculation 1.9 is the exact maximum margin I calculated where there was a shot for McCain to win. (Using how far above and below each state was in the partisan divide over the last few elections, weighted toward the more recent). At 1.9%, he had his first significant chance of picking up Ohio, FL, VA, NV and CO, which would give him a minimal win.

http://www.tarrance.com/files/Final-ballot-final-prediction.pdf

Also, two opportunities to self-identify as Hispanic/Latino, once in the demographic question and again in box [L]. Stand-alone questions on race, voting for the first time, the bailout, Bush’s presidency, and how worried you are about the economy, but only one opportunity to select “experience” as an issue.

Not bias per se, but I just don’t see an easy way to spin the results of these questions for McCain, and I see a lot of ways to spin those results for Obama.

Fortunately, the media is this country is completely unbiased and objective, and the results of the exit polls will be reported without any attempt to influence the outcome of the election.