Skip to main content

View Diary: Could the 2008 Election be Like the 1932 Election? (Part 3) (321 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There's disagreement and then there's (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MadEye, johnnygunn

    accusations of extraordinary claims.  You're the only one doing that.

    •  Not Saying It's Trollish - (0+ / 0-)

      Just that a claim of a hundred-seat gain requires extraordinary support.

      It is a far-fetched assertion.
      It demands specifics, not generalities.
      Especially from a front pager.

      •  So, You're Dishonest? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ron Thompson

        Or, are you going to tell me you just forgot that I've already said this?

        Now, if you want to be autistic-like, and focus on the literal number of seats, fine.  I've never said it would be a 97 seat pick up; in fact, either in the first essay or in the comments to it, I made it quite clear it wouldn't be, because among other reasons, we're starting from a much higher spot.  

        Your obsessiveness in trying to pooh-pooh these essays is starting to make you look pathetic.

        The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.

        by Dana Houle on Sun Dec 16, 2007 at 06:17:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Your Use of the Term "Autistic-Like" - (0+ / 0-)

          Is sufficiently revealing as to the manner of engagement you prefer.

          BTW - I have repeatedly said that I grant you that the definition of "landslide" may be different; however, you have consistently refused to provide any parameters despite the latitude I have allowed you to define it.

        •  PS - (0+ / 0-)

          The 1930 election resulted in 216 Dems in the House.
          (Plus a few more due to special elections during the session)
          The 2006 election resulted in 233 Dems in the House.

          I've never said it would be a 97 seat pick up; in fact, either in the first essay or in the comments to it, I made it quite clear it wouldn't be, because among other reasons, we're starting from a much higher spot.

          What exactly do you mean by "much higher spot"?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site