Image 01 Image 03

Democrats had a chance

Democrats had a chance

In their own minds.

Obama described Democratic Party losses in the 2010 midterms as a shellacking. If 2010 was a shellacking, this midterm was a political drubbing of epic proportions.

Not everyone believed it was going to happen. In fact, many delusional liberals clung bitterly to hope and change right to the end.

David Rutz of The Washington Free Beacon takes us on a trip down memory lane:

The results are in, and the Republican Party came out huge winners Tuesday night by recapturing the U.S. Senate for the first time since 2006.

Not everyone saw it coming, as the above video shows.

Joe Biden, Al Sharpton, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Chuck Schumer, Donna Brazile and other liberal stalwarts just didn’t want to believe it.

Watch this hilarious video round-up.

Have a great day, everyone.

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Lying lairs lie, I wonder what would have happened if they had told the truth.

    Not A Member of Any Organized Political in reply to betty. | November 6, 2014 at 9:07 am

    You said it Betty. Those types are always lying – but they usually will mix in a bit of truth in every lie.

    However I have discovered civilizations around the world and throughout time have a saying addressing that partial truth lying. In summary it goes like this.

    “A Partial Truth, Is a Complete Lie.”

Not A Member of Any Organized Political | November 6, 2014 at 9:05 am

Aliester, you said the key word – “delusional” – and I think several of their leaders must be psychotic* as well.

Snark Snark

*”intensely upset, anxious, or angry; crazy” –

theduchessofkitty | November 6, 2014 at 9:24 am

I think Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is going to be the next one out a job… Any takers?

This made me laugh. Very funny.
But let’s be honest. Did we expect them to say “we are going to lose hugely on Tuesday!” If they did that, what liberal would even bother to vote? So the party has to talk up a chance to win to avoid an even uglier (for them) turnout.
So I don’t think they were delusional (well, SOME of them are). But they are liars. Pathological.

If you remember the 2006 midterm elections, this is virtually the exact flip of that. It seems to be a plain fact that the midterm elections of a 2nd term president are fatal to the party in power, especially if it’s also the president’s party. There is a solution to this: 1 term presidencies and severe term limits on all political offices. I’d vote for that!

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to peg_c. | November 6, 2014 at 1:42 pm

    Why? Because term limits have worked as promised to produce a smaller government in both California and Michigan, two states which have term limited their state legislatures since the 1980s?

    In both states what term limits have done is empower the career bureaucracy and the lobbyists, particularly the public employee union lobbyists. By the time a legislator has learned enough to fight there veterans, they are term limited.

    Ask yourself how many sharp, reform minded people will ever want to spend all that time and effort to get a job they will only be able to keep for four to six years? What term limits have attracted are candidates who see their short stint in public office as an audition for an appointment to the bureaucracy or a position as a lobbyist.

In my opinion, it is time to reaffirm the nature of the social compact underlying our government.

Our government is an agreement among the people of this country to promote the general welfare and secure the common defense. It derives its legitimate power from the consent of the individuals. This state exists to serve us, we do not exist to serve the purposes of people who have been temporarily placed in high public office.

This current administration is staffed by people in high public office who act as though the rights, welfare, and lives of individuals are at their disposal in the service of “larger issues.”

While this country can, and does, ask for sacrifice, even ultimate sacrifice, from some of its citizens, it remains accountable to us for each of those lives. It is not part of our agreement that the lives and fortunes of either Americans or citizens of other countries shall be sacrificed for “larger issues” that exist in the minds of bureaucrats.

It is not acceptable to misuse an Agency of the United States to secure an advantage in the political process: not the IRS, not the FDA, not the EPA.

It is not acceptable to administer the laws of the United States without the restraint of equal protection under the laws for trivial reasons, such as race, creed, color, political affiliation, or gender.

It is not acceptable to lie about scientific matters for the alleged purpose of “preventing panic.”

It is not acceptable to waive our ordinary customer procedures, and thereby expose our children to diseases that have been managed in the United States (enterovirus, TB, scabies) for the purpose of securing a political advantage.

It is not acceptable to risk the lives of our people, our nurses, or our troops, allegedly for the sake of protecting the economic interests of another country.

This administration has repeatedly shown that it is careless of the lives and welfare of our citizens for trivial reasons. This is not what we expect of the US government.

    Not A Member of Any Organized Political in reply to Valerie. | November 6, 2014 at 11:06 am

    FYI: “Although I have no idea what will happen tonight, based on the insane, anti-Constitutional, and un-American proposals being floated by the New York Times,, and CNN, I do know what the media believe will happen: a historic shellacking is in store for Democrats and President Obama.

    How else to explain why the New York Times wants to forever cancel the midterm election. You read that right, cancel them. Outright. According to the Times, midterm elections no longer make sense. The problem is that the midterm electorate “has been whiter, wealthier, older and more educated than during presidential elections.”

Graveyard, whistling.

Sure, there is a component of rah-rah and “keep a stuff upper lip” (pro-tip:I find a couple of martinis stiffen my upper lip quite nicely), but there are also a slew of delusions that the Collective HAS to maintain.

One is that cultures only change in one direction, and the direction is there’s. As we can see, that just ain’t so.

When you wallow in bs, bs becomes home. And many of these people have told the various lies about racism, wars on wimmins, the party of the rich, etc., so often the lies have permanently corrupted their thinking.

Which all goes back to Ragspierre’s theory of voluntary morons.

The media is he enabling parent in this scenario, media, media, media! Until we are willing to hold back our money for the media outlets that promote lies instead of reporting facts, we are all doomed!

I’m glad the GOP won… but what was really different than in 2012? Did the pain finally land? Did the free stuff crowd get complacent and stay home?

I don’t trust a dog that only bites me every second or third time I walk by it.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Andy. | November 6, 2014 at 2:13 pm

    Chatter about voter ID laws and voter fraud may have suppressed the totals to more realistic levels.

    That’s pure speculation on my part with no proof though.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to Andy. | November 6, 2014 at 2:26 pm

    I suspect you may not be distinguishing one dog from another. The electorate in presidential years is now considerably different in attitude than the electorate in non presidential years.

    I also suspect the free stuff has less to do with showing up at the pills than social pressure and the desire to belong.

    Ever since JFK ran for the presidency the campaigns for that office has been shifting away from policy matters and towards personality and a form of moral narcissism. The media encouraged this since the advent of cable TV with their Rock the Vote promotions and by pushing the Democrat candidates as being the only acceptable choice if you want to be seen as a member of the in crowd. It’s almost like being governed by the three Heathers at Westerburg High School.

    The political parties also gear up in presidential years to locate and motivate low interest voters in swing states. In 1992 Clinton was promoted as a candidate for the young to identify with -a changing of the guard away from the WWII generation to the boomers. In 2004 the Bush campaign scoured a dozen swing states for security minded social conservatives who were disengaged from the political process- including the Amish! In 2008, the Obama campaign played not only to the young but also to trendy middle aged perpetual juveniles who had never voted by asking them to be part of history. Obama also used intense peer pressure in the inner city to get people who rarely vote to the polls. If you’re tired by the third robo call, imagine half your family and neighbors harping on you to vote. In 2012, Obama acted early and poisoned the well for Romney among some of the same voters the Bush campaign effectively courted in 2004 and many of them stayed home.