And now we wait.

Ironically on this big day, there's not a lot of news (yet). So what's there to do? Personally, I'm enjoying watching the Democrats pass out their talking points to explain away their defeats and see a few of the bitter clingingers delude themselves that it won't be so bad.

It all reminds me of something.

Of course you'll all be here at Pudding Central following the coverage but what liberals are you most looking forward to hearing the lamentations of?

Personally my favorites are going to be Kos and Olbermann.

And who are you most looking forward to seeing win and lose? For me the winners I'm most excited about are Rubio and Johnson in the Senate and Gibson and West in the House.

As for Dems I'm looking forward to losing, it's a long list....Murray and MurCOKEski (well, she not technically a Democrat but you get the idea) in the Senate and Frank and Grayson in the House.

Big unanswered question of the day: Will Megyn Kelly wear the naughty librarian glasses tonight? God, I hope so.

Added: Here's a Twitter list I put together with a bunch of liberals so you can enjoy their tasty (and nutritious) tears.

A taste that Slu pointed sent along from Tommy Christopher.

Americans gave GOP 8 years to fuck this country up, and gave Obama and the Dems 21 months to fix it. Dumbfucks. Especially stay-home D & I.

Posted by: DrewM at 07:09 AM | Comments (377)
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.

Big day.

George Orwell (creator of New PuddingSkull ("Quenchy")) directed that for us, based on a script by George Orwell and Ace of Spades.

Now go vote. Bring a friend.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:55 AM | Comments (570)
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

(OKÂ…I know IÂ’m gonnaÂ’ pay for that, but in my defense theyÂ’re CongressSkirts we really didnÂ’t want there in the first place, right?)

According to Wall Street JournalÂ’s Marketwatch:

WASHINGTON — The midterm elections on Tuesday feature high-profile female candidates such as Christine O’Donnell in Delaware and Carly Fiorina in California, yet the election cycle is expected to result in the first decline in the number of women in Congress in 30 years, academics say.

“When you look at the numbers, Democrats are the most vulnerable and we’ll probably see between four and six fewer women in the House of Representatives,” said Jennifer Lawless, Associate Professor of Government at American University.”

And why might this be?

Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women in Politics, said she expects to see a decline in women in Congress because most incumbent female lawmakers are Democrats, who are more vulnerable this year.

Currently, more than 75% of women in Congress are Democrats. Walsh also pointed out that 54 incumbent female Democrats and 15 incumbent female Republicans are seeking re-election.

“Many women Democrats are first-term women in districts that you wouldn’t think of as districts that would elect Democrats, but many are Democrats that were swept up in the Obama election,” Walsh said. “We’re looking at this year as potentially the first decline in the total number of women in Congress in 30 years.”

So the Big O has set WomenÂ’s Rights back by 30 years? (Nah, but you know how itÂ’d be played in the media if the party affiliation was reversed.)

Sammiches hardest hitÂ…

Posted by: Genghis at 01:30 AM | Comments (65)
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

I think Ace meant to post this, but he's in Vegas, and, you know...

Some Democratic fraud in today's election will be hidden away ("finding" boxes of ballots later, etc.) but some -- like the New Black Panther Party incident, or the pre-marked Reid ballots -- will be out in the open where any decent citizen can see it.

And these days, decent citizens have smartphones. So if you see something, say something, with American Majority Action's Voter Fraud App for Android, Blackberry, and iPhone. (If you're using Symbian, you're obviously in the wrong country...)

There's a nice guide to the ins and outs of the app here, a shorter guide with witness statement form here, and a guide to voter fraud generally here.

Be prepared. Don't make cheating easy.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 10:56 PM | Comments (74)
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

Welcome to the pre-scrum ONT. Gird your loins.

Election Night Meetups: Chicago - Meet your fellow morons tomorrow night at the Tilted Kilt (17 N. Wabash, Chicago, IL) from 5pm til ??. Let me know if other cities have moron plans.

Rasmussen's Final State of Play

As of polling through last weekend Rasmussen has Republicans +12 in generic polling. And if you look at the trend line, there's a good chance it'll go higher by Tuesday night.

And here's what they have for other races:

California is 49%-46 Boxer over Fiorina (R).

Colorado is 48%-44% Buck (R) over Bennet.

Illinois is 46%-42% Kirk (R) over Giannoulias.

Nevada is 49%-45% Angle (R) over Reid.

Pennsylvania is 50%-46% Toomey (R) over Sestak.

Washington is 48%-47% Rossi (R) over Murray.

West Virginia is 50%-46% Manchin over Raese (R).

And in more positive news...
Likelihood That Dems Will Retain Control of Senate Sinks to 43% on Intrade

Meanwhile US Pudding Reserve Now at Historic Low. You probably should have stocked up already.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:52 PM | Comments (1419)
Post contains 417 words, total size 6 kb.

Illinois can use a man like Mark Kirk.

The biggest knock on Mark Kirk is that he claimed he had personally received an award for intelligence officer of the year when in fact it was merely his 20 or 30 man unit which received the award for intelligence unit of the year.

Wow. Even worse than Joe Miller freeping polls at work.

Rep. Mark Kirk doubled his 2-point lead in last weekÂ’s Fox News battleground state poll of likely voters, and now leads Democratic candidate Alexi Giannoulias 46 percent to 42 percent.

Also with momentum: Angle in NV (48-45), and Buck in CO (50-46). Buck is now supposedly outside the MoE according to a Fox broadcaster, but I don't think they calculated that correctly. I don't think it matters though because if you're even tied, you're winning.

Meanwhile, Tom Tancredo is within 3 of Hickenlooper for Governor. I don't think I've mentioned this, but:

Tom Tancredo for Governor

The Republican nominee, Maes, is badly damaged and sits at the bottom of the polls with like 10%. Every vote for him is a vote against limited-government conservatism and also against reason itself -- you have to be pretty faith-based to imagine he can make up 40+ points at this juncture in the proceedings.

Why is he still in? For ego, mostly, I figure, but he probably tells himself he owes it to his supporters.

To which I'd ask: Owes it to his supporters to do what? Deliver the election to the candidate they oppose the strongest? Offer them the detrimental illusion that he still has a chance?

He ought to make it official and suspend his campaign, tonight, with as much fanfare as possible.

Even if he doesn't, don't throw your vote away. Tancredo is within the Margin of Error; Maes is within the Margin of Futility.

Posted by: Ace at 04:06 PM | Comments (298)
Post contains 316 words, total size 2 kb.

Via American Elephant, urging you to vote-- particularly if you're in a Blue State or blue district and your "vote doesn't count." Oh, this year, yeah, it does -- there is a nontrivial chance your vote will end up making the difference. There are seats that haven't been polled at all all cycle, and no one knows where the incumbent is in these situations.

You combine:

1) An already depressed/unenthusiastic Democratic base, with

2) Democrats just assuming their vote isn't even needed anyway, with

3) Pissed off independents casting what they think is a protest vote, with

4) Republican voters, generally self-suppressing owing to feelings of futility, suddenly coming out of the woodwork to vote, and you've got a major unexpected bonus-damage upset on your hands.

This is why Karen Harrington just might beat Debbie Wasserman-Schultz in FL-20, or John Dennis really could -- really could -- retire Nancy Pelosi a few months ahead of her preferred schedule.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 03:12 PM | Comments (172)
Post contains 168 words, total size 2 kb.

Well Curtis Sittenfeld for one isnÂ’t afraid to let his her Obama-love gush forth in Slate but even heÂ’s she's wondering Am I the last person in America who still adores President Obama?

And Sittenfeld really, really likes Obama:

But when I see Obama on television, I'm unfailingly struck by his intelligence and charisma, by his easygoing humor, by the magnificence of his megawatt smile.

I like his mind-bendingly multicultural extended family. I like that in a campaign interview in Glamour magazine, he could fluently and unabashedly talk about Pap smears. I thought that the beer summit of 2009 was delightful. I was even excited when Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, not realizing until pundits explained otherwise that I was supposed to be aghast at its prematurity.

And thatÂ’s not all:

At this point, I love Obama so much that I recently thought if it were 1961, I'd probably display a bust of him in my living room. Then I realized I'm already displaying the 2010 equivalent: On my living room wall, I have a framed version of that famous November 2008 New Yorker cover of the O moon over the Lincoln Memorial.

Read the whole thing for some sweet, sweet upcoming schadenfreude.

Oh I shall so relish SittenfeldÂ’s tears on November 3rd. I think they will go well with some champagne and fava beans.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 01:51 PM | Comments (305)
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.

Make sure the outcome is outside the MoF (Margin of Fraud).

Posted by: Ace at 01:46 PM | Comments (60)
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.

Can you encourage a right-ish leaning coworker to vote?

A family member?

Write a few emails to friends about your preferred candidate?

Make sure your reasonable sorts of neighbors are voting?

There are still lots of GOTV events, too-- contact your local GOP or candidate's office.

Posted by: Ace at 01:39 PM | Comments (47)
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.