Let’s do a quick update on the latest election news, because it continues to look pretty darn bleak for the Democrats. . . and it’s getting bleaker. Indeed, the estimates for the number of House seats the Republicans will win keep going up, and the Democrats have begun infighting.
1. First, we have this little tidbit. Republicans are now leading in 54 Democratic House districts. In 19 more districts, the Democratic incumbent remains below 50% and the Republican challenger is within five points. Thus, some commentators are now raising their estimates to 73 seats. The modern record was 74 seats in 1922.
2. These numbers could actually be higher, but there is no polling for 160 Democratic House seats that were considered too blue to bother with. . . until now. So no one knows the full extent yet of what is going on. BUT, a ton of interest group money is pouring into what were considered “marginal” races, i.e. races where the Democrat was assumed to win with no problem. In some cases, millions of dollars in ads are being run against Democrats who last won re-election by as much at 10-15%. Money is a stronger indicator than polling of what is really happening.
3. Right now, Republican leaning independent groups are outspending Democratic leaning independent groups 4-1 in House races and 7-1 in Senate races, and large Democratic donors are holding back support.
4. In the Senate: In deep, deep blue Connecticut, Linda McMahon has pulled within 5% of the Democrat, putting that seat back into play, especially if there is a depressed Democratic turn out. New York Republican Joe DioGuardi is within 1% of Kirsten Gillibrand and has momentum, while NY Democrats seem to be imploding in scandal and infighting. And Harry Reid remains stuck in a dead heat somewhere between 44% and 48% each. This could mean a nine seat swing, which would bring the Senate to 50/50, and put Joe Biden to work.
5. Most Democrats are running away from the administration, and none are running ads defending ObamaCare, card check, the stimulus, the GM takeover, cap-and-trade, Iraq, or financial regulation. Instead, they are almost uniformly running negative ads against their Republican opponents. Most are touting their “independence” (no matter how fake) and some are actively running against their party:
I don’t put any faith these assertions as Democrats always play this game. . . lying is part of their cover-up, but Democratic insiders fear this will harm Democratic turnout because it’s turned so negative.• Indiana Democrat Joe Donnelly is running against “Pelosi’s energy tax on Hoosier families.”
• Alabama Democrat Bobby Bright refused to say that he would vote for Pelosi as speaker again, as did Texas Democrat Chet Edwards.
• North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy is actually touting how he voted for the Bush agenda.
6. As Joe Biden tells Democrats to stop whining (always a great campaign slogan), Obama is whining that the Democrats aren’t motivated to support him. Also, he’s been blasting the Republicans every day for a week or two now, but it doesn’t seem to have helped -- his polls numbers keep hitting new lows all over the place. The latest to declare a new low is CNN, which had him at 42% support.
7. The Democrats just adjourned without voting on the Bush tax cuts, giving the Republicans yet another issue: a vote to adjourn is a vote for a tax increase. The 47 Democrats who “wanted” to vote to extend the tax cuts are now exposed as lying. . . again.
8. Ethics troubles continue to catch up to the Democrats. This time it was former lobbyist Paul Magliocchetti pleading guilty to funneling more than $380,000 in illegal campaign contributions to Democrats Jim Moran (Va), Peter Visclosky (Ind.), and John Murtha (Hell), who directed $137 million in defense contracts to Magliocchetti’s defense contractor clients. Even the MSM is saying that Pelosi’s ethics pledge has failed.
9. Bob Woodward just released a book that makes Team Obama look like a collection of infighting idiots and blows away any idea that they are competent when it comes to Afghanistan. It also continues to show Obama as indecisive and without military support.
10. Word has leaked out that the rats are planning to flee the White House, led by Chief Rat Rahm Emmanuel (leaving Friday). Apparently, even David Axelrod is leaving, ostensibly to start working on Obama's re-election campaign. Pre-election staff changes are a sign of turmoil.
11. Obama has given up on Strategy 517: Demonizing John Boehner, and is now moving on to Strategy No. 518: attacking the Republican Pledge which no one knows anything about. . . or cares about. If the election doesn't come soon, they will run out of strategies.
This is what happens during a route, and it’s only going to pick up speed as the situation gets worse and the Democrats get more desperate.
33 Days to Go!
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Election Disaster Update
Labels:
2010 Election,
Democrats
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
42 comments:
Andrew,
There is even commenting on solid Democrat districts that no one in the media is interested in.
Another way of putting it, areas that don't have day to day polling and national media reporting might not go to the Democrat. Several Illinois districts might actually be in play as well as some California ones and we won't know about it until November 3rd.
This rout could be so devastating that a new record of seats changing hands could be had.
Joel, I think you're absolutely right. There could be dozens of seats in play and no one knows it because no one has done any polling. At least, that's what the money is telling us.
And since Republicans are spending in these districts, the Democrats can't afford to send money to their endangered members, which makes a sweep even more likely!
This is going to be a very interesting election night and could truly give Obama the "historic" factor he's been so desperate to achieve! :-)
By the way, we're planning on doing an active open thread on election night, so everyone should drop by with any news/comments they have.
Andrew: I hope the Republicans have the list of Democrats who voted for adjournment. Many Democrats voted to stay in session, and regardless of whether they were voting to extend the Bush tax cuts or modify them, it was at least a principled stand. Any Democrat who voted to adjourn should be immediately tagged a coward. If I saw the vote correctly, two more Democratic votes against adjournment and they'd still be in session. That means there are a lot of cowards who need to be called out for making the financial uncertainty even more uncertain.
Lawhawk, Very true, though I had heard (but haven't bothered to confirm) that Pelosi had to cast the tie-breaking vote. In any event, any of them that voted to adjourn should be seen as voting for the tax increase.
But even those who didn't should be seen for what they are -- enablers of Pelosi and her agenda.
There is one in Ohio who is running as "an independent voice," who actually voted party line the whole session, including voting for everything Pelosi wanted. How pathetic that they can't stand by their own deeds?
It looks like Raul Grijalva may be in trouble in Arizona. His call to boycott his own state hasn't helped him much this year! The most recent poll I saw had Ruth McClung gaining ground to within 7 points. I think that any democrat without a 2-digit lead should consider himself/herself in danger. Gabrielle Giffords in my Tucson district is in a virtual dead heat, and I expect her to lose her seat too. I'm starting to get a little giddy, but trying to contain myself. Posts like this don't help! it kind of makes the giddy flow freely around here.
Andrew: Cowardice and herd-mentality is a lemming disease. The Democrats still don't seem to see that cliff they're about to dive over.
John Murtha (hell) – that’s perfect.
This election year is looking analogous to “Picket’s Charge.” The demonrats have sent their minions to strike at middle America, the assault is being repelled, will odds “3 (real America) to 1 (anti-American radicals),” and will turn into a bloody route on 11/2, metaphorically of course. The trick will be to press the retreat and eviscerate the loony left, once and for all, going Sherman. Knowing that these statist bastards will be lurking in the MSM, Academia, the government beauroacracy, we must strike at their heart, and dissemble their wicked web of deceit. We must be bold and break statist Washington, or as sure as the good lord made little green apples, the demonrats will come back, and continue the death spiral of the USA. My point, this is only the beginning.
Andrew,
"This is only the Beginning."
I keep on reading that and hearing it. I don't think there will be complacency after this election. I don't think that the American People will allow statists to control again.
Thanks for the update, Andrew. Of course the bleaker the picture, the more the lib media will spin any small wins as being a great win for the Dems.
I don't want the faction of good to become complacent. Not until Obamacare is repealed will I give my first small crack of a smile. Whenever Obama whines over thenext two years, he should be forced to view old video clips of himself snarkily wagging a bony finger, head tilted back, and saying "elections matter, we won."
i am praying that november is the symbolic beginning (i think tea party folks would argue they have been working for this "new beginning" for some time) as well as the continuance of americans standing together to say, "ENOUGH!"
i want the vote on november 2nd to be the key to release our shackles from this slavery (it delights me so that i get to throw that back at a very confused barry).
to the polls!
"John Murtha (Hell)"
"it kind of makes the giddy flow freely around here."
two great lines!!
Man, I disappear for an hour and look at all the comments! LOL!
Tam, Sometimes you have to let a little "giddy" out! :-)
Yeah, from what I've seen the whole Democratic delegation in Arizona has just made bad move after bad move! Let's hope for a sweep. . . that would be great!
I know what you mean about not being too hopeful, but this really does seem to be picking up steam. I'm honestly thinking the Republicans will win more than 74 seats in the House unless something really drastic changes. One reason is that the "excitement" factor keeps getting more skewed. The Democrats are getting less excited in each poll, whereas the Republicans and right-leaning independents just keep getting more and more excited. Right now, I would think that means more than a 2% difference, but we'll see.
Whatever happens, one thing is for sure, this is going to be an exciting election night!
Lawhawk, Isn't that the truth! They still don't seem to understand what they've done. Oh well. . . good for us. . . good for the country.
Stan, I've never heard Roger Miller mixed with Gettysburg before, but it works! LOL!
I agree completely -- election night is just the first round and we need to keep feet to the fire, replace those who won't do what needs to be done and keep pushing to right this situation so that we never have to face another "socialist tipping point moment" in America!
Glad you liked the Murtha thing, it's fitting. The man was a disgrace.
Joel, I know that everyone always says "this election is different" but this time I truly believe that. I think the nature and character of the response by the public has fundamentally changed and I think that those who try to practice the old ways will get shoved aside by the public. This is an exciting time!
Jed, I couldn't agree more (though I intend to enjoy this election). I think the election is only the first round of what will be a many year repair job of our government. But I honestly think the public is prepared to do that. When things go wrong, the American people are remarkably good at stepping in and fixing the thing themselves. . . and that seems to be what is going on now. I don't see the public getting complacent or accepting any of the old defeatist excuses for maintaining the status quo.
I know that sounds a little utopian, but what I'm seeing is honestly different than anything I've seen in my lifetime before this. This really feels like one of those moments in history where history changes.
Patti, I think this is just the beginning, and if the Washington establishment doesn't get that, then they will be pushed aside and will need to find new jobs.
Yeah, I thought it was rather asinine for Obama to try to invoke slavery as supporting his policies. Talk about politicizing things -- especially since his party was the one that was defending slavery.
rlaWTX! LOL! Thanks. I truly find Murtha to be a disgrace. Anyone who would accuse our soldiers of war crimes with no proof what-so-ever and play political games with the lives of American military men and women has earned a harsh afterlife, and Murtha did that and much more.
Great recap, Andrew!
In AZ, we are hopeful that democratic representatives and Pelosi/Reid lap dogs Harry Mitchell, Gabrielle Giffords, and Ann Kirkpatrick will be kicked to the curb and early retirement. Not one of them has been singing the praises of their healthcare and stimulus votes. It's hilarious. Ann Kirkpatrick, lately, has been trying to sound more Conservative than Reagan. Ditto for Mitchell.
I think adjourning without extending the tax cuts (although making time to laugh with Colbert) was the final nail. Couldn't happen to a nicer and more ineffective bunch of nitwits.
Come on, Nov. 2! Get here, already!
i love that everyone is so excited about my birfday!
Thanks X! I agree entirely about the adjournment. So they had time to play around with Colbert (which blew up on them), but they couldn't vote on an issue of crucial importance to the public (the tax cuts) nor could they put together a budget?! That's professional negligence.
I seriously hope Arizona goes for the clean sweep. You're state should be a solid Republican state, and I hope this election returns Arizona to it's roots! I have similar hopes for Colorado, though we have a "Denver problem."
And I don't think anything the Democrats say at this point will change anything, so they can talk as conservatively as they want. Everyone knows they didn't act that way when it counted.
Patti, That's your birthday? Excellent! Then I hope the country gives you one heck of a present! :-)
Wow. WOW! Dick Morris has been saying lately that the House AND the Senate are sure wins. He's going to have some serious egg on his face if that doesn't happen.
The Tea Party recently sent out a detailed list of 50 "Winnable" House races. The list is here. Surprisingly, even Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank show up on this list. Amazing. Also on this list is Murtha's old seat (currently held by Mark Critz), Bob Etheridge (the guy who likes to beat up on young tea party journalists) and Alan Grayson (Republican's health plan: die quickly.)
As much as I intensely dislike Linda McMahon, It's likely I'll mark my ballot for her rather than just leave it blank for that office.
Peter Schiff was my favorite and I'm furious at Rob Simmons for jumping back into the race at the last minute, destroying Peter's chances at better final tally in the August primary.
With all of McMahon's faults, she's still far and away a better choice than DICK Blumencreep any day of the week.
God, it nauseates me to have to say that.
Pitts, I saw Morris' prediction. I hope he's right! :-)
I started watching Michael Barone a while ago, and he is the one who pointed out that the Republicans could win 70 seats without winning a single Democratic leaning district, and that history would tell us there will be a 110 seat shift -- though he didn't predict this. At the time, everyone said, "20-30 seats max."
Since that time, ALL of the experts have been raising their estimated well into the 40s and 50s. Morris was the first to get to 70, but I suspect to see more of that by the end of next week.
And if the turn out figures do produce a 5% Republican surprise, then I think the 110 estimate is not out of line. Democratic turn out really will be weak (as shown by polls and primary turn out) and Republican turn out will be HUGE. So this could truly produce an unexpected, historical tidal wave.
The wild card, of course, has always been (1) something the Democrats hit upon to rouse their base or (2) over-confidence by the right leading to a falling off of turn out. But I don't see either of those being possible anymore. People are excited to vote, it's almost like submitting a person "F-you" to this government, and the Democrats are in panic mode -- they aren't regrouping.
So while I am naturally cautious, I also see all the signs of something truly incredible!
Libertarian Advocate, I agree about McMahon. I don't like her or her kind -- she bleeds RINO yellow. But she is a vote for the Republican leadership, and that does matter a great deal. So if you can't get a conservative (and I doubt you can in a place like Connecticut), then get the RINO and hope that the conservatives from places like Texas and Florida and Kansas end up being the ones setting the party agenda.
And hopefully, over time, Connecticut voters will come around to realizing that liberalism is a disaster when they see that conservatives don't set about burning books and shooting poor people.... as they've been told for so long.
Andrew, if the Republicans take 74 seats in the House, I will probably have a heart attack.
I'm seriously thinking about getting together a party on Election Night with all my fellow conservative grad students. One thing's for sure, with all the open threads I'll be checking, it's going to be a busy night.
Personally, I will not be breathing until Nov. 3rd (or until the last vote is counted in Minn sometime in June 2011). I will vote on Nov 2nd and drink heavily until the country is safe again. Oh, wait, that's what I'm doing now.
Here's a link to RealClearPolitics polls that has a really good breakdown of Senate and House toss up races -
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_elections_senate_map.html
T_Rav, I will be very, very excited if they take 74 seats. That will be a total repudiation by the public of everything Democratic, and I suspect it would cause a massive shockwave in the establishment.
An election night party is a great idea! I'm definitely getting together with some people at my place, and we'll be online the whole time. I want to make this a rather active open thread -- trying to think of how to do this right. We'll probably keep a running talley of races.
Feel free to bring your friends! We're always happy to hear from more people. :-)
Bev, November 3rd (or June 2011) certainly can't come soon enough! It's been sickening watching how much damage this crew has done and how much they are still threatening to do before they have to give up power.
Thanks for the link, here it is as an active link:
Link
By the way, I would laugh at the June 2011 thing, except that I fear you're right. There are going to be a ton of legal challenges all over the country this time. . . and I suspect a lot of ballot box stuffing.
I'm trying to keep myself in check, too.
Though hearing that Pelosi is on the "maybe" list did make me do a tiny, little mini jig in my living room.
Andrew, ordinarily I would be satisfied with a lot less than 74 seats (it's a nice number, obviously, but you take what you can get). But I heard somewhere on the blogosphere the other day (HotAir.com, I think) that House Democrats are quietly giving signals that if the total loss is anything over the low 50s, it doesn't matter if Pelosi is around come January or not, they'll kick her out of the Minority Leader position in favor of Steny Hoyer. Come to that, if the swing is a LOT higher than that, they may not even give it to Hoyer. All of which is to say, the Democratic Party may be on the verge of a total meltdown. One more reason to root for a landslide!
DUQ, It does make you feel like dancing, doesn't it?! But I'm not holding my breath on Pelosi losing her seat... though I could see her losing her leadership position (which might be a better punishment!).
T_Rav, I've seen a lot of the groundwork laid for Hoyer replacing Pelosi unless the Democrats do a lot better than losing 50 seats. If I had to guess, I would say that she's done unless they almost keep the House.
In terms of losing Hoyer if they get more than 50, that is an interesting thought. If they dump Pelosi and Hoyer, then we would be looking at a total meltdown and who knows what would happen to their party? The problem for them would be that because none of the moderates will survive, that means a huge leap even further left -- which would make them even less palatable to the American public.
Soooo, this could really set them back a decade and could cause conservative Democrats to finally abandon the party and become Republicans. Of course, that's a best case scenario, but it is kind of nice to think about! :-)
Though you've mentioned it before, one key problem that the Democrats have is the ability to get their base to vote. The Republicans and the "Tea Party Interest Group" more particularly is comprised of people who definitely will vote.
Thus polls are misleading because unless they target high propensity voters, they're unlikely to get the true numbers on who is ahead and who is behind.
LL, Very true. That makes the polls very difficult to interpret. A Democrat might have a 5% lead in "likely voters" but the enthusiasm may entirely cancel that out. . . or it might not. There's just no way to tell.
The differences in the primaries were dramatic -- well above a 5% difference. But again, that could just be a reflection of more competitive races on the Republican side.
I'm sure there will be some pro-Republican shift from the polls, but I'm just not sure how much. It could be 2%, it could be 5%, it could even be close to 8-10%. If the money is to be believed, some people think it could be as high as 15% -- though I doubt that.
I have trouble feeling confident. I know we are doing well but the need to win is so great that I won't be happy till election night.
That being said the democrats are backing some ammendments in the election that people should be aware of. Essentially they state that state legislative and congressional seats cannot be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent with some language about not edging out minorities. We learned about this from our supervisor of elections when he came to speak to us at a Tea Party meeting. It was strictly to explain the ammendments on the ticket.
What was communicated was that if these ammendments are passed, there are two one for state and one for congress, that the democrats will begin filing lawsuits to challenge the breakdown. While I am not in favor of gerrymandering I would at least like the gerrymandering done by a politician I can't vote against as opposed to a liberal judge that I have no control over.
Everyone should research the ammendments being made to the constitutions in your states so that you avoid the kind of end runs. Remember read them carefully because sometimes they are worded such that "Yes" is the "No" vote.
I of course mean the Florida constitution. Sorry for the omission.
Individualist, I'm not familiar with the issue you mention, but things like that need to be looked at very closely. The Democrats are huge at trying to find ways to rig the system in their favor.
Interestingly, on minority districts, where it's been done, it's hurt the Democrats because it's sucked out large numbers of liberal voters into overwhelming liberal districts. That's made the rest of the state more pro-conservative. So while I am opposed to these districts on principle, I am happy with the way they've blown up on the Democrats.
Legislative Ammendment
Congressional Ammendment
Andrew here are the two ammendments. The law has three competing requirements.
1) Not changing incumbents chances
2) not disfavoring minoroties
3) using compact contiguous boundaries that are in existence
It sounds like something you would vote for until you understand that the decision would be made a few judges that are not answerable to the electorate.
The FAIRDISTRICTSFLORIDA.ORG group is a democratic party front as I have been told.
Individualist, Thanks for the list. On the one hand, I like the idea of an independent panel to do redistricting, provided the rules are clear and the panel truly is concerned with drawing sane districts rather than trying to achieve any sort of policies.
But that's not what this is. This is Democrats hoping to take redistricting away from a Republican legislature and like-governor and hand it to leftist judges with instructions to make sure that all of the Democratic interests are enforced as a matter of law. That bullsh~t.
Post a Comment