Election 2010: Winner and Losers

I am disappointed, I admit it. I am disappointed in several things. I’m disappointed in the Republicans. I’m disappointed in certain segments of the public. But, despite my disappointment, I am also excited. Yesterday’s election was historic. And while it showed us the problems we will continue to face, it also gave us a hint of the future. Let’s look at the winners and losers.

Winners

The Republicans: The Republicans won an historic victory. Consider this:

● The Republicans gained 60+ House seats, with 11 undecided. This is the largest repudiation of a sitting party since 1932 and is bigger than 1994.

● The Republicans gained 6 Senate seats (including Obama's seat), with 3 undecided. And this election was fought in mainly deep blue states; 2012 will be different.

● The Republicans now hold 29 governorships, with 1 more leaning toward the Republican column. These governorships control around 70% of the House seats that will be redistricted in the next year -- they also hold most of the key states that are gaining or losing seats.

● The Republicans flipped at least 17 legislative chambers and now control both chambers in at least 31 states, including large states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and North Carolina (the first time since 1889). They even won veto proof majorities in New Hampshire.

● See the map above, the Democrats have been pushed back to the coasts and the big cities -- and it’s even worse on a county by county basis. They are again a special interest party rather than a party of general popular appeal.

The United States: We have stopped Obama’s agenda.

The Tea Party: Sure, they chose some bad candidates (O’Donnell) and they couldn’t win some elections they probably should have won (Alaska/Nevada/Colorado), but the scale of what they achieved is still monumental. They defeated several RINOs, they won some seats, and they changed the way the Republican Party thinks. I actually believe John Boehner when he talks about integrating their ideas into the party. They might even have a future President in their ranks in Rubio. And I’ve seen evidence that Tea Party people learn quickly from their mistakes. Look for more genuine Tea Party people in the future, like the new governor of Michigan, and fewer celebrity-wanna-bes riding the Tea Party label like O’Donnell.

Sanity: California, which is synonymous with drugs and stupidity, shot down the marijuana petition. It didn’t just lose, it got blasted. This is a huge blow to the pot industry and a great moment for sanity and small government in America (I’ll explain this in an article Monday morning).

The Republicans II: By not winning the Senate, the Republicans escaped a trap. The public wants results and the public has shown over and over that they will not excuse failure just because of the filibuster. Thus, had the Republicans won a majority, they would have been blamed for not achieving anything, even if they couldn't have achieved anything.


Losers

Obama: This election was a total repudiation of everything Obama. That was the singular message last night. If he campaigned for you, you lost. If you voted for his agenda, you lost. His entire agenda is now D.O.A., and the Republicans are likely to kill off the parts that escaped the asylum.

The Republicans: The Republicans left a lot on the table. For a long time, I have been pounding the drum that the Republicans need to offer the public something to vote for. They could have won 100+ seats if they had offered an inspiring vision rather than just “we’re not them.” This also would have helped them in the Senate where they fell apart when they let the Democrats make these into races about individual candidates. . . because there was no unifying vision to override the personalities.

Sarah Palin: Palin’s endorsement turned out to be death for many candidates, particularly the “Mama Grizzlies” and Joe Miller in Alaska.

The Democrats: The Democrats got just enough aid and comfort from the Senate results that they will see this as an affirmation they should move further left. And since there are no more moderates (25 of 29 House moderates are gone), they are likely to chart that course. That’s very bad for them.

Obama II: By the Republicans not taking the Senate, Obama is denied the one thing that could have saved him without changing his agenda -- the chance to blame the Republicans for stopping him. With Republicans controlling the House schedule entirely, they can control what goes to the Senate, where the Democrats will try to stop everything. That puts the Democrats in the role of obstructionists, and puts Obama in the awkward position of having to attack as “obstructionists” the very people (the Senate) who are stopping the Republicans from undoing his agenda. He also can't talk to the right (by saying he favors right-leaning things) while acting to the left, because the House will call his bluff and the Senate would be forced to follow his lead. He would have been better off with a clear enemy.

Our Electoral System: There is a strong whiff of electoral fraud in this country, and it all leans toward Democratic districts and states. Until this gets cleaned up, our election system will continue to be suspect.

MSNBC: MSNBC faces a huge cleaning bill today as they try to clean up all the exploded heads.

Women: Apparently, liberal states don’t like women. . . Whitman, Fiorina, O’Donnell, Angle, McMahon, Lincoln, and possibly Murray.

The United States: It is obvious that we have certain states that are a problem. These states do not vote according to national interest, or ideology, or even rationality: they vote for the person they think will give them the most benefits from the federal treasury. And this isn’t just blue states. Alaska is largely a ward of the federal government and they kept right on voting for the candidate who can bring home the most goodies, as did West Virginia and Nevada and New York.

Colorado: F#$%# you, Colorado.

California: LOL! Next stop Evencrazierville. . . population: you.

In the end, I think this election protends an end of the Obama agenda and the end of business as usual. The nation is about to get a lot more partisan, with the center all but disappearing. But that's a good thing because elections should be about choices, not about picking between two brands of the same oatmeal. Redistricting will be huge for the Republicans and could result in a significant advantage for years to come in the House. Also, the shift in the electoral map will hurt Democrats a lot in Presidential elections. The problem, however, remains getting the Republicans to offer an inspiring agenda that can translate into state-wide wins in welfare states. That's the key: break the cycle of dependency and reintroduce these states to conservative values like self-reliance, living within your means, and capitalism. Letting California go broke and cutting the spigot in places like West Virginia and Alaska would be a good start; go cold-turkey on these fools. Nevada and Colorado also showed that Republicans need to start making gains with Hispanics and they need to finally break the unions.

The next few years will be ugly, but 2012 could be a lot brighter. That could be the year we finish what started last night.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Your Election Playbook

Tomorrow nears, and with it comes the beginning of the end for the Pelosi/Obama/Reid nightmare. We will be covering the election at Commentarama and you should check in all day. Our plan is to provide you with updates on the significant races as they come in and keep a running total on who will control Congress. While we do that, we hope that each of you will post anything you hear locally (or just post your thoughts. . . but keep it clean). In the meantime, here is your playbook for tomorrow.

Let’s start with some numbers:

• The Democrats hold 59 Senate seats (including two fellow travelers); the Republicans hold the other 41. Of those, 19 Democratic seats and 18 Republican seats are up for grabs. The Republicans need 10 seats to win the majority. Most polling projections have them picking up between 9 and 11 seats.

• The Democrats hold 255 House seats, the Republicans hold 218, and two are vacant. All 435 seats are up for grabs. The Republicans need 40 seats to get the majority. Most polling projections have them gaining 60 seats.

• The Democrats hold 26 governorships and the Republicans hold 24. Thirty-seven governorships are up for grabs, 19 of those belong to Democrats and 18 belong to the Republicans. Projections have the Republicans picking up 11, but losing 5, for a net gain of 6 seats.

• Forty-six states are holding legislative elections (currently, 27 are controlled by Democrats, 14 by Republicans, 8 are divided and 1 is nonpartisan). And there are 167 ballot initiatives in 37 states, including legalizing pot in California, "medical" pot in Arizona and South Dakota, and defining life in Colorado as the beginning of “biological development.” Several states are also looking to ban ObamaCare (Arizona, Colorado and Oklahoma). And there are attempts in California and Florida to rig the election system.

Aside from the polls themselves, a good deal of evidence suggests that things are going the Republican way. For example, consider these:

• Democrats who’ve never had to defend themselves before (like Barney Frank) are having to put up defenses. And money is pouring into races that seemed safe for the Democrats at the beginning of the year.

• The Democrats are blaming “secret money” for their "loss." Their use of the past tense to describe an election that hasn't happened yet tells us that their internal data show a disaster pending.

• The media also believe it’s over, as evidenced by their running stories telling us that the public wants bipartisanship and is sick of partisan rancor. This is the same media that until last week was writing articles chastising the Democrats for not murdering Republicans in their sleep. They’ve also started running fantasy articles speculating that maybe. . . just maybe. . . the military might vote Democratic for the first time since World War II because they are “tired of war” (you figure that one out), that blacks are more energized than they were in 2008, and that the same college kids who no longer turn out for an Obama rally will suddenly turn out and “make the difference.”

• Democrats are stating off-the-record that Nancy Pelosi plans to quit when they lose. Apparently, another 27 Democrats are making similar noises. Could you imagine a 90 seat sweep, followed by the retirement of another 27 prominent old-time Democrats?

• The recent surge in momentum for the Democrats in the polls has stopped and is now going the other way. The Republicans lead the generic ballot by 9% among voters, 14% among unaffiliated voters, and 18% among those most likely to vote. These numbers indicate that more than 100 seats could swing Republican.

• Early voting in most states (except Nevada) has shown a heavy Republican bias. For example, in Florida, with 1/3 of the total vote already cast, 50% of the ballots have been cast by registered Republicans, and only 35% have been cast by registered Democrats. This is more than the reverse of the prior two elections, when Democrats led early turn out by 46% to 37% (2008) and 44% to 41% (2006). Experts think this translates into a 5%-10% enthusiasm boost for the Republicans, which would devastate the Florida Democratic Party.

• "Crazy", "extremist" Sharon Angle (who has been more than a match for professional politician Harry Reid) now leads Reid by 4% and growing. And Chuck Schumer is talking about getting Reid's job.

Finally, let me finish by telling you that we are ready to call a race....... with 0% reporting, we are calling North Dakota for Republican Governor John Hoeven over Democrat Tracy Potter for a Republican pick up!

Tune in tomorrow!

(P.S. Make any last minute predictions below....)

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Election Reminder

With the election coming up in a couple weeks and many people filing absentee ballots, I figured it was time to dig up the list of complaints against Obama and the Democrats. You may have already seen this, but it's been updated and it's worth repeating. Share this with your friends. Post the link on other websites you visit. E-mail this on whatever list servs you participate in. Let's not let people forget why they want to vote the Democrats out!



Here are some of the things the Democrats did over the past two years that you may not have liked:



Democratic Hate

• Demonizing the Tea Party as racists and Nazis, and lying to manufacture “evidence.”

• Demonizing a cop as racist for arresting a Grade A jackass who happened to be black.

• Demonizing insurance companies to pass ObamaCare.

• Demonizing drug companies to pass ObamaCare.

• Demonizing employers to pass ObamaCare.

• Demonizing doctors to pass ObamaCare.

• Demonizing Arizona on the immigration issue.

• Demonizing banks to pass Financial Reform.

• Demonizing oil companies to pass cap and trade.

• Demonizing Republicans because. . . well, because.

• Demonizing all Christians when a whacko shot an abortion doctor.

• Demonizing Mormons when California voted against gay marriage.

• Demonizing Israel to appease their antiSemitism wing.

• Demonizing “right wingers” and Christians when a whacko shot up the Holocaust museum.

• Demonizing Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, George Bush, etc. etc.

• Demonizing John Boehner because they ran out of other people to hate.

ObamaCare

• Which relies on destroying Medicare for financing.

• Which forces people to buy insurance and will cause everyone to lose their current plan, despite Democratic lies to the contrary.

• Which will bankrupt the country.

• Which is a huge sop to insurers.

• Which does nothing to contain costs.

• Which does nothing to improve the quality of care.

• Which will lead to rationing.

• Excluding union plans and raising the limits on the Cadillac tax in union-friendly states.

• The abortion distortion in ObamaCare, which exposed “pro-life” Democrats as anything but. . . and now suing to stop their opponents from advertising this fact.

• Giving exemptions from ObamaCare to large, well-connected companies like McDonalds and 27 others.

Democratic Corruption

• It seems that every member of the Congressional Black Caucus is up on ethics charges, from taking dirty money (Charlie Goodtime Rangel) to sending stimulus money to relative’s banks (Maxine Waters) to awarding scholarships to ineligible family members (Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson and Rep. Sanford Bishop).

• Chris Dodd’s sweetheart deal with Countrywide.

• Stimulus money paid in non-existent districts for fake jobs.

• Stimulus money used to pay Hillary Clinton’s campaign debt.

• Stimulus money that went to dead people.

• Stimulus money that went to people in jail.

• No one in the Obama administration paying their taxes.

• Pelosi’s private plane.

• Pelosi’s drinks bill.

• Michelle Obama’s high class vacation-a-rama.

• The Louisiana Purchase.

• The Cornhusker Compromise.

• Medicare money for certain districts in Florida.

• A hospital for Chris Dodd’s vote on ObamaCare.

• Special treatment for Kaiser Permanente, the biggest provider in Pelosi’s district.

• Sestak Jobgate and a whiff of Clinton.

• Romanoff Jobgate.

• Climategate, and Obama’s affirmation of the falsified data.

• Algore Rapegate.

• Democrats Jim Moran (Va), Peter Visclosky (Ind.), and John Murtha (Hell) directing $137 million in defense contracts to clients of a lobbyist who funneled more than $380,000 in illegal campaign contributions to them.

Electoral Manipulation

• ACORN voter fraud.

• Manipulating Massachusetts electoral laws to keep Ted Kennedy’s seat Democratic and help pass ObamaCare.

• Running fake Tea Party candidates to hurt Republican chances in November. . . now proven in Michigan, New Jersey and Nevada (more to come).

• Trying to manipulate the electoral systems in several states to tilt the playing field toward Democrats.

Twisted Nominees

• Marxist and racist Van Jones.

• Maoist White House Communications Director Anita Dunn.

• Pedophile Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings.

• Unqualified Supreme Court nominee the Latina Red Sonia Sotomayor.

• Unqualified Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan.

Raping the Treasury

• The trillion dollar union/Democratic-interest-group giveaway known as the Stimulus bill and its dozen sequels.

• The trillion dollar Big Bank giveaway know as the TARP, the TALP and so on.

• Approving and then lying about $1.2 billion in bonuses to AIG.

• Authorizing massive salaries to the officers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both of which escaped regulation.

• The consumer and small bank screw job known as Financial Reform, a sop to huge banks and other Democratic donors.

• Effectively handing the Treasury to Goldman Sachs.

• “Saved or created” fake jobs.

• The attempt to tax “carbon,” i.e. everything on the planet.

• Not going a week without a taxpayer funded vacation or round of golf.

Economic Record

• Permanent 9% official unemployment, 17% real unemployment.

• Spending so much that our deficits have become a national security issue.

• Entertaining Stephen Colbert rather than voting to extend the Bush tax cuts, i.e. raising taxes on all of us.

• 269 bank failures so far, with 829 more on the worry list.

• Record foreclosures.

Weak on Terror

• “Man made disasters.”

• Refusal to recognize the "Islam" in Islamic terrorism.

• Losing the war in Afghanistan and sending troops for a fruitless last push before surrendering.

• Putting Navy SEALS on a show trial.

• Trying to move terrorism trials to New York City. . . so terrorists can be near their new mosque.

Racism

• Inexplicably (lol!) dropping slam dunk lawsuits against racist Black Panthers who tried to intimidate voters.

• Constant whining about racism. . . everything is racism.

Anti-Americanism/Pro-Muslimism

• Apologizing to Arabs and blaming the United States for their hatred of us.

• Feigning ignorance of what could have motivated a Muslim to attack US soldiers at Fort Hood, and warning Americans not to hold this against Muslims.

• NASA’s new role as center for Muslim outreach.

• Democratic support of the Nazi memorial in the heart of Jerusalem. . . wait, I mean the triumphal mosque at Ground Zero.

Pro-Illegal Immigration

• Suing Arizona to stop it from enforcing a law the Federal Government is obligated to enforce.

• Trying to boycott Arizona.

• Reporting Arizona’s law to the United Nations as a human rights violation.

• Refusing to protect the border and instead putting up signs warning Americans to avoid nearby national parks.

Assaults on Freedom of Speech

• Joining Muslim countries to work toward a UN resolution proclaiming blasphemous speech a human rights crime.

• Remaining silent when South Park creators were threatened by Muslims.

• Attempting to take away free speech of corporations.

• Attempting to regulate talk radio through the Fairness Doctrine, dressed up as local content laws.

• Attempting to regulate the internet through Net Neutrality regulations.

• Pelosi’s McCarthy-esque calls for investigations of Democratic opponents.

• Telling Molly Norris she should go into hiding rather than going after the people threatening her.

Faux ”Environmentalism” Exposed

• Ridiculous Copenhagen non-agreement.

• Wiping out central California’s farmland.

• The total mishandling of the BP disaster.

• Suppressing BP data to hide what really happened.

• Proving that leftist groups care about electing Democrats, not the causes they are using as Trojan horses.

Embarrassing Us

• Regifting in Britain.

• Abandoning our foreign allies.

• Bowing to foreign leaders.

• Sending Geithner to beg the Chinese to keep buying our bonds.

• Teleprompter in Chief.

• Scaring the hell out of New Yorkers with Air Force One joy ride.

• The arrogance of accepting the Nobel Prize for anticipatory good deeds.

• Joe Biden

And just in case you like to pretend to be a liberal at the office and you want to discourage your kooky liberal friends from voting, here are some of the most popular (albeit stupid) complaints about the Democrats from the left:

• The Democrats were too interested in bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship than in passing the best possible legislation.

• ObamaCare didn’t go far enough because the Democrats sold out to the health insurance lobby and the Republicans.

• The Democrats didn’t do anything to help the environment. They didn’t pass cap and trade, and Copenhagen was a disaster because the U.S. refused to push for a world treaty against polluters like India, China and Brazil.

• Harry Reid used the threat of filibuster (a false threat when he had 60 votes) to stop or slow everything the Democrats should have done.

• Obama never gave benefits to gays in the Federal government, which he could have done by Executive Order, he failed to stand up for gay marriage, and the Democrats didn’t even try to end "don't ask, don't tell."

• The Democrats did nothing to reform the immigration system.

• The Democrats got into bed with Wall Street, taking their money and selling out consumers to banks.

• The Democrats did nothing to stop the mortgage crisis.

• The Democrats didn’t bail out states like Michigan and California with federal money.

• Obama’s reliance on teleprompters chafes at their delusions about his brilliance.

• He’s not cool, he’s an elitist.

• He didn’t save the economy.

• He did nothing to punish BP, all he did was go on vacation.

• He didn’t get us out of Afghanistan.

There you have it. Pass it along to your friends, and make sure everyone votes!!!



[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Election Disaster Update

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:

• 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.

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.

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!

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Senate Races Update

You may have heard about a little thing called the 2010 election. Let’s see how things are going in the Senate. A total of 36 Senate seats are up for grabs. Of those, 18 are currently held by Republicans, the other 18 are held by Democrats. Those numbers are going to change.

Safe Republican Incumbents

Richard C. Shelby -- Alabama
John McCain -- Arizona
Johnny Isakson -- Georgia
Michael D. Crapo -- Idaho
Charles E. Grassley -- Iowa
David Vitter -- Louisiana
Tom Coburn -- Oklahoma
Richard Burr -- North Carolina
Jim DeMint -- South Carolina
John Thune -- South Dakota

Republican Seats Leaning/Safe Republican

Alaska

42% Joe Miller (R)
27% Lisa Murkowski (I)
25% Scott McAdams (D)

Florida

41% Marco Rubio (R)
30% Charlie Crist (I)
23% Kendrick Meek (D)

Kansas

61% Jerry Moran (R)
28% Lisa Johnston (D)

Kentucky

54% Rand Paul (R)
39% Jack Conway (D)

Missouri

53% Roy Blunt (R)
43% Robin Carnahan (D)

New Hampshire

51% Kelly Ayotte (R)
44% Paul Hodes (D)

Ohio

49% Rob Portman (R)
41% Lee Fisher (D)

Utah

58% Mike Lee (R)
28% Sam Granato (D)

Democratic Seats Leaning/Safe Republican

Arkansas

65% John Boozman (R)
27% Blanche Lincoln (D)

Indiana

50% Dan Coats (R)
34% Brad Ellsworth (D)

North Dakota

69% John Hoeven (R)
25% Tracy Potter (D)

Pennsylvania

49% Pat Toomey (R)
41% Joe Sestak (D)

Wisconsin

51% Ron Johnson (R)
44% Russ Feingold (D)

Democratic Toss Up/Undecided Seats

California

47% Barbara Boxer (D)
43% Carly Fiorina (R)

Colorado

49% Ken Buck (R)
45% Michael Bennet (D)

Illinois

41% Alexi Giannoulias (D)
37% Ron Kirk (R)

Nevada

48% Sharron Angle (R)
48% Harry Reid (D)

Republican Seats Leaning Democratic

None.

Democratic Seats Leaning/Safe Democratic

Connecticut

53% Richard Blumenthal (D)
44% Linda McMahon (R)

Delaware

53% Chris Coons (D)
42% Christine O’Donnell (R)

New York

49% Kirsten Gillibrand (D)
39% Joe DioGuardi (R)

Washington

51% Patty Murray (D)
46% Dino Rossi (R)

Safe Democratic Incumbents

Daniel Inouye -- Hawaii
Barbara Mikulski -- Maryland
Chuck Schumer -- New York
Ron Wyden -- Oregon
Patrick Leahy -- Vermont

The Senate currently sits at 59 Democrats to 41 Republicans. Interestingly, none of the 18 Republican seats up for grabs appear to be leaning toward the Democrats. Of the 18 Democratic seats, nine are considered safe, four remain up for grabs, and five appear all but lost. Thus, the Republicans should do no worse than 54 Democrats to 46 Republicans. Assuming that the toss ups go as they currently stand only gives the Republicans one more seat: 53 Democrats to 47 Republicans.

This is worse than our prior estimates because the Democrats have improved their changes in Nevada, Delaware and Connecticut. However, I still suspect Reid will lose in Nevada because he has yet to break the 50% mark and undecideds tend to go against the incumbent. Also, I suspect there will be a 2-3% boost for Republicans across the board based on voter enthusiasm. Even with this, however, it still appears that the Republicans will do no better than 52-48.

So let’s hope the enthusiasm stays high for 2012.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Democrats Acknowledge Disaster

I’ve been saying for some time that the Democrats are in trouble. In fact, I’ve pointed out that it’s very, very likely the Democrats will lose the House and come very close to losing the Senate. Now the Democrats are starting to admit this as well.

In the past couple days, we’ve been hit with interesting poll results:

• 48% of Americans think Obama’s views are extreme (42% don’t).

• Voters now trust the GOP more than the Democrats on all 10 of the most important issues identified by voters: education, health care, Iraq, the economy, social security, government ethics, national security, Afghanistan, taxes and immigration.

• Unelectable Colorado Tea Party Extremist Loser Ken Buck is leading Democrat Michael Bennet 48% to 40%.

• Unelectable Nevada Tea Party Nutjob Sharon Angle and Saint Harry Reid are tied 47% to 47%.

• Unelectable Corrupt Washington Insider Roy Blunt is leading Robin Carnahan 51% to 40% in bellwether Missouri.

• Unelectable freak Marco Rubio is winning his three way race against shoe-in Charlie Crist and also-ran Kendrick Meek 40% to 32% to 17%. And Crist’s numbers keep falling now that the Democrats have chosen a candidate.

• 60% of Americans still want ObamaCare repealed.

This should shake the Democrats up, right? Probably, but they’ve been so shaken up by internal polls for some time now that this is old news. Consider this quote from one Washington Democrat:

“Democrats kept thinking: ‘We’re going to get better. We’re going to get well before the election.’ But as of this week, you now have people saying that Republicans are going to win the House, and now it’s starting to look like the Senate is going to be a lot closer than people thought.”

Who is saying this? Well, listen to one Democratic pollster who is working on several key races: “The reality is that the House majority is probably gone.” What’s worse, his data shows that the Democrats’ problems are “spreading.”

Democrats are in a panic. They’ve noted for example that House seats they considered “safe” are suddenly up for grabs. In a tacit admission of this, they've begun running ads in many of these safe districts, and even in districts where historically the GOP has never been competitive. Moreover, some Democrats have become so panicky that they’re running ads attacking their own leadership, and there is a sudden exodus of House committee staffers looking for lobbyist jobs before the election. Also, 15.4 million voters came out for Republicans in the primaries so far, but only 12 million came out for Democrats, evidence of a massive enthusiasm gap (polls show 46% of Republicans report being “very enthusiastic” compared to only 23% of Democrats).

As always, the Democrats are looking for a scapegoat. They seem to have chosen Obama. Indeed, they’re bitter that the “summer recovery” they were promised never came. . . waaaah, I never got my unicorn!! And they’re furious at the White House for “keeping the debate over a New York mosque in play for two weeks” and now trying to talk about Iraq when they should be talking about the economy.

But isn’t the economy Bush’s fault, you ask? Well, said one former party chairman: “the problem is that a lot of the message talks to the base, and we’ve got to talk to the middle. You can only blame Bush for so long.” You don’t say?

Speaking of the public, last week we learned a little bit about one of their key problems when information was released about polling and focus group work done on ObamaCare. It turns out that no one believes that ObamaCare will reduce costs, lower the national debt, or improve services. In fact, the public isn't buying any of the talking points put together by the Democrats (debunked here many times). In the end, the marketing gurus recommended that Democrats stop talking about it and instead talk about the future. . . including “fixing ObamaCare.”

Does this mean the Democrats are doomed? Not necessarily, but the evidence is getting pretty overwhelming that a disaster is coming. And even if the evidence doesn’t actually add up to a tidal wave yet, this type of pessimism often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Also, when I hear that the new plan is to demonize John Boehner, a man known by less than 1/3 of the electorate, I begin to suspect that the Democrats just might be on the wrong track.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of skunks.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Democratic Woes Worsen

The other day, I laid out the case for a Republican tidal wave in November. We now have new evidence to add to the pile. Indeed, things are not looking good for our donkey friends on any front. After a panicky weekend of stories about the effects of the faltering economy on Democratic prospects, we now get evidence of anger and chaos.

1. Chaos: Yet Another Bad Strategy

I’ve mentioned before that the Democrats are having a problem finding a strategy they can use to attract voters. They wanted to sell the Stimulus, but it went bust and made people insanely angry at the level of debt the Democrats piled onto the country. They wanted to sell the improving economy, but it didn’t improve. They had a jobs bill that didn’t create any jobs. They wanted to trumpet ObamaCare, but the people hated that. They wanted to rely on Financial Reform, but that’s a snoozer. They tried scapegoating Bush, but that’s not getting traction either.

And Obama is no help. In fact, he’s become so unpopular that Democrats won’t even be seen with him anymore, e.g. Russ Feingold who vanished off the face of the Earth when Obama came to Wisconsin the other day. Add in the BP thing, the McChrystal thing, the Arizona thing, the corruption thing, and you’ve got a serious problem with coming up with a message.

So what’s a Democrat to do? Well, the new plan is to turn the election into a race on local issues, i.e. avoid national issues entirely. But of course, there are two problems with this. First, they haven’t done anything better locally than they’ve done nationally. Secondly, midterm elections have always been a referendum on the incumbent party. Running on local issues just won’t work.

2. Anger: Fund Raising Blues

The Democrats three biggest sources of funds are lawyers, bankers, and unions -- in that order, and their biggest treasure trove of financing comes from New York. But things are going wrong for them in New York. Indeed, there have been several articles lately talking about how dire the Democrats’ relations with Wall Street and New York have become. Said one anonymous Democrat: “Clearly, it's an extremely difficult environment out there.”

There are three issues going on here:

First, many bankers are upset about being demonized by the Democrats during the Financial Regulation debate. Indeed, many banks have decided to sit out this fundraising cycle. Key Democratic supporter Goldman Sachs, for example, has refused to host or attend any fundraisers for Democrats. Said one banker:

“The fact is that the ink is not even dry on [financial regulation], and everyone in town is still getting fundraising requests from members of the conference committee and all sorts of other people who were beating up on Wall Street. It’s unseemly at best, and right now we are just not inclined to say ‘yes’.”

Said another:

“Sometimes their chutzpah just has no bounds. People like [Gillibrand] who didn’t stand up for us at all during the debate are certainly going to feel some pushback.”

Secondly, Jewish donors are upset at the way Obama treats Israel. Several off-the-record comments have confirmed that most of these donors have closed their checkbooks to the Democrats and, more significantly, a large number of them, who have previously said “I've never written a check to a Republican in my life,” are suddenly attending Republican fundraisers.

Third, Obama’s style has become a problem. Just as Obama treats everything American (or British) with disdain, he’s treating New York donors with disdain. This is something they aren't accustomed to. In fact, in the past, they had the Clintons who pandered to their every whim. Said one Washington Democrat:

“For the Clintons, these donors were part of their social circle. They vacationed with them, they had dinners with them. That's not the case for Barack.”

No, it's not. Obama has shown no interest in mixing with these people. Moreover, not only is he not showing them the love the Clintons did, he's actively attacking them:

“They were coddled and worked very hard. Now, they're not just told they're not needed but that they're part of the problem.”

And this disdain is hurting other Democrats as well, who are discovering that Obama's contempt is affecting their fundraising as well: “Obama doesn't care about [these donors], and it trickles down to the rest of the system.”

So how are the Democrats responding? Like they always do. . . by publically blasting the contributors. Said one Democrat, “The New York donor community is all ego driven,” and these complaints are simply from people who are upset about “not getting invited to movie night at the White House.” Way to improve relations!

3. The Unforgiving Public

Finally, the anti-Democratic-incumbent wave continues. Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin was supposed to have an easy re-election. Apparently not. Two polls this week show that Feingold is only 2% ahead of his challenger (45% to 43%), Ron Johnson, a relatively unknown businessman from Oshkosh with no prior political experience.

What’s worse for Feingold, his approval ratings are equal to his disapproval ratings at 42%. Anything less than 50% support for an incumbent at this stage, usually spells disaster as undecideds tend to break for the challenger.

Add in Toomey’s growing lead over Sestak, and it suddenly looks like the Republicans might capture the Senate after all, especially with the excitement edge benefiting Republicans.

All of this is simply more evidence of what is becoming an obvious trend. The Democrats are in trouble. The polls say it. The MSM’s defensiveness says it. The Democrats’ panic says it. And now the Democrats’ donors are saying it. And the Democrats don’t have a clue how to respond to any of this.


[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Elective Thoughts

There are four conflicting trends that are making this election season quite interesting, though not entirely comforting: (1) Obama is on a long losing streak; (2) the Republicans are making no inroads with Democratic voters; (3) the prospects are bleak for establishment types; and (4) turn out has been surprisingly low. Let’s make some sense of this.


Trend 1: In the past year, Obama has endorsed almost a dozen candidates in races as varied as the governor’s races in Virginia and New Jersey and Senate races in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Arkansas. Every single candidate he endorsed has lost.

What does this mean? It means Obama no longer has the ability to sway the public, or indeed, to sway Democratic voters. It means that Obama, like Bush before him, has become political poison. It means that anyone tied too closely to Obama is doomed.

Longer term, this means that Obama’s agenda is doomed. As the members of his own party start to realize that he’s more albatross than eagle, they will begin to oppose him in favor of their own agendas.


Trend 2: Since Obama’s election there have been various special elections throughout the country, around ten total. The Republican candidate has lost every single one of these, for one reason or another, except for the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. Last night, the Republicans lost the chance to pick up Jack Murtha’s former seat.

Here’s the catch. While the media makes a big deal of these seats being “conservative leaning” seats, the reality is quite different. Each of these elections has taken place in deeply Democratic-leaning states. Moreover, most of these seats have been in districts that are heavily unionized. Thus, the only trend that can be drawn from this is that the Republicans are not making any inroads with Democratic voters. But, in truth, they don’t need to. As I pointed out before, the Republicans can win 70 additional House seats without winning a single Democratic-leaning district.


Trend 3: The media is making out a case that incumbents are in trouble. I think this is incorrect. The reality is that candidates who are seen as corrupt or “malleable by the establishment” are the ones who are in trouble. Charlie Crist (I-Florida), Arlen Specter (D/R-Penn), Robert Bennett (R-Utah), and Bart Stupak (D-Mich) showed themselves to be unprincipled opportunists. Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark) showed they were willing to do Washington’s bidding against the strong wishes of their constituents. Alan Mollohan (D-WV) and Chris Dodd (D-Conn) were corrupt. And so on and so on.

There is no evidence that incumbents in general are in trouble, but there is evidence that anyone who has partaken of the waters of the establishment is. Anyone who has willfully handed taxpayer money to cronies, flirted with lobbyists, glad-handed and traded favors or proclaimed their power to milk the system, is in serious trouble.

What’s troubling about this, and what bothers me a good deal about the results last night, is that the Democrats are managing to clean up some of their weakest candidates. Chris Dodd easily would have lost to whatever Republican challenged him. The new guy, despite his Vietnam lie, is a much stronger candidate because he has shed the thing that the Democrats of Connecticut did not like about Dodd -- his corruption.

At the same time, Specter would have been a much weaker candidate against Toomey than Sestak will be. Sestak will have the strong support of Democrats, unlike Specter, and will not enrage moderate Republicans like Specter did. Ditto in Arkansas and anywhere else that the Democrats replace corrupt, establishment co-opted candidates with fresh faces.


Trend 4: Finally, we come to the issue of turn out. Turn out has been low, almost bizarrely low, in every election since the Presidential election. This indicates that the public is not as enraged as people wish to believe. Sadly, this means that the Tea Party effect is quite limited, if it exists at all. But at the same time, this means that Obama’s ability to turn out voters has evaporated. The Kool-Aid is gone and his magical ability to mobilize the masses is no more.

So what does this mean? It’s actually good news. Low turn out means that the party that is more energized has the advantage, and that’s the Republicans. Moreover, this low turn out has taken place during contested Democratic primaries, which further indicates that Democratic voters are demoralized.

That’s good. But all in all, these trends are somewhat troubling. With the anger the public showed when ObamaCare passed, there was a hope that a massive wave of public support would rid us of the Democrats and their RINO hangers-on. But, instead, these trends tell us that we are looking at a very tactical, low-turn out election where local personalities have much greater influence than national trends.

I think the Republicans better consider why they aren’t riding the expected wave.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Generic Trouble

We keep saying the Democrats are in trouble. Duh, right? Well, it could be much worse than anyone has thought. Indeed, there was an interesting article the other day at RealClearPolitics, along with some other recent poll results, which suggest huge losses for the Democrats in November. . . much bigger than previously expected. Let’s consider the evidence.

1. The Generic Ballot.

The generic ballot is a highly unreliable way to determine how the parties will fare come election time because it measures the national mood, rather than the mood locally in each district. But it can be very telling, especially when combined with other evidence. Consider this.

For starters, we need to realize that the generic ballot is biased toward the Democrats. By “biased” I mean that it overstates the Democrats’ electoral chances. The reason is that Democrats are concentrated in relatively few districts. Indeed, the median Congressional district is slightly pro-Republican -- meaning the districts are not evenly balanced and the Democrats tend to be grouped into fewer districts. Consequently, the generic ballot over-sells the Democrats’ chances because much of their support is wasted in these concentrated districts.

Thus, any lead by the Republicans in the generic ballot must be considered significant. And this year, the Republicans are leading the generic ballot. Gallup gives them a 4% lead -- only the third time they’ve ever led the generic ballot according to Gallup (1994 and 2002). Rasmussen, who polls likely voters, gives the Republicans a 9% lead. An NBC/WSJ poll found that Republicans lead by 13% among “energized” voters.

What does this translate into? The RCP average of polls gives the Republicans a 2.8% lead. This translates into a roughly a 225 seat majority for the Republicans, i.e. a 50 seat pick up. The Rasmussen numbers would translate into a 70 seat pick up! A 13% difference would be unprecedented and could exceed 100 seats.

Historically, such swings are not uncommon. Since 1874, there have been 34 mid-term elections. Thirteen of those involved losses of 44 seats or more. Five were above 70 seats, and the high was 129 seats. Moreover, these larger swings happened when there was a convergence of factors similar to today -- bad economic conditions, controversial President, and prior elections leading to large majority for the President's party.

The Democrats counter that there hasn’t been a 60 seat swing in 60 years. But these three factors haven't converged in 60 years either. And more importantly, there is one more huge fact that needs to be considered: the Republicans can pick up 70 seats without winning a single Democratic-leaning district.

What this tells me is that you should look for Republican gains in the 70 seat range.

2. Additional Evidence.

If we only had the generic ballot to work with, I would be much more cautious about suggesting a 70 seat gain. But that’s not the only evidence.

• The Democrats are in trouble like never before. Almost every Democrat except those in the deepest blue areas has been polling below 50% in the polls. That is extremely significant. Incumbents who poll below 50% are very likely to lose. Add in that 70 of those Democrats are sitting in red districts, and that spells serious trouble for the Democrats.

• Moreover, for their chances to improve, Obama’s poll numbers need to rise. But he’s only getting worse. Each of the major polling organizations is reporting Obama at record lows, and week after week he seems to keep on sinking. Even groups like the AP and Gallup, both of which are heavily weighted to favor Democrats, show Obama below 50% support now. In fact, it’s gotten so bad that Obama only beats Ron Paul by 1% (42% to 41%) in a national match up. . . Ron Paul. Good grief!

• And, as predicted, ObamaCare is becoming a lead albatross. Polls show that the public is getting more and more angry about it now that it’s passed. Even the Associated Press now admits that its own polls show 50% of the public opposes it. More reliable polls show much higher opposition numbers (Rasmussen has it at 58%). And try as they might to sell this thing, between now and November is too short of a time to change minds.

• They are losing (or have lost) everyone they’ve gained in recent elections. They poll worse with whites and males than at any time ever. They have lost suburbanites and what used to be called Reagan Democrats. Indeed, there’s little left in their support except blacks, young single women, and socialists.

• The Democrats are relying on an “excite the base” strategy. But they keep selling their base out -- look for the next sell out to come with the Supreme Court nominee. And even if they could excite their base, their base already supports them at the 95% level, i.e. there is no more base to excite, and still it's not enough to avoid a crushing defeat.

• Finally, Democrats are praying for an improved economy. But the people aren’t responding to improved consumer and producer numbers because of unemployment and fears about policy. Indeed 76% rate the economy as “poor”. Moreover, if you want a real indication of how people are feeling, watch where they put their money. “Retail investors” -- that’s fancy speak for “average people” -- are withdrawing money from the market, not adding. That’s a true vote of no confidence.

So putting all of this together, I am starting to suspect a 70+ seat swing in the House is likely, with a possibly much higher swing possible if the Democrats don’t start learning some lessons very quickly. But based on the course they are charting, it's rather obvious they’ve learned nothing. And that’s going to make November very, very interesting.

Indeed, it looks like Obama and Pelosi finally really might make history.


[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Bye Bayh Bye

Today’s announcement of the retirement of Evan Bayh was a shocker. Although we told you a couple weeks ago that his seat wasn’t as safe as it first appeared, no one expected him to quit. This decision has sent shock waves through the Democratic Party and may signal the death of the Democratic Party.

Bayh’s Decision

Bayh won his senate seat in 1998 after serving as the governor of Indiana. He comes from an Indiana family dynasty, with his father serving three terms in the Senate from 1963 until 1981. He was considered a moderate and fairly popular in the state.

However, he also was never close to the senate leadership and he was not considered a team player. He made a failed run for the presidency in 2008 and has been passed over three times as a Vice Presidential nominee.

Until today, it was assumed by all that he would remain in the Senate for many years to come, where he had become an outspoken voice for moving the Democratic Party back from the brink of insanity and toward the center. Indeed, prior to this announcement, he had raised nearly $13 million for his re-election campaign and had already ordered television ads.

But trouble was looming. If you believe Bayh and the Democrats, polling shows Bayh with a significant lead over his opponents. Yet, if you will recall, we pointed out a couple weeks ago that Bayh was finding himself in a surprisingly close race. According to Rasmussen, Bayh would have lost to Congressman Mike Pence if he chose to run, and was only leading likely challenger former-Congressman John Hostettler by a 44% to 41% margin. As we noted, any incumbent with less than 50% support must be considered endangered.

Then, about a week ago, retired Senator Dan Coats decided that he would run against Bayh (unlike Rudy Giuliani who won’t run in New York. . . jerk). Despite the Democrats blasting Coats in a series of nasty advertisements, the writing was on the wall so Bayh suddenly discovered that he doesn’t like politics.

“My decision should not be interpreted for more than it is, a very difficult, deeply personal one. I am an executive at heart. I value my independence. I am not motivated by strident partisanship or ideology. . . . To put it in words I think most people can understand: I love working for the people of Indiana, I love helping our citizens make the most of their lives, but I do not love Congress.”

Now it’s been revealed that Bayh’s wife has made millions of dollars over the past couple years sitting on the boards of health care companies and evil insurance companies.

The Indiana Race

Unlike the retirement of Christopher Dodd, Bayh’s retirement will benefit the Republicans. Dodd, an unlikable man plagued by corruption scandals, had no chance of winning re-election. Connecticut, where he held his seat, was a far-left leaning state that would rather elect Hitler than a Republican. But Dodd, apparently, was worse than Hitler, so the people of Connecticut were preparing to toss him out. When he announced that he would step aside, the Connecticut Democratic Party simply inserted a generic Democrat in his place and suddenly their 20% loss in the polls turned into a 20% lead. Indiana is different.

First, Indiana is a rather conservative state. Bayh only managed to remain competitive in the state because he was a moderate Democrat with a strong family name and two popular stints as governor. With Bayh leaving the race, Indiana will have a tendency to shift to the right, not the left.

Moreover, the Democrats have no one of Bayh’s stature to replace Bayh. The likely replacement for Bayh will be either House Democrat Baron Hill or Brad Ellsworth. Both are considered moderates, though neither is in the popularity league of Bayh. Moreover, if Bayh’s surrender was motivated by an electorate that has turned against the Democrats, as it appears, then it won’t matter which Democrat they run.

Yet, by running either Hill or Ellsworth (Ellsworth is the establishment favorite), the Democrats also put their House seats at risk. Thus, look for the Republicans to have a distinct advantage now in the race for Bayh’s seat and look for them to pick up another House seat as a result of Bayh’s decision.

The Democratic Party Dies

Finally, we come to the real impact of this decision, which goes way beyond a single senate seat. Yes, from a technical perspective, this will improve the Republicans’ chances of retaking the senate, though mathematically that remains unlikely. But this decision has ripples far beyond simple senate math.

Bayh is one of the few moderates left in the Democratic Party. Most of these moderates are quitting during this election cycle. So far, this could be explained for one reason or another -- like the health care vote or scandal. But Bayh is the first who seemed to skate through the Democrats’ agenda without too much harm. That he is quitting foretells a potentially massive shift to the right by the electorate in 2010, where only Democrats in the most left-wing of districts and states will be safe. We will have to watch for more signs of this.

Interestingly, even Obama himself apparently tried to talk Bayh out of quitting, but Bayh refused.

And that takes us to the more important issue. The frustration shown by moderates like Bayh, who reached the point that he would willing give up his career, tells us just how poisonous the inner workings of the Democratic Party have become. Bayh’s retirement shows us that moderates no longer have a home in the Democratic Party.

The media loves to focus on in-fighting within the Republican Party but turns a blind eye to the absolute war going on in Democratic ranks. It’s a blood bath. With a leadership dominated by far-left whackos (not just ideologues, but crazy ideologues), with Rahm Emanuel’s “f*cking retard” activists promising to run ads against moderate Democrats, with the unions threatening to withhold their support unless they immediately get some union-a-topia, with Pelosi treating her moderates like cannon fodder, and with the party’s spokespeople slandering the American people on a daily basis, it’s become clear that the Democratic Party has drifted into a fantasy land of hatred and score-settling.

With the moderates abandoning the party rather than fighting for its soul, there is a serious chance that the Democrats will simply continue to wallow on the left no matter what happens. This means the Democratic Party will no longer be capable of obtaining anything near majority support, and it is likely to lose more and more seats in the coming elections until it is a rump party at best. Moreover, with the moderates leaving the party, there will be no one to pull them back from the brink for at least a generation.

That’s why Bayh’s announcement means so much more than one senate seat.


P.S. I apologize for any pain the NSYNC reference may have caused you.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...