Feb
22
Charlie Cook
Filed Under American Politics | Leave a Comment
Is one of the most respected political analysts in American politics and is regarded as non-partisan. His views are interesting to say the least:
I sort of reject the notion that there is a communications problem with President Obama. I think it’s just fundamental, total miscalculations from the very, very beginning. Of proportions comparable to President George W. Bush’s decision to go into Iraq.
I’ve spent the last couple of days talking to some of the brightest Democrats in the party that are not in the White House. And it’s very hard to come up with a scenario where Democrats don’t lose the House. It’s very hard. Are the seats there right this second? No. But we’re on a trajectory on the House turning over….
I suggest you read the whole thing.
Feb
16
The Left Are Tone Deaf
Filed Under Uncategorized | 15 Comments
In Indiana, a liberal Democrat, Tamyra d’Ippolito is trying to get the necessary signatures to register as the Democratic candidate for the Senate in that state, replacing Evan Bayh. On her facebook page, she calls for others to support her bid including tea-partiers. Impressive bipartisan outreach? Not so much. The leftist lexicon is letting her down somewhat:
We are calling all people to file signatures tomorrow Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Tea Baggers, everyone with a pulse go to your county clerks office tomorrow before noon in your district.
I think she may struggle to get “tea baggers” on board.
Feb
15
Wow!
Filed Under Uncategorized | 33 Comments
Senator Evan Bayh, the Democratic Senator from Indiana has announced he won’t run for re-election this year.
This is a big deal. Bayh is probably the highest profile moderate Democrat in the Senate and was probably second in the running behind Joe Biden to serve as Obama’s VP. He has a 61% approval rating in Indiana and was polling well against Republican challenger Dan Coats (although in a Daily Kos/Research 200 poll).
This is the highest profile Democratic withdrawal from these 2010 mid-terms and will have the polling experts re-calibrating their expectations of GOP success.
Or is his decision about his poor expectations for victory. Interesting theory from Ace of Spades:
Some are suggesting the set-up to a 2012 run against the President. Bayh would have to re-cast himself as a Beltway outsider, so that makes some sense.
There is an increasing disconnect between conservadems and the Democratic leadership. A challenge from the right makes some sense.
An interesting story to follow methinks.
Jan
25
Hubris
Filed Under American Politics | Leave a Comment
Today has been another bad day for the Democrats with Beau Biden announcing that he won’t be running for his father’s Senate seat in Delaware, and thus making Republicans favourite to take another Senate seat in a blue state come November.
Additionally, Democratic Representative Marion Berry of Arkansas has announced that he won’t be running for re-election. This is particularly noteworthy because of his parting remarks about Obama, healthcare and the current electoral landscape:
Berry recounted meetings with White House officials, reminiscent of some during the Clinton days, where he and others urged them not to force Blue Dogs “off into that swamp” of supporting bills that would be unpopular with voters back home.
“I’ve been doing that with this White House, and they just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”
Didn’t work out so well in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts did it?
Jan
13
By Israel
The 2010 mid-terms in November at this time is being shown in the “liberal media” as devastating for liberals due to a combination of right wing anger that “their” presidency has been in their eyes usurped by “the other guy”, an influx of fear-mongering throughout the last summer, and the lethargy of liberals as compromise after compromise has weakened the agenda most went to the polls for.
In the last few weeks l have watched as the “liberal” media has drooled over what they see as a Democratic implosion with the intended retirement of two Democratic Senators (Dorgan and Dodd) and 10 Democratic members of the US House. I have also seen talk of Democratic infighting over suggested primary challengers for Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson due to their corporate sponsored opposition to Healthcare Reform, but does this tell the full story?
Remember Florida Republican Party Chairman Jim Greer?
Or should l say former Florida Republican Party Chairman Jim Greer.
He’s the man who went on air last year and accused the president of indoctrination by asking kids to stay in school and study.
Well, Greer doesn’t seem to be right wing enough and has been ousted by the teabaggers for his support of the moderate Charlie Crist and was not happy about it saying:
“Their efforts and their own statements privately and even sometimes not so privately, to not be concerned about the future of the party, has led me to recognize that I cannot be a participant in the shredding and tearing of the fabric of the Republican Party. Many of my supporters, including the Governor, have continued right up to this day to support me as chairman. I would note that the Governor has not asked me to step down. In fact the Governor has continued to support me right through this process, and would have continued, because he does know the facts and the accomplishments we have had, through Saturday and beyond.”
Greer also said he will remain active in the party. “I intend to be very engaged in supporting candidates,” he said. <strong>”I intend to play a role in making sure common sense Republicans get elected to office, and Republicans I will support that believe we should be an inclusive party, and be one that lowers the political rhetoric and focuses on leadership and results.</strong> I’m not a purist as you all know. I have never been a purist. I believe that our party stands for principles and values that should always allow anyone who has an interest in being part of our party to participate.”
On that point l wish him the best of British luck, expecially as the republican base lurches further rightward in the next few months as the pogroms continue.
Josh Marshall of Talkingpointsmemo has stated that his site will be following closely a couple of the Republican Primaries; VA-05, where seven Republican candidates are lining up in hopes of challenging top target Rep. Tom Perriello(D), AL-02, where Rick Barber announced his candidacy in the Republican primary, challenging the NRCC candidate Martha Roby, and PA-06 where NRCC favorite Steve Welch and state Rep. Curt Schroder are fighting to replace Rep. Jim Gerlach (R), who is retiring to run for governor:
You also have jittery new Republican Rep. Parker Griffith (the blue dog who promised to vote against Speaker Pelosi’s re-election and who’s staff all quit in disgust at his defection) already looking at a primary challenge before he get his feet under the desk in Alabama with the Club For Growth and Erik son of Erik at Redstate declaring the old school vendetta against him.
Former conservative blogger Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has some interesting comments from one Dale Robertson, described by the Washington Times as “a tea party leader”, who warns that:
“We are turning our guns on anyone who doesn’t support constitutional conservative candidates,” said Dale Robertson, who operates TeaParty.org out of Houston and helped start the movement nearly two years ago.
“If they continue to do things like they did in Florida, it’s not going to be good for them,” Mr. Robertson said. “If they don’t get that and their party chairmen don’t get that, they are going to be ostracized.”
He declined to say which states are next on the Tea Party’s hit list. He said party leaders in those states would be warned privately, but the movement’s wrath “will be very clear publicly” if they don’t listen.
It’s also interesting that the teabaggers themselves are not fully in agreement with the Republicans, with the plans for the upcoming February convention in Nashville being criticized both for the inclusion of top line GOP speakers and the $550 cover charge which removes the thin veneer they had placed over themselves in their attempts to claim that they are grassroots not astroturf.
The other point which the “liberal” media has glossed over are the retirements.
Steve Benen of The Washington Monthly writing on the 6th Jan rightly points out that:
This is, to be sure, exactly the meme Republicans want the media to embrace, and if the coverage this morning is any indication, political journalists seem anxious to comply.
If Dems are “dropping like flies,” the answer should be obvious. But it’s not — in both chambers, Republican retirements, at least for now, outnumber Democratic retirements.
But let’s add a little perspective here. Quick quiz: which party has more Senate retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans? Follow-up question: which party has more House retirements so far this campaign cycle, Democrats or Republicans?
So that’s six Republican Senators which include Kit Bond(R) of Missouri, Sam Brownback(R) of Kansas, Mel Martinez(R) of Florida and George Voinovich(R) of Ohio who are retiring along with 14 members of the House against two Senators and 10 House members on the democratic side not to mention three Democratic Governors against four Republican ones.
In terms of percentages that means the Republicans are looking at twice that of Democrats 8% versus 4% in the House and, in the Senate Republicans are losing 15% of their members to retirement, Democrats 3.5% yet the “liberal” media mantra is that “the Democrats are falling apart”?
As the best newsman on the best news show summed up the story:
Jon Stewart: Two elected Democratic senators out of their caucus of 60 are stepping down, and 11 Democratic congressional representatives will be retiring, compared to 6 out of the 40 Republican Senators and 14 House Republicans. So I think we know how the media is going to play this:
Campbell Brown: Congressional Democrats dropping like flies…
Andrea Mitchell: Democrats reeling from a recent string of retirement announcements…
Sean Hannity: Democrats all around the country are running scared…
Rush Limbaugh: They’re running for the hills!
Stewart: It’s less! The other party has more people leaving! How are those figures not even like a wash, or a little bit in the Democrats’ favor? Boy, you f**kers can make controversy out of anything, can’t you? Why do you have to have everything sound more interesting than it is? Y’know, if Congress made it rain cookies, the headline would read: DEMOCRATS LEAVE MILLIONS MILKLESS!
A bit like the comment from Rep Alan Grayson who said last year that if Barack Obama had shown a preference for BLT sandwiches the GOP would try to ban bacon. A sad but very true indictment on where things are standing at the moment.
The DNC’s Hari Sevugan chimes in that:
“We know that Republicans would like to do anything to distract from their utter lack of accomplishment this year, but their bloviations and the breathless prognostication by some others should be taken with more than just a grain of salt. We woke up yesterday morning with more Republican retirements than Democratic ones in the House, Senate and state houses. And today there are still more Republican retirements than Democratic ones in the House, Senate and state houses. At the same time Republicans are engaged in bloody primaries throughout the country as the far right wing radical faction of the party tries to stage a coup d’etat and purge the party of moderate voices. And while Democrats are going to be able to talk about getting things done that have helped the American people Republicans are going to have to defend their obstructionism and why they only stood up for the well heeled, the insurance lobby and Wall Street. While mid-term elections are historically tough for the party in power, Democrats, for these reasons, remain well positioned.”
Infighting, bloviating, obstructionism. Things that if they had a “liberal” media in the US would have been pointed out a lot more than on just the blogs.
A (hoped for) continued failure of the economy and the repeal of healthcare.
These are what the Republican platform is going to be for 2010. When put into context will things be as bad as the GOP and their media enablers hope? We will see.
Jan
6
Going Down Like Nine-Pins
Filed Under American Politics | 2 Comments
A dramatic day yesterday for Democrats with three very high profile decisions by incumbent Democrats not to seek re-election in 2010.
1. The biggest news will be that of Chris Dodd, the embattled and controversial Senator from Connecticut. Whilst the next two Democrats represent bad news for the party, Dodd’s decision not to seek re-election is probably good news for Democrats. Dodd has been embroiled in a scandal that has him allegedly getting a sweetheart mortgage deal from Countrywide, a subprime lender. Dodd is the chair of the Senate Finance committee. He’s been trailing potential GOP nominees in polls all year in what should be a safely blue state and his seat was seen as one of the most likely Republican pickups in the mid-terms. One suspects that the Connecticut Senate seat moves back to being a fairly safe Democratic hold with this news.
2. Bill Ritter, the Governor of Colorado also announced his decision not to seek re-election. Ritter is another incumbent Democrat struggling in the polls, and one suspects that having seen the writing on the wall, took the decision to bail.
3. Until the Dodd story broke, the big story of the day was Byron Dorgan’s decision to not stand for re-election. Dorgan is the Democratic Junior Senator for North Dakota. He has quite high favourabilities within the state, but again was facing defeat in 2010 if the Republican Governor, John Hoeven, decided to challenge him. Hoeven who has an 86% approval rating hasn’t yet declared himself. Dorgan’s decision to quit was being seen by both political pundits and even liberal bloggers as extremely bad news for the Democratic Party.
The reason why these announcements are important, is that they are reflective of the Democratic Party’s level of confidence ahead of the 2010 elections, particularly in red/purple and trending blue states. There have been a number of House Democrats within these states who have declared themselves as not seeking re-election. This suggests that Democrats aren’t confident that they will do well in the south particularly, but also in any state that isn’t blue to the core. The Dorgan and Ritter announcements (which came first) only served to confirm this perception. And the Dorgan announcement would have created a difficult news cycle for Democrats. But they have been saved somewhat by the Chris Dodd decision. The controversy surrounding him over Countrywide already makes him high profile, but he is also one of the most senior Democrats in the Senate and was a Presidential candidate during the Democratic primaries in 2008. He’ll know supplant Dorgan as the horse-race story of the day and rather than talking about how they are likely to lose a Senate Seat in North Dakota, Democrats can now talk about the fact that they will most likely retain their Connecticut seat. The timing is interesting. Perhaps Dodd was already planning to stand down, but just wasn’t choosing to announce it yet, but I wouldn’t be surprised to read that pressure was put on him to announce the decision today to take Dorgan off the front pages.
Whatever the truth, Democrats are very jumpy in red, purple and bluish states. This is a dramatic turnaround from the confidence that Democrats displayed following their dramatic Congressional victoies in ‘06 and ‘08, along with Obama’s win. Some of this is reflective of economic conditions, the incumbent party will always suffer in poor economic circumstances, but a lot of the blame for the new Democratic unpopularity can be levelled at Pelosi and Obama who have demonstrated themselves to be out of touch with the wishes of a large part of the population.
Dec
17
A Seismic Shift!?!
Filed Under American Politics | 9 Comments
Last week a Rasmussen poll asked the hypothetical question about who people would vote for should a tea-party party exist. It outpolled Republicans:
Democratic Party 36%
Tea-Party Party – 23%
Republicans – 18%
They’ve now shot into the lead in the latest NBC/WSJ poll:
Tea-Party Party – 41%
Democratic Party – 35%
Republican Party – 28%
In truth, NBC are asking a different question to Rasmussen; not “who would you vote for”, but “do you have a favourable/unfavourable view of the respective parties?” But even so, that’s a remarkable ascendancy.
To be honest, I don’t see the Tea Party phenomena being maintained as thoughts are concentrated towards the 2010 election. Once the Democrats get the healthcare fiasco behind them (win or lose), they’ll put forward some sort of jobs bill* which should get them some of their mojo back and Republicans will focus on a unified electoral message that will encapsulate much of the Tea Party philosophy. The Tea Partiers will be pulled in both directions.
But it is yet more evidence of the potential dramas ahead for incumbents of both political parties. Very few Congressional seats will be seen as safe as we head into the electoral season.
* However, if they try an illegals amnesty bill, then that could boost the tea-partiers even more.
Dec
4
More 2010 Bad News
Filed Under American Politics | 11 Comments
Via Nate Silver:
A Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll released last week has rightly received a lot of attention for its stark rendering of the ‘enthusiasm gap’. Whereas 81 percent of Republicans, the poll found, plan to definitely or probably vote in the 2010 midterms, the percentage is just 56 percent among Democrats. If those percentages hold up, the Democrats’ advantage on the generic ballot is flipped from a +5 all the way to a -4, which could translate to catastrophic losses in the House.
If only slightly more than 50% of Democrats vote in 2010, that will indeed be catastrophic for them.
Nov
20
Blanche Lincoln is the Democratic Senator for Arkansas. She is up for re-election next year in a red state and a state that is very strongly opposed to Obamacare by a 2-1 margin:
The Zogby Poll shows Arkansans opposed to the Obama/Reid bill by 28-64, with 50 percent “strongly opposed” to the legislation. To swim in the face of such a current of public opinion is risky business for a U.S. senator.
She is also, along with Joe Liebermann, the most likely Democrat to scupper Obama’s healthcare reform. Voting for something so unpopular in one’s own state with elections only a year away could be political suicide. But liberals are hopeful that she can be swayed to vote “yea” on the bill. Nate Silver ponts out that Lincoln is the only Red State Democrat in the Senate up for re-election next year. In other words, get her on board and they are a lot closer to winning the vote. That means Harry Reid giveaways or persuading her that she will probably lose anyway, regardless of a yes or no vote on Obamacare and therefore she may as well vote with the caucus.
But the Democrats are on a knife edge as to whether they get the 60 votes needed to bring healthcare to a vote in the Senate. One vote may be all the difference in the world. And that’s why I wonder whether Republicans should offer not to oppose Blanche Lincoln, provided she votes “Nay” on bringing healthcare to a vote in the Senate.
There are a number of downsides to this. Firstly, it’s pretty undemocratic in a two party system. I’m not sure Arkansans would be too happy not being given a choice in 2010. It’s also pretty unethical to effectively bribe a Senator for a no vote. And the other downside is that the Republicans need to start diminishing the Democratic majorities in both houses. Lincoln’s seat is very winnable for Republicans which of course ends the Democratic supermajority should they win.
But on the other hand, it pretty much guarantees the defeat of Obamacare.
Is this too off the wall as a suggestion? I’m in two minds. Killing Obamacare would not only be good for America, it would re-energise the Republican Party, would anger the Democratic base and would seriously hinder both Obama’s and the Congressional Democrat’s agendas over the next few years. All those are laudable aims.
Thoughts?
Nov
12
Thankyou Obama And Pelosi
Filed Under American Politics | 6 Comments
Exciting times for Democrats the last few years. Big election victories, a supposed permanent Democratic majority and the Republican party on the run.
In December last year, Democrats had a 15% lead in the generic congressional ballot. In 2007, they had a high of a 23% lead over the GOP. In the space of nine months and on the back of unpopular bailouts, unpopular cap and trade and marginally unpopular healthcare reform, that lead has evaporated.
In previous years, as Gallup note, when Democrats have done well at the polls, they have held double digit leads over the Republicans. As I’ve noted before, Democrats do not turnout as well as Republicans in elections and thus they need that large registered voter cushion to compensate for the more committed Republican voter.
But today, Democrats trail by 4%:
In November 1994, the year of the Republican Congressional takeover, Republicans and Democrats were tied. Whilst another 1994 is probably not on the cards, the Democrats need a big turn around in popularity to even maintain the status quo.
Gallup have modelled what the national share of the vote represents in terms of the number of seats won (you can see the graph here). 44% of the vote, as they have now represents approximately 180 seats, far below what is needed for majority purposes. They need to get to 48% to just retain control of the house.
Republicans lead Democrats amongst independents by a whopping 22%. For perspective, Independents went to Obama by an 8% margin. That’s a 30% turnaround in the space of a year. And the gap continues to widen:
It’s not 2010 yet and the elephant in the room is healthcare reform. But Barack Obama and particularly Nancy Pelosi have presided over a dramatic fall off in Democratic support, I mean let’s face it, this isn’t about strong Republican messaging. So thankyou to the gruesome twosome at the top of the Democratic party and let’s hope for more of the same over the next three years.