October 22, 2006 Posts
04:06 Let's Refute the 'Cut & Run' Stories 04:52 The 'History' of the 2006 Wave Election 13:03 Ordering the New Upholstery 21:12 I Heartily Concur
Let's Refute the 'Cut & Run' Stories
I've told friends that I've never fully bought into the notion that conservatives were going to stay home in droves. Now I've got documentation from RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman that validates my beliefs. Let's start with the opening paragraph:
In recent days and weeks, the mainstream media have repeatedly claimed that the Republican base is suffering from "low voter enthusiasm." It is easy to believe a story that is repeated so frequently, but in fact there is ample evidence to the contrary. By many measures, there are strong indications of a right-of-center base that is engaged and committed.What's not to be engaged about? Can conservatives afford to stay home when Democrats have shown with their votes that they'd attempt to foil passing the legislation that would codify into law the NSA intercept program? Can conservatives afford to stay home knowing that not voting for Republicans would mean Ted Kennedy and John McCain writing 'immigration reform'? That's a scary thought, isn't it? Can we afford staying home knowing that a Chairman Rangel of the House Ways and Means Committee would start dismantling of the Bush tax cuts that's strengthened the economy?
To quote from Gallup's voter turnout projection, "Gallup's latest analysis suggests Republicans and Democrats are now roughly even in terms of anticipated turnout in the midterm congressional elections. The voting intentions of the large pool of registered voters is now similar to the voting intentions of the smaller pool of likely voters, showing no disproportionate impact of turnout in either direction."It seems to me that wave elections can't happen if both parties get their vote out. In fact, the fact that there's near parity in likely voter turnout tells me that Democrats don't stand much of a chance of even making substantial gains in either the House or Senate.
I'd further suggest that the data telling us that Republicans are very engaged refutes the 'reporting' that assumes all Christian conservatives will stay home because of the Foley fiasco.
There are ways besides polls to measure the intensity of the Republican base, and those also indicate that GOP voters are strongly engaged. Fundraising, for example, is often called the 'first ballot' for the simple reason that supporters only donate when they are involved and enthusiastic. That is why we are excited that the RNC received support from 362,000 new donors this cycle. We've averaged 8,256 contributions for each deposit day so far this year. We just announced that September has been our best financial month of the entire cycle. Our supporters know how important this election is, and their financial support shows it.If we accept the fact that the 'first ballot' test is a way to gauge who'll win, then isn't it telling that the RNC is adding donors to its list while the DNC announced that it'll borrow $5-10 million for the DSCC's final push?
That's an indicator that the DSCC knows that it won't win back the Senate. If they're borrowing money this close to the election they must see several races slipping away and that their only way of staying competitive is through massive ad buys funded with this loan. They're right in assuming that. Harold Ford's candidacy nosedived with his 'in-your-face' stunt Friday; Claire McCaskill's candidacy never got traction because of her 'scandal-a-day' troubles and appeal for Jon Tester's ultraliberalism is fading faster than a setting sun in a Big Sky sunset. Other than that, the DSCC is in great shape.
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2006 4:08 AM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
The 'History' of the 2006 Wave Election
Let's examine where the notion of a wave election originated. Here's the first article that showed up when I googled "wave election articles":
There's probably no way congressional Republicans can lose this fall, no matter how unpopular President Bush is or how unhappy the voters are with the war in Iraq. That's the prevailing view in Washington today.The article, written by Thomas Mann, bases this impending 'wave' on "history". He didn't even have the confidence to say that it will happen. He could only must up a "we could see a national tide in November..." That sounds awfully speculative, doesn't it? That article was dated "Sunday, July 16, 2006".
But it's wrong.
If history is any guide, we're heading into a major political storm. And that means we could see a national tide in November that will sweep the Democrats back into the majority.
Let's see if we can detect a media 'wave' building. We needn't look further than Larry Sabato's foggy Crystal Ball 'readings':
But now, with a quarter of time elapsed between that pulse-reading and the election, surer signs are emerging that something more substantial than a "micro-wave" is heating up this summer. Historical trends and big picture indicators, generic congressional ballot tests and approval ratings of President Bush's job performance in particular, have always been heavily stacked against the GOP in this "sixth year itch" cycle, but aggregations of more race-specific indicators are now suggesting that Republicans are headed for their most serious midterm losses in decades.That report is dated August 3, 2006. Notice the flimsy things Sabato bases this opinion on: "Historical trends and big picture indicators, generic congressional ballot tests and approval ratings of President Bush's job performance".
Historical trends weren't a good predictor in 2002 or 2004. In fact, they were utterly unreliable. Which "big picture indicators" is Prof. Sabato talking about? The generic ballot? National moods? Those are utterly subjective. They're also utterly unreliable predictors.
Let's summarize the foundation that these articles are built on: Thomas Mann saying that a wave might happen and Larry Sabato relying on generic ballots and big picture indicators. Forgive me if I'm not persuaded by this 'evidence'. Mssrs. Sabato and Mann should be ashamed of themselves for writing this junk. That type of 'reasoning' wouldn't get a political science student a passing grade in demanding colleges.
Let's fast forward to Sabato's next offering:
But frontrunner challengers in primaries can feel the wrath, too: voters ultimately deep-sixed the bids of candidates whom retiring representatives Jim Kolbe (R-AZ), Joel Hefley (R-CO), Marty Sabo (D-MN), and Major Owens (D-NY) had endorsed (and in some cases hand-picked) to succeed them. When voters go wild, when they want to lash out, they can strike any available target. Since the Republicans control all federal branches, they will suffer most from the electorate's surly mood, but no one is guaranteed an exemption.Moderate Kolbe was replaced by Randy Graf, a conservative that the activists support. He'll win going away. Why? Because he's a charter member of the Minutemen who won't vote for amnesty for illegal aliens. Graf's campaign website posted this slogan:
Send a Minuteman to CongressThat sells in AZ-8 because they're overrun with illegal immigration issues. Gabrielle Gifford is supposedly walking away with this race. Again, the 'conventional
Minnesota's DFL picked Keith Ellison over Mike Erlandson, Sabo's hand-picked choice to succeed him. Erlandson is the former DFL state chairman and Sabo's chief of staff. Meanwhile, Ellison's been imbroiled in one scandal after another. Erlandson would've won walking away but Democrats did like the Palestinians: They didn't miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
The moral of this is that candidates matter far more than "big picture indicators" and "historical trends."
I'd suggest further that Mann's and Sabato's analysis is flawed in another aspect. I'd suggest that they'd do better if they heeded that House District's demographics, the power of incumbency, cash on hand and the power of visceral issues like illegal immigration and preventing terrorist attacks, are better predictors than anything Mssrs. Mann and Sabato have suggested.
Conservatives were rebellious when President Bush sided with Ted Kennedy and John McCain on immigration (non)'reform'. Now that was a wave-sized rebellion. In fact, it's likely to sweep Randy Graf into office and wash Bob Casey away. Those candidates that espouse support for the fence will do far better than those advocating 'comprehensive immigration reform' because voters know that 'CIR' is code for amnesty. Amnesty's an issue that fails by a 70-30 or 80-20 margin.
What's intriguing to me is that the articles keep coming in spite of a noticeable movement heading in the GOP's direction:
"There will be a Democratic wave. It's clearly going to be at least a medium wave, it might even be a high wave," said political scientist Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. Another prominent political analyst, Charlie Cook, has spoken of "a category five hurricane" that will likely strip the Republicans of their majority in the House of Representatives, unless the war in Iraq and various political scandals suddenly disappear from the news.Actually, this article gives us a significant glimpse into a liberal's mind. Consider this: Cook and Sabato think that the Foley fiasco and Iraq are the dominant issues. They aren't even significant issues to the GOP. Topping that list are (in order of importance): National security/preventing terrorist attacks, illegal immigration, taxes and confirming President Bush's judicial nominees. I'm talking often with my church friends and they're telling me that 'Foleygate' won't affect their vote. PERIOD.
Iraq and Foleygate are only important issues with the Nutroots idiots. That's only a portion of the minority party. The last time I looked, you didn't win wave elections with a sliver of the minority party 'leading' the way.
I hope that this 'mini-timeline' has helped establish the 'credentials' of this year's 'wave election'. After all, the Agenda Media created it out of thin air. The least I could do is 'save it' for the history books.
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2006 4:56 AM
August 2006 Posts
Comment 1 by Magnum Serpentine at 23-Oct-06 02:11 PM
"a sliver of the minority party..." Geeee are you saying the Democratic party is on the verge of a massive landslide this fall and that their Minority status is so thin that with just one more vote they will become the MAJORITY party.
Good article, yes, the Democrats will be in the majority and are now, lacking just one or two votes to become a Majority.
Yep Thank you
Ordering the New Upholstery
According to this NY Times article, that's the mindset with House Democrats these days. It'll be a sad, horrific sight to see how dejected, dumfounded and disillusioned those same House Democrats will be when they fail to retake the House again. I'll predict right now that the finger-pointing will reach levels that we've never seen before.
With each new delivery of bad news for Republicans, another Republican congressman under investigation, another Republican district conceded , another poll showing support for the Republican-controlled Congress collapsing, a party that has become so used to losing is considering, disbelievingly and with the requisite worry, the possibility that it could actually win in November. "I've moved from optimistic to giddy," said Gordon R. Fischer, a former chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party. "I really have."When Mr. Nagourney writes that "another Republican district" is conceded to the Democrats, Mr. Nagourney assumes that we've been fooled by this article.
To refresh readers' memories, that article said that "the RNC has conceded the Ohio Senate race." I didn't believe that article but I was infuriated when Patrick Ruffini, from the RNC's e-Campaign staff, emailed bloggers saying that "the RNC has spent more money on Ohio than any other state. That level of spending will continue. The notion that the RNC is pulling out of Ohio is just dead wrong."
I wasn't fooled because I'm a bachelor. You're asking what that's got to do with anything, right? A bachelor's definition of a bachelor is "someone who hasn't made the same mistake once." LOL (How I wish that were true. It sounded good though, right?)
Now Mr. Nagourney isn't satisfied with lying about Senate races. Now he's tackling a new group of races. If Mr. Nagourney thinks that "another Republican district conceded", why doesn't he cite specific races in his article? He cites "Florida, Minnesota, Nevada, upstate New York and Washington State" but he isn't specific.
I'm guessing that the Florida seat he's refering to is Foley's seat. I'm also guessing that the Minnesota seat that's now on the DNC's radar is MN-6 because that's the only seat that's being seriously contested. Gil Gutknecht has pulled away in MN-1 (Tim Walz isn't even a third tier candidate.); John Kline is pulling away and hiding from Coleen Rowley in what was never a close race; Jim Ramstad's lead is rock solid. In the MN-6 race, I'm betting that real polling shows (that eliminates this Minnesota Poll) Michele Bachmann leading by low double digits. In fact, the only seats I see with a chance of flipping in Minnesota are Democratically-controlled MN-5 and MN-7.
The House seat mentioning "upstate NY" is likely Tom Reynolds' seat, which was thought to be vulnerable but now shows signs of moving into the strongly leaning GOP category. What he's talking about in Nevada and Washington state is anybody's guess.
As I mentioned here, the notion of a wave election is strictly an Agenda Media concoction. Mssrs. Frank, Rangel, Conyers and Murtha aren't commissioning new paintings of themselves or ordering new furniture or upholstery anytime soon if they're basing their decisions on verifiable facts.
Part of the Democrats' queasiness stems from painful familiarity with Mr. Rove's record of success, and from their own recognition that they hold only slim leads in many races and could yet fall victim to an assertive and sophisticated Republican turnout operation.It isn't a stretch to predict that the GOP GOTV operation will turn Democratic 'pickups' into GOP retentions all across the nation. The whining and recriminations emanating from the Democratic side will be plentiful and loud.
"I'm a little concerned that we are spending all our time talking about what our agenda will be in January rather than how we are going to get our votes out in early November," said Chris Redfern, chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party.Mr. Redfern should be concerned. Charlie Rangel saying that he "cannot think of one" of the tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush that merits renewal isn't winning over voters. In fact, it's driving voters into the GOP's columns. John Conyers' yapping about impeachment has driven voters away, too. The fact that he's semi-rescinded that promise means little to thinking human beings.
Some of that concern is about the long-term psychic damage the party's rank-and-file may suffer if Democrats collapse at the finish line again.Why worry about "long-term psychic damage" if they're on such a roll? If people are suddenly deciding on voting Democrat in 40 hotly contested races, they shouldn't be worrying; they should be ordering the champagne and polishing the glasses.
"They keep trying to pull rabbits out of the hat, but none of them come out," he said. "But we are holding some money in abeyance for some kind of October surprise."Sen. Schumer, Is that money that you're holding in abeyance the $5-10 million that the DNC is borrowing, is it? That isn't an appealing message if they're borrowing money just to get the message out, isn't it?
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2006 1:04 PM
August 2006 Posts
Comment 1 by Jim Hoft at 22-Oct-06 01:29 PM
Right on! I see a Red Tide coming!
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 22-Oct-06 08:39 PM
Thanks Jim. I can't see how Mrs. McCaskill can win with all of her ethical lapses. She's had more ethical lapses than Murtha's had boneheaded comments about the GWOT.
Comment 3 by Papa Ray at 22-Oct-06 09:40 PM
Yep, if they do lose, the first thing will be investigations because of voter fraud. They will not lose gracefully, they will tie everything up with multiple investigations and mudslinging that will be unmatched in American History.
Can't wait.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 22-Oct-06 11:44 PM
Papa Ray, I've been predicting that there'd be a ton of conspiracy theories spawned Election Night since mid-summer. I've never bought into the 'wave' theory.
These conspiracy theories prove one of my favorite cliches right. That cliche says "A little paranoia goes a long way."
If you want to go Biblical on what Election night will be like for Democrats, I can't think of a better verse than "On that night, there will be weaping & gnashing of teeth."
If you just want old-fashioned country, I'd just say "It ain't gonna be pretty."
I Heartily Concur
The best advice that John Murtha could ever get is found inside this Johnstown Tribune-Democrat article. Here's the advice:
Mae Richardson left no doubt that she will vote Republican on Nov. 7. "I think we should be (in Iraq). I'd rather fight them over there than here," said Richardson, who has had three of her children serve in the military. "Sometimes, I think (Murtha) should just keep his mouth shut."This wouldn't be a race if Murtha hadn't shot his mouth off by convicting the Haditha Marines in the court of public opinion. He'd be leading by 15 points minimum had he "just kept his mouth shut." That he didn't is the biggest indicator that he's too arrogant for his own good. I can't say that I'm surprised, though. He's had so little competition that he's (a) started believing his press clippings and (b) gotten sloppy.
I'd compare him to an old grizzly who's been king of his section of wilderness who's suddenly confronted by a young, hungry bear who is his equal physically. The end result is predictable. The old bear looks formidable on the outside but doesn't have the muscles to defend himself. He isn't musclebound because he hasn't had the competition he now needs to defend himself.
Think of it this way: Murtha knows that he's in the fight of his life but because he's gotten flabby, he doesn't have the ability to defend himself. The outcome was sealed years before. It was just a beating waiting to happen.
Diana Irey is small of stature but I'll guarantee that she's all muscle where it counts. She's quite musclebound intellectually. In that respect, she's Murtha's superior. Intellectually, she's in shape; he isn't. Intellectually, she's sharp; Murtha's sloppy. She's hit him every time he's opened his mouth. Murtha's ignored her, thinking that ignoring her was the time-tested technique he needed to not publicize her.
As Bones and I have predicted, Diana will get upwards of 55% of the vote with an outside shot at 60%. I suspect that that'll be one of the first shockers called this election night.
With Republican challenger Diana Irey capitalizing on Murtha's calls for a troop withdrawal from Iraq, there are two big questions in this campaign. How many Democrats will turn against Murtha? And will that number be high enough, especially on Irey's home turf, to make a significant difference in a district designed to resemble a sprawling Democratic fortress?It's worth noting that a significant number of PA-12 Democrats are the older 'Scoop Jackson/JFK' Democrats. PA-12 is also the source of alot of Reagan Democrats. I suspect that alot of Democratic war vets have already turned against Murtha, thanks to things like OSC . OSC is a cost-effective way to get the word out about your opponent. This worked this time because Murtha badmouthed the military and because he voted against most national security legislation. That's downright stupid, especially in wartime. It's even more stupid when the first war heroes in the GWOT died 12 miles from Murtha's hometown of Johnstown.
This is this year's perfect political storm. Murtha ran as a Pelosi liberal in a conservative Pennsylvania district. Murtha badmouthed the military in a district where 25-30% of registered voters are military personnel and their families. He's voted against every bit of legislation that would enhance our warfighting capabilities. That's before we consider the great GOP candidate we have in Diana Irey who's running one of the most efficient campaigns ever.
The end result will be 'V-I' day (Victory Irey Day) this November 7th.
Posted Sunday, October 22, 2006 11:47 PM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
